ASSESSED INTELLIGENCE Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
PERSONALITY TRAITS AND INTELLECTUAL COMPETENCE: THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PERSONALITY TRAITS, ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE, PSYCHOMETRIC AND SUBJECTIVELY- ASSESSED INTELLIGENCE Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic Departmentof Psychology University College London January2003 A thesis submittedto the Faculty of Science of the University of London for the degreeof Doctor of Philosohpy c May. PAG ; NUlVI RIN-G AS ORIGINAL For My Parents iv Acknowledgments Thanks are due to Philip Ackerman,Elizabeth Austin, Nadia Bettega,Geoff Bird, Nathan Brody, John Draper, Jon Driver, Linda Gottfredson, Keith Langley, Gerald Matthews, Joanna Moutafi, Dino Petrides, Chris McManus and Leonora Wilkinson for their permanenttechnical supportand advice. I am also thankful to the British Council and Fundacion Antorchas for the financial supportthroughout my studies. Finally I would like to expressmy deepestgratitude to Adrian Furnharn for supervising this dissertationand being such a great example of personality and intelligence. Thanks Adrian. V Abstract This thesis concerns the relationship between personality traits and intellectual compctence. It containsfive chaptersand ten independentbut related empirical studies. Chapter one presentsa review of the salient literature in the area. It is divided into three sub-sections: personality and psychometric intelligence, personality and academic performance (AP), and personality and subjectively-assessedintelligence (SAI). Chapter two (studies 1 to 4) examines the relationship between the Big Five personality traits with several psychometric intelligence tests, SAL and gender.Results indicatedthat personalitytraits (notably Neuroticism and Agreeableness)are significantly related to SAI, but not to psychometric intelligence. Since SAI is also significantly relatedto psychometricintelligence, it is suggestedthat SAI may mediatethe relationship betweenpersonality and psychometricintelligence. Chapterthree (studies5 to 8) examinesthe relationshipbetween psychometric intelligence and personality (the Big Five and the Gigantic Three) with AP. Results indicate that personality traits (notably Conscientiousnessand Psychoticism) are significant predictors of AP, accounting for unique variance in AP even when psychometricintelligence and academicbehaviour are consideredas predictors. Chapter four (studies 9& 10) looks at the relationship between personality and psychometricintelligence with a measureof art judgement as well as severalindicators of previous art experience. Results indicate that art judgement is related to both personality and intelligence, and may thereforebe considereda mixed construct. Chapterfive presentsa brief summaryof the results and conclusions. vi Note: Study 8 has been published in Social Behaviour and Personality, 2002,30,807- 813. Study 7 has been acceptedfor publication by the European Journal of Personality. Study 6 has been acceptedfor publication by the Journal of Research in Personality. Study 10 has been accepted for publication by Personality and Individual Differences. Currently anotherfive studies are under editorial review: studies 1 and 2 by the Joumal of Personality, study 3 by the Journal of PersonalityAssessment, study 4 and study 9 by the British Journal of Psychology. vii Contents Acknowledgments v List of figures xiv List of tables xv Chapter 1: Introduction: review of the salient literature 1.1 Overview 1 1.2 Personalitytraits and psychometricintelligence 2 1.2.1 Psychometricintelligence and the notion of g 6 1.2.2 Personality:the Big Five 9 1.2.3 The Big Five and g reviewed 15 1.2.3.1 Neuroticism and test performance 19 1.2.3.1.1 Alternative interpretations 22 1.2.3.2 Extraversion and test taking style (speedvs. accuracy) 25 1.2.3.3 Opennessto Experienceand intellectual ability 27 1.2.3.3.1 Opennessas a correlateof psychometricintelligence 32 1.2.3.3.2 Interpretations 33 1.2.3.3.3 Typical Intellectual Engagement(TIE) 37 viii 1.2.3.4 Agreeableness,modesty and test taking attitude 38 1.2.3.5 Conscientiousness(need for achievement) 40 1.3 Personalitytraits and academicperformance (AP) 42 1.3.1 Psychometricintelligence and the prediction of AP 44 1.3.2 Personalitytraits and the prediction of AP 47 1.3.3 The Gigantic Three and AP 49 1.3.3.1 Neuroticism, worry and exam stress 50 1.3.3.2 Extraversionand study habits 54 1.3.3.3 Psychoticismand poor AP 56 1.3.3.4 Opennessand AP 58 1.3.3.5 Agreeablenessand AP 60 1.3.3.6 Conscientiousnessand AP 62 1.3.4 Current directions on personalitytraits and AP research 63 1.4 Subjectively-assessedintelligence (SAI) 65 1.4.1 SAI and psychometricintelligence 67 1.4.2 SAI and AP 69 1.4.3 SAI and gender 72 ix 1.4.4 SAI and lay conceptionsof intelligence 76 1.4.5 SAI and personalitytraits 79 Chapter 2: The relationship between the Big Five, psychometric and subjectively-assessedintelligence (four studies reported) STUDY 1 2.1 Introduction 88 2.2 Method 98 2.3 Results 100 2.4 Discussion 104 STUDY2 2.5 Introduction 108 2.6 Method 112 2.7 Results 114 2.8 Discussion 117 x STUDY3 2.9 Introduction 119 2.10 Method 126 2.11 Results 127 2.12 Discussion 133 STUDY4 2.13 Introduction 137 2.14 Method 147 2.15 Results 148 2.16 Discussion 151 2.17 Conclusions 154 Chapter 3: Personality and academic performance STUDY5 3.1 Introduction 159 3.2 Method 167 3.3 Results 169 xi 3.4 Discussion 175 STUDY6 3.5 Introduction 178 3.6 Method 188 3.7 Results 190 3.8 Discussion 196 STUDY 7 3.9 Introduction 201 3.10 Method 208 3.11 Results 209 3.12 Discussion 213 STUDY8 3.13 Introduction 220 3.14 Method 221 3.15 Results 222 3.16 Discussion 223 3.17 Conclusions 224 xii Chapter 4: Individual differences and art judgement STUDY9 4.1 Introduction 229 4.2 Method 239 4.3 Results 240 4.4 Discussion 244 STUDY6 4.5 Introduction 248 4.6 Method 252 4.7 Results 254 4.8 Discussion 263 4.9 Conclusions 270 Chapter 5: General discussion and conclusion 5.1 Summaryof findings 273 5.2 Limitations and criticism 279 5.3 Implications 281 5.4 References 292 xiii Figures 1.1 A graphic representationof the epistemologicaloverlap between personalityand intelligence (basedon Barrat, 1995) 3 1.2 A graphic representationof personalityas a subordinateof temperament and intelligence (basedon Eysenck& Eysenck, 1985) 3 1.3 A hypotheticalmodel for the processesunderlying the relationship betweentrait anxiety and test performance(based on Muller, 1992) 24 1.4 A schematicrepresentation of relations betweenOpenness, psychometric intelligence, and intellect ("actual" intelligence)(adaptedfrom McCrae & Costa, 1997a) 30 3.1 Structural equation model 171 3.2 Interaction 173 4.1 Relationshipbetween creative achievement and originality (adaptedfrom Eysenck, 1993) 234 5.1 A conceptualmodel for the interaction betweenpersonality and intellectual competence 288 xiv Tables 1.1 Sampleitems for objective/maximaland self-reporthypical measures 1.2 NEO-PI-R (Costa& McCrae, 1992) superand primary traits (facets)with checklist items. 11 1.3 NEO-PI-R (Costa& McCrae, 1992)primary traits (facets) with sampleitems. 12 1.4 Correlatesof test anxiety 21 1.5 Test related featuresto high and low Extraversion 27 1.6 Somecharacteristics of high vs. low Neuroticism, Extraversion and Psychoticismscorers 50 1.7 Conceptualframework presentingcorrelations among personality traits and indicators of intellectual competence 87 2.1 Correlationsbetween gender, Big Five, SAI, psychometric intelligence, and SEV 100 2.2 St.0 coefficients for predictorsof WPT, BRT, SAI, and SEV after hierarchical regressions 103 2.3 Correlationsbetween gender, Big Five, SAI, BRT, S&M, Gf, and CI 115 2.4 Standardised0 coefficients for predictorsof CI, SAI, and Gf after hierarchical regressions 116 xv 2.5 Correlationsbetween gender, age, Big Five, SAI and psychometricintelligence 129 2.6 St.0 coefficients for predictorsof SAI after hierarchical and multiple regressions 131 2.7 St.0 coefficients for multiple regressionsof SAI and Gf 133 2.8 Correlation betweenself/other estimatedand actual personality and intelligence scores 149 2.9 St.D coefficients for the predictorsof estimatedand psychometric intelligence 151 3.1 Somecharacteristics of high versuslow Neuroticism, Extraversionand Psychoticismscorers. 162 3.2 Cumulative constraintstesting for genderdifferences in the model 172 3.3 Correlationsbetween AP, tutors' predictions,ABI, Big Five and creativity 191 3.4 Correlationsbetween ABI, Big Five andcreativity 192 3.5 St. 0 coefficients for predictorsof tutors' predictions and AP 193 3.6 Correlationsbetween AP, tutors' predictions,ABI and personality 194 3.7 Correlationsbetween ABI variablesand EPQ-R traits 194 3.8 St. 0 coefficients for predictorsof tutors' predictions and AP 195 xvi 3.9 Correlationsbetween Big Five superand primary traits and Exam marks 210 3.10 St. P and t valuesfor the Big Five super-traitsas predictorsof exam marks after Regressions. 211 3.11 St. P and t valuesfor the Big Five super-traitsas predictorsof exam marks after Regressions. 212 3.12 EPQ-R Meansand SD for healthy vs. sick students 222 4.1 Items, affirmative responsefrequency, and ComponentMatrix for Art interests 241 4.2 ComponentMatrix and responsefrequencies for Art activities 241 4.3 Factor ComponentMatrix and affirmative responsefrequencies for Art knowledge 242 4.4 Intercorrelationsbetween Big Five,WPT, art background, activities,and knowledge, and JDT. 243 4.5 ComponentMatrix for Art-trait 243 4.6 St. 0 coefficients and t valuesfor the predictorsof the flierarchical Regressions 244 4.7 Items, affirmative responsefrequency, and Factor Pattern Matrix for art and music experience 255 4.8 Factor PatternMatrix