LAB REP Psych OF PERS PDF

Preview

Summary

Download LAB REP Psych OF PERS PDF

Description

ASSOCIATIONS BETWEEN THE HUGE TWO AND CREATIVE SELF-CONCEPT

Associations between the Huge Two Meta-traits of Personality and Performance and how Creative Self-concept is affected

Mordechai Aryeh Levin

Due Date: Jan 20, 2020 Unit: Psychology of Personality Tutor: Drew Reilly Word Count: 2974

ASSOCIATIONS BETWEEN THE HUGE TWO AND CREATIVE SELF-CONCEPT

Abstract

The complex relationships between both personality and creativity were investigated. Fiftyseven third-year psychology students completed the study; undertaking counterbalanced convergent and divergent creativity tasks in addition to self-report measures of creative selfconcept and personality. As expected, the mega-traits of Plasticity and Stability personality traits generated a positive correlation with creative self-concept. It was also expected that performance on divergent tasks are potentially linked to greater Plasticity and lower Stability and the reverse concerning convergent tasks; however, no significant relationships were uncovered. This study supports the already well- documented and substantiated relationship established between personality and creative self-concept in previous literature. Creative performance, however, did not correlate to personality, such findings may direct future study in how additional factors such as mood, intelligence or attitude may further explain variations within creativity.

ASSOCIATIONS BETWEEN THE HUGE TWO AND CREATIVE SELF-CONCEPT

Creativity is describable of a generation of solutions considered original, innovative and relevant (Batey & Furnham, 2006; Radel, Davranche, Fournier & Dietrich, 2015; Batey & Hughes, 2017). Crucial to problem-solving across the arts, sciences and humanities, creativity is both measured and defined in multiple ways (Guilford, 1967; Feist, 1998; Radel et al., 2015). Creative self-concept refers to one’s awareness of innate creative ability, encompassing overall creative identity, self-assessed creative ability, creative metacognition and self-efficacy (Karwowski, 2016). As creative behaviour is assessed, a distinction is established concerning convergent and divergent creativity processing (Guilford, 1967; Radel et al., 2015). Divergent thinking incorporates a variety of novel yet potentially ambiguous solutions to a single question, whereas convergent thinking only utilises single, correct and explicit answers (Cropley, 2006; Radel et al., 2015).

The variance may partly explain differences within individual creativity (i.e., originality of thought) across personality and intelligence (Karwowski & Lebuda, 2016; Eysenck, 1995). Trait theorists propose that personalities are unique, considering individuals vary along trait dimensions. While it is common to describe personality utilising the Big Five Factors (BFF; Goldberg, 1990), some researchers, assessing creativity contend that variance in personality (i.e., BFF) can be explained in terms of the two meta-traits (i.e., Plasticity and Stability; DeYoung, 2006; Silvia et al., 2008). Individuals high in Plasticity, combining Openness to experience and Extraversion, take joy partaking in both original thoughts and behaviours (Silvia, Nusbaum, Berg, Martin & O’Conner, 2009). Stability comprises of Conscientiousness, Agreeableness and Emotional Stability (i.e., the reverse of Neuroticism Gosling et al., 2003; DeYoung, 2006). Contrasting Plasticity, individuals high in Stability rely on stability and conformity, generally bypassing disruptive influences (Silvia et al., 2009).

A large proportion of research exploring creativity and personality have considered utilising Goldberg’s (1990) Big Five Factors; however, such findings are also applicable to the Huge Two (DeYoung, 2006; Batey & Hughes, 2017). Powerful relationships are frequently examined across creative self-concept and Openness to experience (Feist, 1998;

ASSOCIATIONS BETWEEN THE HUGE TWO AND CREATIVE SELF-CONCEPT Karwowski & Lebuda, 2016; Silvia et al., 2009), Since individuals high on Openness have a developed sense of imagination, a higher creative self-concept is produced as a result of intrinsic motivation present in individuals engaging in both new concepts and experiences (Batey & Hughes, 2017). A positive, albeit weaker, relationship is also identified between Extraversion and creative self-concept (Karwowski & Lebuda, 2016), this reflects an inherently social nature experienced across some creative activities (i.e., group-based drama; Batey & Hughes, 2017) or the potential assertiveness characteristic of extraverts thereby facilitating unconventional thought processes (Helson, 1967). Since Plasticity incorporates such traits, one may acknowledge how past studies generated similar positive relationships with the creative self-concept (Karwowski & Lebuda, 2016; Silvia et al., 2009).

As opposed to Plasticity; Stability relates to creative self-concept more variably, to the point that even the traits comprising it have produced contradictory situational findings (Karwowski & Lebuda, 2016). Conscientiousness could predict lower self-rated creativity, likely due to the rigid and orderly characteristics observed in conscientious individuals; thereby limiting the freedoms associated with creative thought (Batey & Furnham, 2006). However, Conscientiousness generally predicts higher self-ratings associated with greater productivity, self-efficacy and perseverance when attempting creative projects (Karwowski & Lebuda, 2016; Batey & Hughes, 2017). Neuroticism is sometimes considered a vehicle for creativity (Eysenck, 1993), yet, neurotic individuals have also been known to underestimate their creative ability; resulting in lower self-esteem and limited creative self-perception (Batey & Hughes, 2017). This negative correlation between Neuroticism and creative selfconcept has been documented in many prior studies (Karwowski & Lebuda, 2016; Batey & Hughes, 2017). Despite Feist’s (1998) findings suggesting Emotional stability to be negatively associated with creative self-concept, this was mainly due to the domain-specific characteristics applied. In light of this detail, Emotional Stability warrants further investigation into whether it is positively linked. Agreeableness; the most ambiguous trait reveals predominately that no relationship to creative self-concept is established (Karwowski & Lebuda, 2016; Batey & Hughes, 2017). Overall, Stability relates to the creative selfconcept (Silvia et al., 2009), however, as aforementioned, difficulties may arise given the variability, specifically amongst different domains of creativity (Karwowski & Lebuda, 2016). In comparison to self-rated creativity, no considerable research concerning how personality potentially relates to creative behaviours has been sourced (Batey & Hughes,

ASSOCIATIONS BETWEEN THE HUGE TWO AND CREATIVE SELF-CONCEPT 2017). Studies have found, to varying degrees, that Openness to experience (McCrae, 1987; Silvia et al., 2009), Extraversion (Feist, 1998) and Plasticity (Silvia et al., 2009) may predict advanced divergent thinking, with Openness to experience being the strongest predictor (McCrae, 1987; Silvia et al., 2009). The ambiguous nature of divergent tasks may further accommodate individuals high in Plasticity who enjoy partaking in unique and exploratory problem-solving exercises (Cropley, 2006). Conversely, Silvia et al. (2009) found that higher Stability scores correlate to decreased performance on tasks, potentially because stable individuals prefer to be guided rather than create original solutions on their own (Cropley, 2006).

In regard to the unambiguous nature of convergent creativity tasks, there have been relatively invariable conclusions and, for the most part, performance in both of the meta-traits (Guilford’s 1967; Hirsh, 2001). Since convergent tasks only require single correct answers derivative of known rules and logic, it seems theoretically plausible that individuals high in Stability and low in Plasticity would excel in such creativity tasks (Cropley, 2006), despite the additional research necessary to warrant confirmation. Silvia et al. (2009) suggest Stability and Plasticity could have opposing influences on creative behaviour potentially lending further support to this idea.

The current study investigated the relationships between creativity and the Huge Two meta-traits. The Creative self-concept was predicted to positively correlate with both Plasticity and Stability. Better performance on convergent creativity tasks was expected to be negatively correlated with Plasticity and positively correlated with Stability. Conversely, Better performance on divergent creativity tasks was predicted to be positively correlated with Plasticity and negatively correlated with Stability.

Method

Participants

Participants were third-year psychology students at Swinburne University, 40 females (M= 24.5 years, SD = 7.3 years) and 17 males (M=24.0 years, SD = 5.5 years).

Design

ASSOCIATIONS BETWEEN THE HUGE TWO AND CREATIVE SELF-CONCEPT

The dependent variable of creativity was operationalised in terms of creative selfconcept and divergent and convergent creative performance. The study investigated divergent and convergent creative performance and their effect on creativity, as well as partially correlational, inspecting the relationship between independent variables of both Plasticity and Stability on creativity.

Materials Demographic information was collected through an online questionnaire. Personality meta-traits (i.e., Stability and Plasticity), were assessed utilising the IPIP-NEO 120 (Maples, Guan, Carter & Miller, 2014), a valid measure of the BFF. A 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (very inaccurate) to 5 (very accurate) determined to what extent each of the 120 items were applicable to participants. Plasticity scores were obtained by grouping Extraversion and Openness to experience items together, while Stability scores were comprised of Neuroticism (i.e., Emotional stability; Gosling et al., 2003; DeYoung, 2006), Agreeableness and Conscientiousness items.

Creative self-concept was measured using the 11-item Short Scale of Creative Self (Karwowski, 2012). Utilising a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging 1 (definitely not) to 5 (definitely yes), participants determined how accurately each statement reflects creative selfconcepts. Items averaged an overall score from 1-5 which meant higher scores equated to a greater sense of creative self-concept.

The concept of creative behaviour was conceived as a result of evaluating both divergent and convergent cognitive tasks. Guilford’s Alternate Uses Task (Guilford, 1967) assessed divergent thinking. Participants were allocated 3 minutes to list as many uses as they could for a brick, a newspaper and a shoe. Using Silvia et al.’s (2008) subjective multiple rater-method, responses were rated from 1 (not at all creative) to 5 (highly creative) in accordance with the eccentricity, remoteness and cleverness of the ideas discussed. Scores were tallied and averaged to produce overall scores ranging from 1-5, with higher scores indicating greater divergent creativity.

ASSOCIATIONS BETWEEN THE HUGE TWO AND CREATIVE SELF-CONCEPT The Remote Associations Test (Mednick, 1962) assessed convergent thinking. Participants had three minutes to complete 30 questions, each including three remotely associated words (e.g., paint/cat/doll), requiring participants to configure an additional word relating to all three (e.g., house). Convergent creativity scores are expressed as the proportion of correct responses.

Procedure Prior to commencement, participants were informed of their right to refuse participation or withdraw from the study at any time as stated in the consent form. All consenting participants were randomly selected and instructed to complete two counterbalanced creativity tasks using the Inquisit program- taking approximately 15 minutes in their assigned tutorial time. At a convenient time within a week of their tutorial, participants completed a self-report questionnaire using Qualtrics including measures of personality and creative self-concept. All scores were linkable to a unique code, which also permitted anonymous participation. A debriefing statement outlining the study’s aims was provided upon completion.

Results The means and standard deviations for all measures were derived from descriptive statistics as displayed in Table 1.

Table 1.

Means and Standard Deviations for Measures of Stability, Plasticity, Creative Self-concept and Performance on Convergent and Divergent Thinking Tasks

Variable

Scale

Mean

Standard

ASSOCIATIONS BETWEEN THE HUGE TWO AND CREATIVE SELF-CONCEPT Deviation Plasticity IPIP-NEO 167.61 18.77 Stablity IPIP-NEO 249.75 25.93 Creative self-concept SCSS 3.63 0.70 Divergent Thinking AUT 1.89 0.35 Convergent Thinking RAT 0.13 0.09 Note. IPIP-NEO =International Personality Item Pool – Neuroticism, Extraversion & Openness. SCSS = Short Scale of Creative Self. AUT = Alternate Uses Task. RAT = Remote Associations Test.

To explore the relationship between personality, creative self-concept as well as performance on creativity tasks; a bivariate correlations analysis was performed, found in Table 2.

Table 2. Correlation Coefficients for Relationships between Plasticity, Stability, Creative Self-concept and Performance on Measures of Convergent and Divergent Thinking Tasks

Plasticity Stability Creative

Plasticity

Stability

Creative

-

-.293* -

Self-concept .285* -.319*

AUT Score

RAT Score

.284* .046 .154

-.125 .102 .108

Self-concept AUT Scores .232 RAT Scores Note. *p...