8/12/2019 Mccrae 1987

1/8

Journalof Personality andSocialPsychology1987,Vol.52,No. 6, 1258-1265

Inthepublicdomain

Creativity,DivergentThinking, and Openness toExperienceRobert R.McCrae

Gerontology Research CenterNational Institute onAging,National Institutes of Health

Testscoresofdivergent thinkingobtainedbetween1959and 1972 werecorrelatedwithavarietyofpersonalitymeasures administered since1980.In this sample of 268men,divergentthinkingwasconsistentlyassociatedwithself-reports andratingsofopennessto experience, but notwithneuroti-cism, extraversion,agreeableness,orconscientiousness.Both divergent thinking andopennesswerealsomodestlycorrelatedwithCough's(1979)empiricallyderived CreativePersonalityScale.Severalother personality variables mentioned in the literaturewerealsoexamined; thosethatwereassoci-atedwithdivergent thinkingwerealsogenerallycorrelatedwithopenness.These datasuggestthatcreativityis particularly related to the personalitydomainofopennessto experience.

Althoughsome object thatthedistinctionisartificial(Heim,1970),cognition and personalityhavetraditionally been seen asdistinct domains.Intelligenceis construed as a set of aptitudesand abilities; personality isviewed,at least by psychometri-cians, as a collection of characteristic dispositions. Empirically,thereissomejustification for the separation. Measuresofper-sonality traits typicallyshowverymodest correlations withtestsofgeneral intelligence (e.g., Eysenck&Eysenck, 1975), andjointfactoranalysesofpersonality andcognitiveabilityvari-ablesshowthat the latterform adistinct factor (McCrae&Costa, 1985b,1985c).

Creativity,however,seems to hold an intermediate position.Thenoveltyandoriginalityofcreative productionsimplybothanabilitytothinkfluentlyandflexiblyand aninclinationto doso. Avoluminous literaturehasdocumentedtheimportanceofboth these aspects of creativity (Barren & Harrington,1981).Inthis article,Iattempttoorganizethe findings onpersonalitycharacteristics associated withcreativitybyreferenceto awell-establishedtaxonomy of personality traits.Specifically, I amtesting the hypothesis that creativity isuniquelyassociatedwiththepersonality domain of openness to experience.

Creativity,Intelligence, and Divergent ThinkingWhether creativity should be consideredpartofgeneralintel-

ligenceor acorrelateof it or anentirely independent abilityisstill disputed. Steinberg(1985), forexample, studied implicittheories of intelligence, creativity, and wisdom and concludedthat "implicit theoriesareclearly inconsistent with viewssuchasGuilford's (1967),according to which creativity is an aspectofintelligence" (p.612). Measuresofcreativityand ofintelli-gencearelargely independentwithinspecialized groups (e.g.,

Correspondenceconcerningthis articleshould be addressed toLoring J. Ingraham, Laboratory of Psychology and Psychopathology,National Institute of MentalHealth,Bethesda, Maryland 20892.

architects,scientists) and are sometime uncorrelated in morediverse samples (Wallach&Kogan, 1965). However,thereisconsiderable evidence that creativity is stronglyassociatedwithintelligence when the full rangeofboth variablesisassessed.Highlycreative individuals generally scoreveryhighonmea-sured intelligence(Barren& Harrington, 1981).WhenStern-berg(1985)created scales of intelligence and creativity basedonimplicit theoriesofeach, they correlated substantially(r =.69) in a study rating letters of recommendation. Although con-ceptually discriminable, it appearsthatthese two aptitudes areempirically closely related.

Cognitive studies of creativity have focused on divergentthinkingabilities(Guilford, 1967).Incontrastto thesingle cor-rect answer demanded by convergenttests,divergenttests askforas many appropriate answers as possible. Some tests empha-sizethe sheer quantity of productions: WordFluency (Chris-tensen& Guilford, 1958b),forexample,simplyasks respon-dents to list as many words as they can that contain aspecifiedletter. Othertests(e.g., Consequences;Christensen,Merrifield,&Guilford, 1958) scorefor unusual and original responses.Factor analysesshowthatallthese kindsoftestsformasinglefactor, distinct from although related to general intelligence(McCrae,Arenberg,&Costa,1987).

Asmeasures of creativity, divergent thinkingtestshavebeenwidely criticized. Wallach and Kogan (1965), Harrington(1975),andKatzand Poag (1979) have shown that theirvalidityismarkedlyinfluencedby theconditions underwhichthey areadministered, and Sternberg(1985) declined to use tests of cre-ativitybecausehefeltthat "such tests capture,atbest,onlythemost trivialaspectsofcreativity"(p.618).AlthoughtestslikeWordFluency certainly have limitedfacevalidityasmeasuresofcreativity, their abilitytoidentifycreative individualsis anempirical matter,and infacttheyarereasonablysuccessful inthis.AsBarrenandHarrington (1981)cautiously concluded,"somedivergent thinkingtests,administeredundersome condi-tionsandscoredbysomesetsofcriteria,do measure abilitiesrelated to creative achievement and behavior in somedomains"(p.447). Consideran example:Alpaugh,Parham, Cole,and

1258

8/12/2019 Mccrae 1987

2/8

DIVERGENTTHINKING AND OPENNESS 1259Birren(1982)had threeEnglishprofessors scorestorieswrittenby61women, ages20 to 83, fororiginalityandcreativity. Inter-rater agreement between pairs of judges was quite high.1Themean creativity ratingswere significantlyrelatedto all the diver-gentthinkingtestsexamined (re = .34 to .55), and the observedrelations could not be attributed to age or intelligence.

CreativityandPersonalityHundreds of studieshavecompared more andlesscreative

individuals on measures of personality. Manyhaveused the Ad-jective Check List (ACL; Gough &Heilbrun,1965); perhapsthe most impressive of these studiespooledseven male and fivefemale samples that had been rated forcreativity (Gough,1979). A 30-item Creative Personality Scale(CPS)was devel-oped andcross-validatedon samples that totaledover 1,700subjects.Scalesdeveloped by thecriterion-groupstrategyoftenincludeaconceptually diversesetofitems, andsome ofthecon-tent of the CPS is puzzling. For example, individuals low incre-ativitydescribedthemselvesasboth affected andsincere;indi-vidualshighin creativity claimed to be bothinformal andsnob-bish.Most the the items,however,make sense: High scorersreport that theyare clever, inventive,reflective, and unconven-tional;lowscorers endorsecommonplace,conservative,andin-terests narrow.These items are alsoconsistentwith the person-alitycharacteristicsrepeatedly identified in theliteratureas cor-relates of creativity, including aesthetic sensitivity, broadinterests,independenceofjudgment, and toleration of ambigu-ity(Barren & Harrington, 1981).

Itispossibletointerpret mostofthesetraitsascomponentsofabroaddomain of personality thathas been identified asopenness to experience (McCrae &Costa,1985b). Factor analy-ses ofquestionnaires,adjective rating scales, andQ-sortitemsall pointto a five-factormodelofpersonality similarto thetax-onomyoffered in1963byNorman. BeyondNeuroticism,Ex-traversion,Agreeableness,andConscientiousness is a fifth do-main, Openness to Experience, which includes intellectual cu-riosity, aesthetic sensitivity, liberal values, and emotionaldifferentiation.AdjectivesfromtheOpennessfactor(McCrae&Costa,1985c) includeconventionaloriginal, down-to-earthimaginative,anduncreativecreative;CaliforniaQ-Set(CQS;Block, 1961) items defining an Openness factor (McCrae,Costa,& Busch, 1986)contrast valuesintellectualmattersandrebellious, nonconforming withjudgesin conventionaltermsand favors conservativevalues.Inquestionnaire form(Costa&McCrae,1985b), openness is measured in areas offantasy,aes-thetics,feelings,actions,ideas,andvalues.

What all these elements share is an interest in varied experi-ence for its own sake. Closed individuals are not necessarily de-fensive,but theyaremore comfortable withthe familiarandhavelittleincentive to try the new. Individualsclosedto experi-encewould havelittle motivation to be creative, andthismightaccountfortherepeatedfinding that individuals judged creativescore high ontraitsin the domain of openness.

DivergentThinkingandOpennessWhetheropennesscontributes to theabilityto becreativeis,

however,a moredifficultquestion. In an early study relatingdivergentthinking to personality scales,Merrifield,Guilford,

Christensen,andFrick(1961) reported verymodestassocia-tions between fluency and originality andsuchvariables asaes-thetic interest, reflectiveness, and tolerance for ambiguity.There was no support for the hypotheses that originality wouldberelated tononconformity, needforadventure,orneedforvariety.Anumberofstudieshavecorrelated Rokeach's(1960)Dogmatism Scalea measure ofclosednesswithmeasures ofcreative ability, with conflicting results (Parsons, Tinier, &Cook, 1984).It ispossible that opennesstoexperienceand di-vergentthinking abilitiesareindependentpredictorsofcreativ-ity;certainly there are many individuals whohavethe desire tobecreativebut not thetalent.

It isalsopossible,however,that the measurement of opennesshasbeen inadequate. Dogmatism,forexample,mayrepresenttoo small apartof thefulldomain of openness toshowreliablerelations. An alternative tradition of measuring openness beganwithFitzgerald(1966),whose ExperienceInquirywasintendedtoassessregression in the service of the ego (Kris,1952).Revi-sions ofthisscale were subsequently made by Coan(1974)andCostaand McCrae (1978); the version to be used in this studyispartof the NEOPersonality Inventory(NEO-PI;Costa& Mc-Crae, 1985b),aquestionnaire measureof the fivemajordo-mains of personality.

Inthis study, Iassessthe relations among divergent thinkingtests, Cough'sCPS, and multiple measures of the fivemajordomains of personality, especially openness to experience.Be-tween1959and1972, participantsin theBaltimore Longitudi-nalStudyof Aging (BLSA) were given abatteryofdivergentthinking tests; since1980,manyof thesame individualshavebeen administered a variety of personality questionnaires andbeen the objects of peer and spouse ratings. Comparing cogni-tiveperformance with personalitydatacollected 8 to 20 yearslatermayseem questionable,but infacttherearegood reasonstosuspect that thelapseof timewillhavelittleeffect on therelations observed.In theBLSAsample,the6-year reteststabil-ity of total divergent thinking scores was .87 (McCrae etal.,1987),and personalitytraitsare alsoknownto beverystable inadulthood(McCrae &Costa, 1984; seealsoSchaefer, 1972).Costa& McCrae (1985a)haveargued that, formanypurposes,personalitydatacollected at any point in adulthood may beconsidered contemporaneous, but it is also possible toviewthisdesign as a prospective longitudinal study that asks whether di-vergent thinking ability among adults predicts any aspect ofpersonality a decadelater.

Awealthofpersonality datahasbeen accumulatedonBLSAparticipants,and it seems appropriate here to test supplemen-tary hypotheses about the relation ofdivergentthinking to othervariables suggested by the literature. Woody and Claridge(1977)reportedstrong correlations betweenWallachand Ko-gan's (1965) tests of creativity and Eysenck and Eysenck's(1975)PsychoticismScale in a college sample, and Gotz andGotz(1979)foundthat adultartistsscored higher than controlsonthis dimension. Artistic interests, evenamongnonartists,havebeen associated withcreativity, andRump(1982)arguedthatHolland's(1985)measuresofvocational interestmay beuseful predictors. Finally,BarronandHarrington(1981)sug-

' CompareAmabile's(1982)suggesteddefinition: A product or re-sponse is creative to theextentthatappropriateobservers independentlyagree thatit iscreative (p.1001).

8/12/2019 Mccrae 1987

3/8

1260 ROBERT R. McCRAETable1Scheduleo fAdministrationofMeasures

Instrument DateDivergentthinkingtestsSelf-reports

NEOInventoryCaliforniaQ-SetsortsSelf-DirectedSearchPreliminaryAgreeablenessand

Conscientiousnessscales,adjectiveratings,psychoticism

CreativePersonality Scale,Sensation Seeking ScaleV

Peer ratings: NEO PersonalityInventory, adjective ratings

Spouseratings:NEOInventory

December 1959toAugust1972February 1980August1981toJanuary 1985October 1981

March1983September 1985July 1983August1980

gestedthat sensationseekingisamongthetraitsthatshould beinvestigated ascorrelatesofcreativity,and aseriesof studies(seeZuckerman, 1979,pp.238-240)havedemonstratedsig-nificantpositivecorrelationsbetweenearlyformsof Zucker-man's(1979)SensationSeekingScale(SSS-V)and avarietyofmeasuresof creativity andcreativebehavior. Some ofthesetraitsarethemselvesrelated to openness to experience; if cre-ativityisuniquelyrelated to openness,thenthose traitsrelatedtodivergentthinkingabilities should also becorrelatedwithopenness.

MethodSubjects

Subjects for thestudyweremale volunteer participantsin theBLSA(Shock etal., 1984).BLSAparticipantsare apredominantly white,community-dwellinggroupofindividualswhohaveagreedtoreturnforperiodicbiomedicaland psychologicaltesting.Most have at least acollege degreeandworkin or areretiredfromscientific, professional,ormanagerialoccupations.Recruitment into theBLSAhas been con-tinuous,with mostparticipantsreferredbyfriendsorrelatives alreadyin thestudy.Althoughnotrepresentativeof thegeneral population ineducationoroccupation, comparisons show thatthissampledoesnotdiffermarkedlyfromanational sample withregard to thethree person-ality dimensions of neuroticism, extraversion, and openness to experi-ence(Costaetal.,1986).

Asinmost longitudinalstudies,datahavebeen gathered overaperiodofyears,with newinstruments introduced at different stagesof thestudy.Table1givesthedatesofadministrationofinstrumentsanalyzedinthis article.Datawere providedby 268 mengivendivergentthinkingtestsin theearly yearsof thestudyandpersonality measuresinrecentyears. They rangedin agefrom 18 to 80 atinitialtesting,withameanageof 48.4 years. Because of missingdataandparticipationindifferentaspectsof the study, the number of subjects variesacrossanalyses.Re-sultsarebasedon allavailabledata;specificNvaluesaregivenin thetables.

Measures and ProceduresDivergent thinkingtests. Sixmeasuresofdivergent thinking were

used: Associations Fluency I (Form A;Christensen Guilford,1957a), in which subjects provide synonyms;ExpressionalFluency(Form A;Christensen&Guilford,1958a),inwhich subjects write sen-

tences with words beginning with designated letters;IdeationalFluencyI(FormA;Christensen&Guilford, 1957b),inwhichsubjects nameobjectsinspecificclasses;WordFluency(FormA;Christensen&Guil-ford,1958b), inwhich subjects write words containingadesignated let-ter,andConsequences (Christensenetal.,1958),inwhichsubjectsarerequiredtoimaginethepossible consequencesofunusualsituations.The last of these is scored for Obvious and Remote Consequences, thelatter being more unusualandoriginal.Atotal scorewasalsoformedbysummingstandardizedscoreson the sixtests.Alltestsweretimed,and the order of administration of the fluencytestswas counterbal-anced. Because of time limitations, it wasimpossiblefor some subjectsto complete the Consequences portion of the battery at the same visit;ofthe 268 subjects analyzed here, 86% took all tests at the sametime,8%tooktheConsequences portionat alater visit,and 6%failedtotaketheConsequencesportion.

Because divergent thinkingtestsareopen-ended,theycannot beob-jectivelyscored.Interscorerreliability,however,rangedfrom.96 to1.00for the four fluencytests.Interscorer reliabilitywas.81forObviousConsequences and .74 for Remote Consequences. Inthese cases, judg-ment is needed not only to tally the number of appropriate and nonre-dundant responses but alsotodecidewhicharecommonplace andwhichoriginal;giventhe necessary subjectivity of these judgments, theobserved reliabilities are reasonable. Internal-consistencyestimatesforthe sixtestsrangedfrom .78 to .86, and 6-year retest stability rangedfrom.63 to .81. The6-year stabilitycoefficientfor thetotalwas87.

Whenthe six divergent thinkingtestswere jointly factored with theeightsubtestsof theArmy Alphain thefullBLSAsample (McCraeetal.,1987), all variables had positive loadings on the first, general factor.Because two eigenvalues were greater than 1.0, twovarimax-rotatedprincipalcomponentswere examined.AlleightArmyAlphatestshadtheir higher loading (rangingfrom.65 to.78)on the firstfactor,GeneralIntelligence;all sixdivergent-thinkingtestshad their higher loading (.66to .75) on the secondfactor,Fluency. These results suggest that the diver-gentthinkingtestsrepresent a relatively homogeneous cluster of cogni-tiveabilities thataredistinguishablefromtraditional measuresofintel-ligence,andtheysupportthe useofatotalscoreas asummary measureofdivergentthinking.MeasuresoftheJive-factor model.TheNEO-PIis a181-item question-nairedeveloped throughfactoranalysisto fit a five-dimensionalmodelofpersonality(Costa&McCrae, 1985b).Anearlier versionof thetest,the NEO Inventory (McCrae &Costa,I983a), measured traits in thethreedomainsofneuroticism, extraversion,andopennesstoexperi-ence; thisinstrument was used for self-reports and spouse ratings. Re-centmodifications (McCrae&Costa,1987) have addedtwo newscalestomeasureagreeableness andconscientiousness. Self-reports herearebased onshort,preliminaryformsof the Agreeableness and Conscien-tiousnessscales;fullscalesforthese dimensionsareusedinpeer ratings.Itemscoringin theNEO-PIisbalancedtocontrolforacquiescence,andsocially desirable respondingdoesnotappeartobias scores (McCraeCosta,1983b). Internal consistencyand6-month retest reliabilityfortheNeuroticism, Extraversion,andOpennessscalesrangefrom.85 to.93(McCrae&Costa,1983a); internal consistencyfor the Agreeable-ness andConscientiousness scalesare .89 and .91,respectively,inpeerratingsbutsomewhatlowerinself-reports, where preliminary scaleswereused.TheNEO-PIhasbeencorrelatedwithotherinventories,ob-serverratings,and sentencecompletionsand has been used to predictsomatic complaints, psychological well-being, and coping behavior(Costa&McCrae, 1985b).

Fivefactors were derivedfrom an80-item adjective ratingform inboth self-reports (McCrae&Costa, 1985c)andpeer ratings (McCraeCosta,1987). These factors weregiventhesame labelsas thedomainscalesof theNEO-PIandwere significantlycorrelatedwiththequestion-naire measuresof thesameconstruct.Five factors werealso derivedfrom the 100itemsof the CQS(Block,1961),which weresortedbysubjectsattheir regularly scheduled visitsto theGerontology ResearchCenter (McCrae etal.,1986).The CQS factors showed evidence of con-

8/12/2019 Mccrae 1987

4/8

DIVERGENTTHINKING AND OPENNESS 1261vergentanddiscriminantvalidity whencorrelatedwith the NEO-PIandthe adjectivefactors.

Allpersonality data except the CQS werecollectedthrough mail ad-ministrations.For approximately half thesubjects,spouse ratings forneuroticism,extraversion, and openness were obtained on theNEOIn-ventory(McCrae,1982).For adifferentsubsample,peer ratings on theNEO-PIandadjective rating scales were obtainedfrommen andwomennominated by thesubjects;one tofourraters provided assessments. De-tailson thecharacteristicsof theratersandtheir relationshipsto thesubjects they rated are provided elsewhere (McCrae &Costa, 1987).Ingeneral,theraters resembledthesubjectsin age andeducation andappeared to bewellacquaintedwiththem,havingseen themfrequentlyina number ofdifferentsituations for several years. Scores for peerrat-ingsareaveraged across raters.

Creative PersonalityScale(Gough,1979).TheCPSisa30-itemscaleempirically derivedfromthe 300 itemsofthe ACL(Cough&Heilbrun,1965).Ratingsofcreativityfromexpert judges,facultymembers,per-sonality-assessmentstaff members,andlife-history interviewers wereexaminedforsevengroupsof men and fivegroupsof women who hadcompletedthe ACL(N =1,701). Correlationsofindividual itemswithcreativity ratingswere usedtoselect18positiveand 12negative items.Internal-consistencycoefficientsin thederivation samples rangedfrom.73to.81.The CPS wassignificantlycorrelatedwithsixother creativityscales previously derivedfrom the ACL(= .30 to.76);inaddition,itwascorrelatedwithcreativity ratingsin10ofthe 12groups.In the twocross-validation samples, it showed correlations with rated creativity of.35(N=35,p

8/12/2019 Mccrae 1987

5/8

1262 ROBERT R. McCRAETable2CorrelationsofDivergent Thinking TestsandCreative PersonalityScale(CPS) With Self-ReportsandRatingsonMeasures oftheFive-Factor Model

DivergentthinkingtestsFactor

NEOPersonality InventorySelf-reports

NeuroticismExtraversionOpennessAgreeablenessConscientiousness

Peer ratingsNeuroticismExtraversionOpennessAgreeablenessConscientiousness

SpouseratingsNeuroticismExtraversionOpenness

AdjectivefactorscoresSelf-reports

NeuroticismExtraversionOpennessAgreeablenessConscientiousness

Peer ratingsNeuroticismExtraversionOpennessAgreeablenessConscientiousness

CaliforniaQ-Setfactorscores(self-reports)

NeuroticismExtraversionOpennessAgreeablenessConscientiousnessCPS

AF

.02-.03

.38***

.04-.05-.10

.12

.37***

.03.06

.05-.04

.27**

.01-.14*

.37***

.16*-.02

.05-.02

.27**

.05

.05

-.05.03.38***.06.03.18*

EF

.00

.04

.30***

.02-.08-.04

.13

.36***.03-.04-.07

.06

.23*

.00-.02

.28***.04-.05

.11

.05

.27**-.02-.02

-.22**.11.18*.10.11.21**

IF

-.05.06.25***.03

-.01.03.15.28**

-.10.00

-.02-.11

.15

-.01-.15*.28*"

-.09.01.11.04.26**

-.10.06

-.20*.09.41***

-.04-.02

.17*

WF

-.03.02.33***.05

-.04.02.12.37***

-.10.05

-.03-.12

.17

-.03-.12

.39***.07

.02

.18*-.07

.39***-.07

.02

-.01-.01

.25*

.01.04

.28***

oc

-.10.13*.06.04.00

-.12-.04-.05-.06

.08-.20*.00.14

-.08-.03

.11-.13.06-.08-.05

.06-.08

.22*

-.11.17.12.04.14.09

RC

.02

.13*

.34***

.01-.02

.10

.10

.29**-.14-.02

.03

.16

.36***

.01-.11

.27***-.04

.05

.15

.00

.40***-.13

.10

-.01.05.33***.03.13.20*

Total

-.04.09.39***.05

-.05-.01

.16

.41***-.07

.02-.06-.02

.29**

.00-.15*

.39***

.02.00

.14

.03

.40***-.07

.11

-.14.10.37***.05.09.26**

ResidualsDivergentthinking

-.08.13*.18**.01.02

-.13.18.26**

-.06.10

-.07-.02

.11

-.06-.02

.25***

.02

.01

.01

.06

.30**-.06

.14

-.17.17.15.06.03.21**

Vocabulary

.04-.24***

.20**

.11-.09

.11-.17

.18

.14-.01

.02-.10

.17

.06-.29***

.1 1

.01-.01

.16-.14

.11

.14

.08

.10-.24**

.32***.02

.16-.04

CPS

-.30***.30***.44***.17*.30**.1 1.37***.34**

-.39***-.02-.14

.15

.26*

-.11.16.61***

-.11.30***.05.26*.38***

-.30**.07

-.36***.58***.35***

-.15.27*

1.00Note.For divergentthinkingtests, ns =130-267with self-reports,105-115withpeerratings, and104-113with spouse ratings; for CPS,ns= 86-137withself-reports,81withpeerratings, and 65 with spouse ratings. AF =AssociationalFluency; EF =ExpressionalFluency; IF = IdeationalFluency;WF =WordFluency; OC = Obvious Consequences; RC = Remote Consequences.*p

8/12/2019 Mccrae 1987

6/8

DIVERGENT THINKINGAND OPENNESS 1263Table4CorrelationsofOtherPersonality Variables With Openness toExperienceandTotalDivergent Thinking Score

VariableEPQPsychoticismSelf-Directed SearchRealistic

InvestigativeArtisticSocialEnterprisingConventional

SensationSeeking ScaleVThrill and AdventureSeekingExperience SeekingDisinhibitionBoredom Susceptibility

TotalSensation Seeking

Opennessto experience

-.06.17*.34*".50*".16*.11

-.06.32***.51***.25**.15.45***

Total divergentthinking.00

-.16*.24**.27***.19*.10

-.02.22**.25".22".18*.31*"

Note.N- 156-201.EPQ=EysenckPersonalityQuestionnaire.*p

8/12/2019 Mccrae 1987

7/8

1264 ROBERTR. McCRAEbeenobtained if thetestshad been administered under otherconditions.Harrington(1975)andKatzandPoag(1979)foundthatthepsychologicalmeaning ofdivergentthinkingtest scoreschangedwhensubjectswerespecifically instructed to be cre-ative. In Harrington'sstudy,correlations with an ACL measureofcreative abilities increasedfrom.22 in thestandard condition(comparable to the .26foundbetweentotaldivergent thinkingandthe CPS in this study) to .64 in the creativity condition.Scorers high in divergent thinking in the creativity condition,but not in the standard condition, described themselves asself-confident,dominant,andachievement-oriented.These traitsare consistentwiththe CPS finding that more creative individu-alsareadjusted,extraverted,and conscientious aswellas open.

Studies of rated creativityoftenbut not always support thesecontentions.Kelson's(1985)womennominated for creativepo-tential andBarren's (1969) creative female mathematicianscould be described as open and extraverted, but whereasHel-son'ssubjectswerecharacterized by high conscientiousness,Barren'swere regardedasless dependable and responsible thanwererepresentative (i.e.,noncreative)femalemathematicians.Barren's(1969)studyoforiginalityinIrishmanagers suggeststhatcreativityinthis contextismarkedchieflybydisagreeable-ness,asseeninsuch adjectivesascynicalandbossyasopposedto pleasantand unselfish. Katzand Poag (1979) found thatwomenscoringhighindivergent thinking tests under instruc-tionsto becreative labeled themselvesascold,timid,andcow-ardly.

AsBarronandHarrington(1981)pointed out, thereissomevariation in personality characteristics across fields of creativeendeavor.Paintersmay behighinpsychoticism(Gotz&Gotz,1979);creative scientists may be more introverted than creativesalesmen. Thesedifferencesmayaccountforsomeof thecon-flicting literature. In addition, creative abilitydoesnot inevita-blylead to recognized creativity, and a variety of personalitytraitsmay beinvolvedinbeing perceivedascreative. Conscien-tious individualsmaycomplete their creative projects moreof-ten; extraverts mayexhibit them more readily; adjusted individ-uals may belessdistractedfromcreativeworkbypersonalprob-lems. At this point, it seems reasonable to conclude thatopennessto experience is a common characteristic of creativeindividualsbut that additional research is needed to ascertainwhetherand under what conditions other domains of personal-itycontribute to creative accomplishments.

Ithasoftenbeen pointed out that dispositions andabilitiesinteractin thelifeof theindividual (e.g., Heim, 1970).Smartextraverts make intelligent conversation, smart introverts readdifficultbooks; conscientious individualsusetheir intellectualgifts,lackadaisical individuals do not. Openness to experienceanddivergent thinking abilities may also interact as mutuallynecessary conditionsforcreativity,theformerprovidingthe in-clinationand thelatter providingtheaptitudefororiginal think-ing.But these two are not independent predictors of creativity;theyarethemselvesconsistently related,and theexplanationforthisassociation is a matter of some interest. There are severalpossibilities.

First,openandclosed individualsmaydiffernot intrue diver-gentthinking abilitybutmerelyintest performance.Theopenperson may be intrigued by the task ofimaginingconsequencesor generating words that include a specified letter and thus out-performtheclosed person.Byprovisionofextrinsic motivation

(suchas money), closed individuals might be induced to per-formaswellasopen individualsdo ondivergentthinkingtasks.Experimental studies couldbedesignedtotest thispossibility.

Second,open people mayhavedeveloped intellectual and es-pecially divergent thinking abilities through alifetimeof prac-tice.Byexercising their cognitivefaculties,theymayhave dis-coveredor retained skills that were lost to closed individuals. Ifthisprocess occurs,it should be cumulative, and it might beexpected that the association of opennesswith divergent think-ingwould bestrongerinolder than inyounger men.Whenyoungerand older men in this sample were examined sepa-rately, however, correlationswerenot significantly different.Similarcomparisonsin children, adolescents, andyoungadultsmightfind supportforthismechanism at an earlier age.

Finally, theappreciationofnoveltymay befacilitatedby theability tothink creatively. Individualswhoeasily generatenewideas, whose cognitiveprocessesare flexible, may develop aninterest in varied experience, just as individuals with particularcompetenciesdevelopcorrespondingvocational interests (Hol-land, 1985). Again, developmental studies couldclarify theseissues.

Unfortunately,the most scientificallysatisfyingway of dis-covering thecausal orderingofthesetwovariablesis not feasi-ble. Both personalitytraitsand cognitive abilities are singularlyresistantto experimental manipulation, at least withinterven-tionsknown today. In the immediate future, therefore, open-ness to experience may be of more value as a means of selectingpotentially creative individuals thanas amechanismfor en-hancing creativity.

ReferencesAlpaugh, P. K.,Parham,I.A.,Cole,K. D., &Birren,J. E. (1982).Cre-

ativityinadulthoodand oldage:Anexploratorystudy.EducationalGerontology,S,101-116.Amabile,T. M.(1982).Socialpsychology of creativity: Aconsensual

assessmenttechnique.Journal ofPersonality andSocial Psychology,43,997-1013.

Barron,F.(1969).Creativeperson andcreativeprocess.NewYork:Holt,Rinehart& Winston.

Barron, E, Harrington,D. M.(1981). Creativity,intelligence,andpersonality.Annual ReviewofPsychology,32,439-476.

Block,J.(1961).TheQ-sortmethodinpersonality assessmentandpsy-chiatricresearch.Springfield, IL:CharlesCThomas.

Christensen,P.R.,&Guilford,J. P. (1957a).Associational FluencyI,FormA.BeverlyHills,CA:SheridanSupply.

Christensen,P.R.,& Guilford, J. P.(1957b).Ideational FluencyI.FormA.BeverlyHills, CA:SheridanSupply.

Christensen,P.R.,& Guilford, J. P. (I958a).Expressional Fluency,FormA.BeverlyHills,CA:SheridanSupply.

Christensen,P.R.,&Guilford,J. P. (1958b). Word Fluency, Form A.BeverlyHills,CA:SheridanSupply.

Christensen,P.R.,Merrifield, P.R.,&Guilford,J. P.(1958).Conse-quences, FormA-II.Beverly Hills, CA:SheridanSupply.

Coan,R. W. (1974).The optimalpersonality.NewYork:ColumbiaUni-versityPress.

Costa,P.T.,Jr.,&McCrae,R. R.(1978).Objective personalityassess-ment.InM.Storandt,I. C. Siegler, & M. F.Elias(Eds.),Theclinicalpsychology o faging pp . 119-143).New York:PlenumPress.

Costa,P. T.,Jr.,&McCrae,R. R. (1985a).Concurrentvalidationafter20 years:Implicationsofpersonality stabilityfor itsassessment.InJ. N. Butcher & C. D.Spielbeiger(Eds.),Advancesinpersonalityas-sessment(Vol.4, pp.31-54).Hillsdale, NJ:Erlbaum.

8/12/2019 Mccrae 1987

8/8

DIVERGENT THINKING AND OPENNESS 1265Costa,P.T,Jr.,&McCrae,R. R. (1985b).The NEO Personality Inven-

torymanual.Odessa,FL:Psychological Assessment Resources.Costa,P.T.,Jr., McCrae,R.R.,&Holland,J. L.(1984). Personalityand

vocational interestsin anadult sample.Journal ofApplied Psychol-ogy.69,390-400.

Costa,P. X,Jr., McCrae,R.R.,Zonderman,A. B.,Barbano,H. E.,Lebowitz, B., & Larson, D.M.(1986).Cross-sectional studiesofper-sonalityin anational sample:II.Stabilityinneuroticism,extraver-sion, andopenness.Psychologyand Aging,I,144-149.

Eysenck,H.J., Eysenck,S. B. G. (1975). Manual of the EysenckPersonality Questionnaire.SanDiego,CA:Educationaland Indus-trialTestingService.

Fitzgerald,E. T. (1966).Measurementofopennesstoexperience:Astudy ofregressionin theserviceof theego.Journal of Personalityand SocialPsychology, 4,655-663.

Gotz,K.Q,&Gotz,K.(1979). Personality characteristics ofprofes-sional artists.PerceptualandMotorSkills, 49,327-334.

Cough,H. G.(1979).Acreative personality scalefor the AdjectiveCheckList.JournalofPersonalityand SocialPsychology,37, 1398-1405.

Cough.H.G.,&Heilbrun,A.B.,Jr.(1965).Adjective CheckList man-ual.PaloAlto,CA:Consulting Psychologists Press.

Guilford,J. P. (1967). The natureofhumanintelligence.NewYork:McGraw-Hill.

Harrington,D. M. (1975).Effectsofexplicit instructionsto becre-ative on thepsychological meaningof divergentthinking testscores.Journal ofPersonality,43,434-454.

Heim,A.(1970).Intelligence and personality: Their assessment andrelationship.Baltimore:PenguinBooks.

Helson,R. (1985).Whichofthose youngwomenwithcreative potentialbecame productive? Personalityincollegeandcharacteristicsofpar-ents.In R.Hogan& W. H.Jones(Eds.), Perspectives inpersonality(Vol.1,pp.49-80).Greenwich,CT: JAIPress.

Holland,J. L.(1985).Self-Directed Search1985edition.Odessa,FL:PsychologicalAssessment Resources.

Katz, A. N., Poag, J. R.(1979).Sexdifferences ininstructions tobecreative on divergent and nondivergenttestscores.JournalofPersonality,47,518-530.

Kris,E. (1952).Psychoanalytic explorationsin an.NewYork:Interna-tionalUniversitiesPress.

McCrae, R. R.(1982).Consensual validation of personality traits: Evi-dencefromself-reportsand ratings.JournalofPersonalityand SocialPsychology,43,293-303.

McCrae,R.R.,Arenberg,D.,&Costa,P.T., Jr.(1987). Declinesindivergentthinking with age:Cross-sectional,longitudinal, andcross-sequential analyses.PsychologyandAging,2,130-137.

McCrae,R.R.,&Costa,P. X, Jr. (1983a).Jointfactorsinself-reportsandratings: Neuroticism, extraversion,andopennessto experience.PersonalityandIndividual Differences, 4,245-255.

McCrae,R.R.,&Costa,P. X, Jr.(1983b). Social desirability scales:

Moresubstance thanstyle.Journal ofConsulting and Clinical Psy-chology.SI,882-888.

McCrae,R.R.,&Costa,P. X, Jr.(1984).Emerginglives,enduringdis-positions:Personalityinadulthood.Boston: Little,Brown.

McCrae,R.R.,&Costa,P. X, Jr.(1985a).Comparisonof EPI andPsy-choticismscaleswithmeasuresof the fivefactormodelofpersonality.Personalityand Individual Differences, 6.587-597.

McCrae,R.R.,&Costa,P. X, Jr.(1985b).Opennesstoexperience.InR.Hogan& W. H.Jones(Eds.),Perspectivesinpersonality(Vol.1,pp.145-172). Greenwich,CT: JAIPress.

McCrae, R.R.,&Costa,P. X, Jr.(1985c). Updating Norman's ade-quate taxonomy : Intelligenceandpersonality dimensionsinnaturallanguage and in questionnaires. Journal of Personality and SocialPsychology,49,710-721.

McCrae,R.R.,&Costa,P. X, Jr.(1987).Validationof the five-factormodelofpersonalityacrossinstrumentsandobservers.JournalofPersonalityandSocialPsychology,52,81-90.

McCrae,R.R.,Costa,P. X,Jr.,& Busch, C. M.(1986). Evaluatingcomprehensiveness in personality systems: The CaliforniaQ-Setandthe fivefactor model.JournalofPersonality,54,430-446.

Merrifield, P.R.,Guilford,J. P.,Christensen,P.R.,& Frick, J. W.(1961).Interrelationships between certainabilitiesand certain traitsofmotivationandtemperament.JournalofGeneralPsychology. 65.57-74.

Norman,W. T.(1963).Towardanadequate taxonomyofpersonalityattributes:Replicatedfactorstructure in peernominationpersonalityratings.Journal ofAbnormaland SocialPsychology, 66,574-583.

Parsons,R.J.,Tittler,B.I., Cook,V. J.(1984).Amulti-trait multi-method evaluationof creativity andopenness.Psychological Reports,54,403-410.

Rokeach, M. (1960). The open and closed mind.NewYork:BasicBooks.

Rump, E. E.(1982).Relationships between creativity,arts-orientation,and esthetic-preferencevariables.Journalof Psychology, 110,11-20.

Schaefer,C. E.(1972).Follow-up studyof a creativityscalefor the Ad-jective Check List.PsychologicalReports,30,662.

Shock,N.W.,Greulich,R.C., Andres,R.,Arenberg,D.,Costa,P. X,Jr. Lakatta,E.G.,&Tobin,J. D.(1984).Normalhumanaging:TheBaltimore Longitudinal Study ofAging(NIHPublicationNo.84-2450).Bethesda,MD: National Institutes of Health.

Steraberg,R. J. (1985).Implicittheories of intelligence, creativity, andwisdom.Journal ofPersonalityand SocialPsychology, 49,607-627.

Wallach,M.A.,&Kogan,N. (1965).Modes ofthinkinginyoungchil-dren.NewYork:Holt, Rinehart&Winston.

Woody,C,&Claridge,G. S.(1977).Psychoticismandthinking.BritishJournal ofSocialandClinicalPsychology, 16,241-248.

Zuckerman,M.(1979).Sensationseeking:Beyondthe optimallevelofarousal.NewYork:Edbaum.

ReceivedJuly 16,1986RevisionreceivedOctober17,1986

Accepted January9,1987