KAUFMAN SHEELA RAMESH GREGORY J FEIST Who Finds Bill Gates Sexy Creative Mate Preferences as a Function of Cognitive Ability Personality and Creative Achievement ABSTRACT Creativity is sexy but are all creative behaviors equally sexy We attempted to ID: 52751
Download Pdf The PPT/PDF document "SCOTT BARRY KAUFMAN AARON KOZBELT PAUL S..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Nettle&Miell,2011;Greengross&Miller,2011;Kaufmanetal.,2010;Nettle,2008;Net-tle&Clegg,2006).Forexample,inarecentstudyayoungmaleconfederatecarriedaguitar,asportsbag,ornothingatallonacitystreet.Hethensolicitedphonenumbersfrom300youngwomen.Hereceivedmorephonenumberswhenhecarriedtheguitarthanintheothertwoconditions(Gueguen,Meineri&Fischer-Lokou,2014).Butareallcreativebehaviorsequallysexuallyattractivethatis,arecreativescientistsandtechnolo-gists,suchasBillGatesorSteveJobsalsoequallyattractivetomembersoftheoppositeLookingthroughanevolutionarylens,GeoffreyMiller,andcolleagueshavearguedthathumancreativityevolvedasaresultofsexualselectionthroughmutualmatechoice(Geher&Kaufman,2013;Geher&Miller,2008;Kaufman,Kozbelt,Bromley&Miller,2007;Miller,1999,2000a,b).AccordingtoMillerandcolleagues,ourmorerecentlyevolvedcreativeculturaldisplays(e.g.,art,music,humor,language)areanalogoustothepeacockÕstail:theyservethefunctionofattractingmatesbyactingasÞtnessindicators,revealingapersonÕslevelofcognitiveabilityandpersonality(Penke,Denissen,&Miller,2007;Miller,2009;Miller&Tal,2007;Penke,Denissen&Miller,2007).Extendingthisargument,Feist(2001,2007)arguedthatapplied/technologicaldisplaysofcreativity,asseeninmodernbehaviorsindomainssuchastechnology,science,andengineering,wereshapedlargelybynaturalselectionpressures,andhavetheirbasisinourevolvedcapacitiesfortoolandtechnologicaluse.Inaddition,Feistarguedthatorna-mental/aestheticformsofcreativity,suchasthoseinvolvedinart,music,andotheraes-theticdomains,wereshapedprimarilybysexualselectionpressures,andthereforeshouldbeperceivedasmoresexuallyattractivethanapplied/technologicaldisplaysofcreativity.Consideringthatornamental/aestheticaspectsofcreativeexpressionplayonourevolvedperceptualfunctionsandevokestrongemotionsintheperceiver,thiscouldincreasethechancesforasexualresponse.Therefore,accordingtothisaccount,ornamental/aestheticdisplaysofcreativityarepredictedtobemoresexuallyattractivethanapplied/technologi-caldisplaysofcreativity.Althoughthistheoryaccountsforspecies-typicalbehaviors,itignoresthemanydiffer-enceswithinourspeciesthatmayimpactmateselection.Assortativemating(i.e.,theten-dencyforpeopletobeattractedtoandtomatewiththosesimilartothemselvesingenotypeand/orphenotype,suchasattractiveness,intelligence,andothertraits)mayoperateonthelevelofpersonalityandinterest,whichwouldinßuencewhichformsofcreativityareconsideredsexuallyattractive.Forinstance,thosewhoaremorescientiÞ-callyinclinedmayprefermateswhoarealsoscientiÞcallyinclined,whereasthosewhovaluefantasyandaestheticsmayprefermateswhoareaestheticallyinclined.Aninvestiga-tionofindividualdifferencesinmatepreferencesfordifferentformsofcreativitywouldaddfurthernuanceforthesexualselectionaccount,showingnotonlyhowwedifferfromotherspeciesbutalsohowwedifferfromeachotherwithinourspecies.Priorresearchhasfoundsex-differentiatedassociationswheninvestigatingtheassocia-tionbetweencreativityandsexualoutcomes,andthatshort-termmatingmotiveenhancescreativityinmenmorethanwomen.Forexample,Griskevicius,Cialdini,andKenrick(2006)testedthehypothesisthatprimingparticipantswithsexuallyattractivematecues(choosinganattractiveoppositeseximage)wouldenhancecreativeresponsesinmenmorethanwomen.Theyfoundsupportforthishypothesisinthejudgedcreativityofstoriesbeforeandafteramatingcueinasampleofundergraduates(91;61%female).CreativeMatePreferences CreativityScale(SAC),(e)theCreativeBehaviorMatingPreferencesChecklist(CB-MPC),(e)theIPIPBig5PersonalityQuestionnaire,(f)theWordKnowledgeTest,(g)adiver-gentthinkingitemtakenfromtheAbbreviatedTorranceTestforAdults(ATTA),and(h)anabbreviatedversionoftheRavenÕsProgressiveMatricesTest(Raven,Raven&Court,1998).Insomecases,participantsfailedtocompleteoneormoreofthemeasures,whichmeansthatthedegreesoffreedomintheanalysessometimesvaryslightly.Thedetailsandscoringofeachmeasurearenowprovided.Thesearediscussedinawaythatreßectsourconceptualapproachtothephenomenonratherthanthetaskpresentationorderlistedabove.Creativebehaviormatingpreferenceschecklist(CB-MPC)TheCreativeBehaviorMatingPreferencesChecklist(CB-MPC)consistsof43itemsassessingtheextenttowhichindividualsÞndvariousbehavioralmanifestationsofcrea-tivitysexuallyattractiveinapotentialmate.Checklistitemswerecompiledfrommultiplesources.First,weincludedallitemsinthe27-itemCreativeActivitiesandInterestsChecklist(GrifÞn&McDermott,1998),whichassessesinvolvementin5creativedomains:visualarts,performingarts,literaryarts,andmusicalarts,anddomesticarts.WechangedtheitemaboutÒbuskingÓenthusiasmtoÒstreetperformingÓtoreßecttheAmericanEnglishlanguageoftheparticipants.WealsoaddedscientiÞcitemsfromHolt,Delaney,andRoe(unpublisheddata)basedontheCreativeBehaviorInventory(Hoce-var,1979).Toquantifythemeasures,wemodiÞedtheresponsesfromaÒyesÓchecklistformattoa5-pointLikertscalerangingfrom1(sexuallyunattractive)to5(extremelysexuallyattractive).ItemsincludedsuchactivitiesasÒpaintingapictureÓ,ÒwritingshortstoriesÓ,andÒmakingwebsitesÓ.Becausethisinstrumentisofthegreatestinterest,itisanalyzeditem-by-itembelow.Generalcognitiveability(g)Generalcognitiveability,or(Carroll,1993;Chabris,2007;Spearman,1904),wasestimatedbycombiningperformanceontwomeasures:ashortenedversionoftheRavenÕsProgressiveMatricesTest(Ravenetal.,1998)asanestimateofnonverbalcogni-tiveability,andtheWordKnowledgeTestasanestimateofverbalcognitiveability.TheRavenÕsProgressiveMatricesTestconsistedof12items,inincreasingorderofdifÞculty,witha15-minutetimelimit(2.5,Range11).Oneachitem,partici-pantswereshowna33gridshowingsomepatternorprogressionfromlefttorightandtoptobottom,andhadtochooseoneofeightpossibilitiestocorrectlycompletethepatterninthemissinglower-rightcellofthegrid.Performancewasgaugedbynumberofquestionsansweredcorrectly.Themeanscoreforthistestsuggeststhatthesamplemayberestrictedinrangewhenitcomestononverbalcognitiveability,withtheupperpartoftherangenotwellrepresented.TheWordKnowledgeTest(developedbyresearchersatUniversityofKent[http://www.kent.ac.uk/careers/tests/synonyms.htm])consistedof39items,witha5-minutetimelimit(5.5,39).Oneachitem,participantsweregivenatargetwordandthreeotherwords,thecorrectoneofwhichwaseitherasynonymorantonymofthetargetword;participantsÕtaskwastochoosethecorrectword.Performancewasassessedbynumberofquestionsansweredcorrectly.ScoresontheRavensandWordCreativeMatePreferences TABLE1.DescriptiveStatistics:CreativeBehaviorMatePreferencesChecklistCreativeactivityFemalesMalesMSDMSDPlayingsports3.81.23.31.2Takingadateonaspontaneousroadtrip3.81.33.41.3Recordingmusic3.41.33.01.2Makingacleverremark3.41.23.01.2Writingmusic3.31.32.81.1Performinginaband3.21.23.01.1Thetakingofartisticphotographs3.11.22.91.2Performingincomedy3.11.22.91.1Dressinginauniquestyle3.11.13.11.2Writingpoetry3.01.32.81.2Inventingnewrecipes2.91.22.81.1Thedrawingofpictures2.91.22.81.1Performingindance2.91.23.21.1Thepaintingofpictures2.91.22.81.1Themakingofsculptures2.81.22.71.1Writingshortstories2.71.22.71.1Stylingyourhairinaninterestingway2.71.22.91.2Streetperforming2.71.22.61.2Writingplays2.71.22.61.1Performinginaplay2.71.12.81.2Participatinginvideoproduction2.61.02.91.1PerforminginashortÞlm2.61.12.61.1Writingmagazinearticles2.61.12.51.1Writingspeeches2.61.12.41.1TheconstructionofscientiÞcortechnicalobjects2.51.12.31.1Writingjournalarticles2.51.12.41.1Therenovationofoldorantiqueobjects2.51.12.51.1Themakingofusefulordecorativeobjects2.51.12.71.1Participatingineventplanning2.51.02.61.1Participatinginanorchestra2.51.12.71.2DirectingashortÞlm2.51.02.71.1Participatingindramaproduction2.51.02.71.2ThedevelopmentofscientiÞcexperimentaldesigns2.41.12.31.2Applyingmathinanoriginalwaytosolveapracticalprogram2.41.02.41.2Exteriordecorating2.41.02.51.1PresentingscientiÞcormathematicalpapers2.41.12.31.1Growingandgardening2.41.02.51.0Makingwebsites2.31.02.51.2Writinganoriginalcomputerprogram2.31.02.21.1Interiordecorating2.31.02.51.1Makingadcampaigns2.31.02.41.1JournalofCreativeBehavior TABLE2.PrincipalComponentAnalysisofCB-MPCItemsCreativeactivityWritingmusic.20.08Recordingmusic.14.06Writingpoetry.17.20Performinginaband.14.08Thedrawingofpictures.24.28Writingplays.28.22Thepaintingofpictures.22.33Writingshortstories.30.21Thetakingofartisticphotographs.22.32Performingincomedy.19.19Performinginaplay.10.38Playingsports.10.01Themakingofsculptures.25.34Streetperforming.11.29Participatinginvideoproduction.21.42Writingspeeches.45.16Performingindance.01.41Takingadateonaspontaneousroadtrip.16.09Participatingindramaproduction.13.43PerforminginashortÞlm.27.44Performinginanorchestra.31.32Makingacleverremark.29.16Therenovationofoldorantiqueobjects.36.44DirectingashortÞlm.37.36ThedevelopmentofscientiÞcexperimentaldesignsTheconstructionofscientiÞcortechnicalobjectsPresentingscientiÞcormathematicalpapers.17Writinganoriginalcomputerprogram.18Enteringprojectsorpapersintoasciencecontest.16ApplyingmathinanoriginalwaytosolveapracticalproblemWritingjournalarticles.43Writingmagazinearticles.45Makingwebsites.23Interiordecorating.06.23Exteriordecorating.11.33MakingClothes.19.18Growingandgardening.08.37JournalofCreativeBehavior theresultsoftheprincipalcomponentanalysisdescribedabove.SpeciÞcally,wecom-binedrelevantsetsofitemsontheCAQandderivedthreescoresforeachparticipant,indicatingtheirself-reportedlevelofcreativeachievementinornamental/aesthetic,applied/technological,andeveryday/domesticdomains.DomainsclassiÞedasornamen-tal/aestheticwerevisualart,musicperformance,musiccomposition,dance,creativewrit-ing,humor,andtheater/Þlm.Applied/technologicaldomainswereinventionsandscientiÞcdiscovery.Everyday/domesticcreativityconsistedoftheculinaryartsitem.(Thearchitectureitemwasnotincludedintheanalysis,asitarguablyinvolveshighdegreesofbothartisticandscientiÞccreativity,andindeedshowedrelativelyhighpositivecorrela-tionswithbothornamental/aestheticandapplied/technologicaldomains.)Asexpected,scoresoneachitemwerepositivelyskewedandwerethus-transformed.Withineachsetofitems,-transformedscoresforrelevantitemswereaveraged,providingaunitaryestimateofcreativeachievementinornamental/aesthetic.70,skew1.6(.09),kur-tosis3.8(.17),applied/technological,.62,skew2.6(.09),kurtosis8.1(.17),andeveryday/domesticdomains.ThecorrelationsamongthepredictorvariablesareshowninTable3,formalesandfemalesseparately.Therewerenonotabledifferencesinthepatternofcorrelationsbetweenmalesandfemales,andmostofthecorrelationsareconsistentwiththepriorliterature.Forbothmalesandfemales,wasmoderatelyrelatedtodivergentthinking,whichisconsistentwithanemergingliteraturesuggestingthatthemoderateoverlappingvariancebetweenmeasuresofgeneralcognitiveabilityanddivergentthinkingisdue,inpart,toasharedrelianceonexecutivefunctioning(Beaty&Silvia,2012;Gilhooly,Fioratou,Anthony&Wynn,2007;Nusbaum&Silvia,2011).Interestingly(consideringtheaimsofthecurrentstudy),thethreeformsofcreativeachievement(ornamental/aesthetic,applied/technological,everyday/domestic)didnotsig-niÞcantlycorrelatewithmostofthevariablesexceptthemselves.Theinter-CAQcorrela-tionsindicatethatparticipantswhohadcreativeachievementsinonesetofdomainstendedtohaveachievementsinotherkindsofdomainsaswell.ThehighestcorrelationbetweenaCAQ-derivedmeasureandanon-CAQ-derivedmeasureamongbothmalesandfemaleswasbetweenOrnamental/AestheticcreativeachievementandOpennesstoExperience(males:.23,.05;females:.01).Theseresultsmakesense;afterall,theOpennesstoExperienceaspectoftheBFASincludesitemsrelatingtoaes-theticandartisticinterests.Incontrast,wasnotpositivelycorrelatedwithcreativeachievementinornamental/aesthetic,applied/technological,oreveryday/domesticformsofcreativityamongmalesorfemales.Insum,manyofthecorrelationsshowninTable3areconsistentwithÞndingsreportedelsewhereintheliterature.However,intermsoftheirabsolutestrength,mostrelationsareatbestmoderate;thissuggeststhatallofthevariablescanbeincludedaspredictorsinregressionanalyseswithoutundueconcernforcollinearity(apointcorrob-oratedbyformaltestsforcollinearityintheregressionanalyses).Wenowturntotheregressionanalyses,whichformthecenterpieceoftheResults.PERSONALCHARACTERISTICPREDICTORSOFMATEPREFERENCESHere,weattempttodeterminethecharacteristicsthatmakeonemorelikelytovalueornamental/aestheticversusapplied/technologicalversuseveryday/domesticcreativityinJournalofCreativeBehavior prospectivesexualpartners.Dataforfemalesandmaleswereanalyzedseparately,givenexpecteddifferencesinresponsespredictedbysexualselectiontheory.Sixisomorphicanalyseswereconducted.Ineachanalysis,thedependentvariablewasonesetoffactorscoresfromtheCB-MPC(eitherapreferenceforornamental/aesthetic,applied/techno-logical,oreveryday/domesticcreativityinapotentialsexualpartner),foreitherfemalesonlyormalesonly,andthesetof12independentvariableswasidentical(seeabove,Table3).IntheÞrstregressionanalysis,weinvestigatedtheindependentpredictorsofscoresontheOrnamental/Aestheticfactoramongfemales.TheregressionwashighlysigniÞcant,(12,664).001,adjusted-.23.AscanbeseeninTable4,sixpredictorsweresigniÞcantatthe.05level,withonemoreapproachingsigniÞcance.Theseresultsindicatethatwomenwhoparticularlyvaluedisplaysofornamental/aestheticcreativityinprospectivematestendtoscorehigheringeneralcognitiveability,agreeableness,open-nesstoexperience,aresomewhatlowerinneuroticism(.06),seethemselvesascrea-tivegenerally,havemadetheirowncreativeachievementsinornamental/aestheticdomains,andhavemadefewercreativeachievementsineveryday/domesticcreativedomains.Notably,oneofthetwostrongestpredictorsofvaluingdisplaysofornamental/aestheticcreativityamongwomenwastheirowncreativeachievementinornamental/aes-theticdomains.Also,itisnotablethatthetopindependentpredictorwasopennesstoexperience,whereasIntellectwasnotasigniÞcantindependentpredictor.Inthesecondregressionanalysis,weinvestigatedtheindependentpredictorsofscoresontheApplied/Technologicalfactoramongfemales.TheregressionwasagainsigniÞcant, TABLE4.ResultsfortheMultipleRegressionAnalysisPredictingIndividualDiffer-encesamongFemalesÕPreferencesforDisplaysofOrnamental/Aesthetic,Applied/Technological,andEveryday/DomesticCreativityinProspectiveSexualPartnersbbbExtraversion.02.07.01.08*.08*Intellect.05Opennesstoexperience.09.03Ornamental/AestheticCAQApplied/TechnologicalCAQ.01Everyday/DomesticCAQ.09*.09*Self-perceptioncreativityDivergentthinking.04.07JournalofCreativeBehavior technologicalformsofcreativityamongmales,andthepredictionwasalsointhenega-tivedirectionamongfemales,thiswasmostlikelyduetoasuppressioneffectconsideringandIntellectweresigniÞcantlypositivelycorrelatedwitheachother.TheregressionÞndingsareinlinewithassortativemating,andsuggestthatintellectualinterestsareamorerobustpredictorofapreferenceforapplied/technologicalformsofcreativityinamatethangeneralcognitiveability.Incontrast,themostrobustpersonalitypredictorofapreferenceforornamental/aestheticcreativityinamateamongbothmalesandfemaleswasopennesstoexperience.Crucially,opennesstoexperiencewasnotasigniÞcantpre-dictorofapreferenceforapplied/technologicaloreveryday/domesticformsofcreativityamongeithermalesorfemales.TheseÞndingsarealsoconsistentwithotherresearchthathaslookedatthedifferen-tialpredictivevalidityofOpennessandIntellectoncreativeachievement.NusbaumandSilvia(2011)foundthatapreferenceforengagementwithcomplexproblemsolvingandabstractreasoning(ÒIntellectÓ)predictedßuidreasoning(ahighly-loadedability)butnottotalcreativeachievementacrosstendomainsofcreativityintheartsandsciences,whereasapreferenceforengagementwithsensoryandperceptualinformation(ÒOpen-nesstoExperienceÓ)signiÞcantlypredictedtotalcreativeachievementbutnotßuidreasoning.Differentiatingbetweendomains,Kaufman(2013)foundthattwofactorsrelatingtoOpennesstoExperience(affectiveandaestheticengagement)weresigniÞcantlyassociatedwithcreativeachievementinthearts,whereastwofactorsrelatingtoIntellect(intellectualengagement)weresigniÞcantlyassociatedwithcreativeachievementinthesciences.Inaregressionanalysis,intellectualengagementwasthesoleindependentpre-dictorofcreativeachievementinthesciences,aboveandbeyondtheeffectof.Similarly,ina42-yearlongitudinalinvestigationofthepredictorsofcreativeachievement,FeistandBarron(2003)foundthatgeneralcognitiveabilitymeasuredatage27wasamuchweakerpredictorofcreativeachievementatage72thanobserver-ratedintellectandmea-suresofpersonalitysuchasself-conÞdence,intellectualcuriosity,andtolerance.OurÞndingsalsosuggestedthatassortativemating(ÒlikeattractslikeÓ)playsaroleinthesexualattractivenessofcreativity.IngeneralpeopleÞndattractivecreativeachieve-mentindomainsinwhichtheythemselvesachieve.Forexample,creativeachievementinapplied/technologicaldomainspredictedapreferenceforapplied/technologicalcreativityinapotentialmate.Creativeachievementinornamental/aestheticdomainspredictedapreferenceforornamental/aestheticcreativityamongfemales,andeveryday/domesticcre-ativeachievementpredictedapreferenceforornamental/aestheticcreativityamongmales.Onepossiblereasonforthelessconsistentresultsmaybeanartifactoftheinstrumentused.IntheCAQ,highlevelsofcreativeachievementinornamental/aestheticdomainscanbemoreopentointerpretation;manyofthehighest-levelitemsarebasedonhavingcreativeworkreviewedorpublishedinanationalpublication.Incontrast,high-levelitemsinapplied/technologicalarebasedonÞrmerstandards(i.e.,earningapatent,receivingagrant,orpublishinginascientiÞcjournal).Applied/technologicalcreativeachievementasmeasuredinthisstudymaybetterreßectÒactualÓcreativeachievementthanintheothertwodomains.AlthoughourÞndingsprovideafairlycoherentperspective,thepresentstudyhassomelimitations.Becauseoursampleconsistedprimarilyofuniversitystudents,wehadarestrictedrangeintermsoflevelsofcreativeachievement.Futurestudies,usingawiderCreativeMatePreferences