No abstract

This study investigated the relationship between creativity and personality among college students from a variety of major fields of study. Indicators of creativity were ratings of written stories, lists of personal hobbies, and scores on the Creative Personality Scale (CPS; Gough, 1979). Personality was assessed broadly using the NEO‐Five Factor Inventory (Costa and McCrae, 1985) as well as measures of depersonalization, intolerance of ambiguity, faith in intuition, and problem‐solving styles. The results showed a positive relationship between openness to experience and all creativity measures. Moreover, high scores on intuition and extraversion were the best predictors for creativity as measured by the CPS. Story creativity was predicted by low scores on conscientiousness. Depersonalization was not significantly related to creativity. The results of this investigation confirm and extend previous research in demonstrating a close association between creativity and specific personality traits. Future research should clarify the nature of the creative personality across individuals of differing levels and domains of expertise. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

This study investigates the relation between personality traits (Five-Factor-Model), personal (innovativeness, self-efficacy) and social (expectations or relevant reference groups) Internet related factors on the one hand and three motives (information, entertainment and, interpersonal communication) for going on-line among 122 adolescent Internet users on the other hand. The specificity hypothesis was supported in that Internet-specific personal and social factors together accounted for more variance of the 1nternet use motives than the global personality traits. With regard to the personality traits, neuroticism was found to be positively associated with the entertainment motive and with the interpersonal communication motive and extraversion was positively associated with the communication motive only. The potential of the three Internet motives to predict corresponding types of Internet activities was demonstrated. numbers were reported in Germany by Doll, Petersen, and Rudolf, with 7I percent Internet users for college students and 67 percent for high school students [6].Strongly divergent positions exist about the quality of Internet effects on daily life in general. Internet opponents emphasize that Internet use might cause people to become addicted to certain ways of Internet use [e.g, 7], to become isolated and cut off from genuine social relationships because of the communication with anonymous strangers [e.g., 8]. Internet supporters emphasize the educational usefulness of the Internet and argue that Internet use leads to more and better social relationships on the basis of common interests and by freeing people from the constraints of geography or isolation [9, l0].Because very different Internet-related activities can be employed by its users, the effects of Internet use on individuals, groups, and society should depend on their predominating Internet using types. Beside other possibilities, the Internet can be used for one-to-one or group communication, to research and gather information, for gaming and recreational purposes, and in order to produce and publish content in hypertext format. Interpersonal communication was found to be the dominant type of Internet use at home [11]. But social interactions via the Internet are different from traditional face-to-face interactions and do not have effects comparable to traditional social activities [12]. The emotional quality of relationships determines whether the social use of the Internet has positive or negative effects [7]. Close relationships with people via the Internet are associated with frequent contact, deeper feelings, and a broad interest domain and thus have been found to lead to better social and psychological outcomes such as more social support [13,14]. These relationships can serve as a buffer from lifes stresses, whereas weak Internet relationships characterized by superficial, infrequent contacts and easily broken bonds are useful only to receive information and contact social resources unavailable in people's actual environment.In a l...

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

People often make inferences about the values of other people in their families, cities, and countries, but there are reasons to expect systematic biases in these inferences. Across four studies (N = 1,763), we examined people’s perceptions of the values of their families, fellow citizens of the cities in which they live, and compatriots across three nations (Brazil, Germany, the United Kingdom). Our results show that people systematically misperceive comparison groups’ values. People underestimate the importance that their compatriots ascribe to more important values and overestimate the importance of less important values. This occurs in comparison with their own values, the actual values of the people living in the same city and the actual values of their compatriots. The effect sizes were medium to large. Furthermore, the results occurred independently of participants’ culture, time spent in the culture, and the underlying value model used. These results consistently show that people’s speculations about values in their community and society are biased in a self- and family favoring direction. In addition, we found that the structure of values (e.g., as proposed by Schwartz) holds for perceived family, fellow citizens of the cities in which they live, and compatriots’ values. Overall, our findings suggest that the values of other people are more selfless than is often believed.