Personality and aesthetic preference in Spain and England: two studies relating sensation seeking and openness to experience to liking for paintings and music

Personality and Aesthetic Preference inSpain and England: Two StudiesRelating Sensation Seeking and

Openness to Experience to Liking forPaintings and Music

DAVID RAWLINGS1*, NEUS BARRANTES i VIDAL2 and ADRIAN FURNHAM3

1Department of Psychology, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia2Departament de Psicologia de la Salut i de Psicologia Social, Universitat

Autonoma de Barcelona, Spain3Department of Psychology, University College, London, UK

Abstract

In two studies, one employing Spanish students and the other English students, ques-tionnaire measures of Sensation Seeking and Openness to Experience were correlatedwith liking for major music types, several short music excerpts, and eight categories ofpainting (presented as slides). Inter-correlations between music preference measures,painting preference, and personality are reported. In both samples, the Sensation SeekingScale (FormV) and, particularly, the Experience Seeking sub-scale were associated witha factor contrasting liking for `hard rock' music and `violent±abstract' art with liking for`neutral±realistic' art and èasy listening' music. Several substantial relationshipsbetween aesthetics measures and Openness to Experience ( from the NEO-PI-R) werealso found, though mostly in the English sample. The results reinforce the view thatpersonality dimensions such as Sensation Seeking and Openness are important in¯uenceson aesthetic judgment. Copyright # 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

INTRODUCTION

A substantial amount of research has examined the relationship of personalitydispositions to liking for particular forms of visual art or music. The aestheticpreference measures employed in such studies have varied widely. Abstract stimuli aresometimes used, such as polygons with di�erent numbers of turns (e.g. Looft andBaranowski, 1971; Rawlings and Ciancarelli, 1997), line drawings varying in `com-plexity' (Dellas and Gaier, 1970; Eysenck, 1993b; Zuckerman et al., 1972) or chords

Copyright # 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Received 30 June 1999Accepted 21 February 2000

European Journal of PersonalityEur. J. Pers. 14: 553±576 (2000)

*Correspondence to: David Rawlings, Department of Psychology, University of Melbourne, Parkville,Victoria 3052, Australia.

removed from their musical context (e.g. Rawlings, Hodge, Sherr and Dempsey,1995). Questionnaires listing well known music categories have been employed inseveral studies of music preference (e.g. Dollinger, 1993; Litle and Zuckerman, 1986).Finally, a number of studies have used examples of `real' paintings (on slides) or tapedexcerpts of music. Paintings have been selected to represent qualities like complexityand tension or arousal value (Zaleski, 1984; Zuckerman, Ulrich and McLaughlin,1993), or categories such as realistic, abstract, or surrealistic (Furnham and Bunyan,1988; Furnham and Avison, 1997). Other studies have used paintings with violent andaggressive themes, or with content varying in the potential to arouse positive andnegative emotions (Tobacyck, Myers and Bailey, 1981; Zaleski, 1984). Likewise,musical excerpts have been chosen to represent such characteristics as tempo, strengthof rhythm, discordance, or èmotionality' (Cattell and Saunders, 1954; Payne, 1980),or to exemplify accepted categories, such as rock, jazz and classical (Rawlings et al.,1995).

The personality dimensions correlated with the above aesthetic measures have alsovaried considerably. An early study of music preference by Cattell and Saunders(1954) required subjects to rate brief excerpts of recorded music. The researchersnoted that extraversion was associated with musical choices characterized bystrong rhythms, fast tempo, discordant harmonies and a `joyful but agitatedmood'. Several later studies pointed to extraversion as an important dimensionunderlying aspects of individual di�erence in music preference (Daoussis andMcKelvie, 1986; Payne, 1980; Rawlings and Ciancarelli, 1997). Eysenck's (1941,1982) early attempts to associate personality with visual aesthetic preference alsoconcentrated on extraversion. However, in his later writings, Eysenck (1993a, 1995)placed emphasis on the third of his three major personality dimensions, psychoticism,and outlined a complex, biologically based theory in which this dimension isassociated with a `creativity trait' measurable both by traditional creativity tests andby tests of aesthetic complexity like the Barron±Welsh Art Scale (Welsh, 1987). Insupport of this theory, several studies have found a correlation between psychoticismand preference for complex visual stimuli (Eysenck, 1993b; Frith and Nias, 1974);while Rawlings et al. (1995) found high psychoticism scores among subjects showinga relative preference for `hard' forms of music and for discordant musical triads.

Other personality variables have been associated, in diverse studies, with visual ormusical preference, including neuroticism (Dollinger, 1993; Payne, 1967), conserva-tism (Glasgow, Cartier and Wilson, 1985; Wilson, Ausman and Matthews, 1973),®eld dependence (Tobacyck et al., 1981), locus of control (Juhasz and Paxson, 1978),intolerance of ambiguity (Furnham and Avison, 1997) and schizotypy (Rawlings,Twomey, Burns andMorris, 1998). Research relevant to two dimensions of particularinterest to the present study, Sensation Seeking and Openness to Experience, will bediscussed below.

Sensation Seeking

Zuckerman and his colleagues have produced considerable evidence for the view thatthe tendency to seek novel and intense sensory stimulation comprises a majordimension of individual di�erence. Zuckerman calls this dimension `sensationseeking', and several versions of the Sensation Seeking Scale (SSS) have been

554 D. Rawlings et al.

Copyright # 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Eur. J. Pers. 14: 553±576 (2000)

developed to measure the construct. According to Zuckerman (1994), biologicalmechanisms underlie di�erences in sensation seeking, with high sensation seekersbelieved to have a high òptimal level' of arousal of the catecholamine systems relatedto intrinsic reward.

Empirical studies successfully associating personality with aesthetic preferences aremore numerous for the SSS than for any other measure. The dimension has beenfound to distinguish individuals who prefer complexity in simple polygons (Looft andBaranowski, 1971; Rawlings et al., 1998) and in more complex, asymmetrical linedrawings (Zuckerman et al., 1972). On the other hand, the scale is unrelated, or isnegligibly related, to preference for complex over simple paintings (Furnham andAvison, 1997; Osborne and Farley, 1970; Zuckerman et al., 1993). With respect topaintings, high sensation seekers have been found to show some preference for naturepaintings de®ned as high in tension over those low in tension (Zuckerman et al., 1993)and to prefer art which is abstract or surrealistic rather than representational(Furnham and Avison, 1997; Furnham and Bunyan, 1988). High scoring subjects alsoprefer emotionally arousing themes, whether positive (e.g. erotic) or negative (e.g.violent), in paintings (Tobacyck et al., 1981; Zaleski, 1984), in video and ®lm(Zuckerman and Litle, 1986) or in selection of entertainment (Schierman andRowland, 1985).

Glasgow et al. (1985) played short excerpts of music to their subjects and failed to®nd a signi®cant correlation between SSS scores and several types of classical music,though Hargreaves and Colman (1981) note the limitations of studies using onlyclassical music. Litle and Zuckerman (1986) developed a Musical Preference Scale tomeasure preference for established music categories, including non-classicalcategories. They found that sensation seekers liked all types of rock music butdisliked (®lm and TV) soundtrack music. Using an updated version of the same scale,Rawlings et al. (1998) found that high scorers tended to prefer `hard' forms of musicsuch as `heavy metal' or `grunge', but to dislike `soft-popular' forms such as top-40,èasy listening' and soundtrack music.

Openness to Experience

A model of personality which has achieved substantial support in recent years is theFive Factor Model or `Big Five' model. Although derived substantially from earlywork on the factor analysis of trait descriptors (Goldberg, 1993), the model appears inits most popular form in the questionnaire measures developed by Costa andMcCrae,the latest version of which is the NEO Personality Inventory Ð Revised (NEO-PI-R;Costa and McCrae, 1994). This questionnaire includes scales measuring Neuroticism,Extraversion, Openness to Experience, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness.

In their empirical and theoretical contributions to the area of aesthetic preference,and to the associated area of creativity, Costa andMcCrae have put most emphasis onthe Openness factor, arguing that àrtists can be seen as exemplars of Openness just asneurotics are exemplars of Neuroticism' (McCrae and Costa, 1997). Like the otherNEO-PI-R factors, Openness includes six sub-scales, or facets. Àesthetics', presumedto measure an individual's sensitivity to and interest in art and beauty, is arguably thestrongest of the Openness facets in factor analytic studies of the NEO-PI-R (e.g.Costa and McCrae, 1994; Rawlings and Freeman, 1997; Zuckerman, Kuhlman,

Personality and aesthetic preference 555


Joireman, Teta and Kraft, 1993), and has been found to correlate strongly withàrtistic' interests in Holland's (1985) vocational interest model (DeFruyt andMervielde, 1997). Openness is associated with liking for polygons self-rated as both`complex' and `meaningful' (Rawlings et al., 1998), and with liking for `sophisticated'forms of music such as jazz and classical music and dislike of `soft popular' musicstyles (Dollinger, 1993; Rawlings and Ciancarelli, 1997; Rawlings et al., 1998).

The relationship between Openness and aesthetic preference is not unambiguous,however. A study by Furnham and Avison (1997) presented subjects with slides ofpaintings varying with respect to the number of elements in the paintings (manyversus few) and whether the paintings were surrealistic and incongruous orrepresentational and realistic. Open subjects, as measured by the NEO Five FactorInventory, a short form of the NEO-PI-R, showed a small preference for representa-tional art, particularly pictures with few elements. The same study found a strongertendency for sensation seekers to show a relative preference for surrealistic overrepresentational art and found that subjects high in ambiguity tolerance preferredsurrealistic paintings with few elements.

In a recent study by Rawlings and his colleagues (Rawlings et al., 1998), an attemptwas made to identify a factor cutting across various àesthetic' measures. Threestudies identi®ed a canonical variable associated with preference for complex oversimple polygons, relative dislike of soft, popular music categories, and originality andnumber of responses in a divergent thinking task. Of the various personality measuresemployed, the highest structure coe�cients on the canonical variable were obtainedby sensation seeking and openness to experience.

The two studies to be reported below build on and elaborate earlier research in anumber of ways.

(1) As in the Rawlings et al. (1998) studies, an attempt is made to explore factors ofpreference cutting across both visual and musical areas. However, in the presentstudies we have employed slides of paintings rather than the abstract stimuli usedin the earlier series, and have extended the slide categories into areas notpreviously investigated.

(2) The disadvantage of questionnaire measures of music preference involvingcategory judgments is that di�erent subjects may ascribe somewhat di�erentmeanings to generic categories, particularly those associated with music withwhich they are unfamiliar. On the other hand, excerpts of music produce ratingsquite speci®c to the particular excerpt. The present study employs both a shortquestionnaire measure of music preference and excerpts of music presumed torepresent several of the categories measured by the questionnaire.

(3) In recognition of the possibility that the low correlations between paintingpreference and Openness to Experience obtained by Furnham and Avison (1997)may have been partly due to the use of the short version of the Openness scale, thefull Openness scale from the NEO-PI-R is used in the present study. We also usethe version of the Sensation Seeking Scale employed in several earlier invest-igations in this area.

(4) Finally, because the robustness of any relationships obtained would be sub-stantially con®rmed if replicated in more than one language group, the study isrepeated using separate samples of Spanish-speaking and English-speakingstudents.



METHOD

Samples

Two independent samples of undergraduate psychology students were employed.The `Spanish sample' comprised 76 students, mostly from the second year of the

undergraduate course at the Autonomous University of Barcelona (60 females, 16males), with a mean age of 21.74 years (SD � 1.42). They completed the study inseveral small groups varying in size between six and 12, in two sessions ofapproximately 45 minutes, the two sessions occurring one week apart.

The Ènglish sample' comprised 79 ®rst year psychology students from UniversityCollege London (62 females, 17 males), with a mean age of 19.78 years (SD � 2.92).They completed the study in a single group over two sessions of approximately 45minutes, the two sessions occurring on the same day.

Materials and procedure

In the context of a number of other tasks unrelated to the present studies, subjectscompleted the following six tasks in the order outlined below, with the ®rst threeincluded in a single questionnaire booklet. The Spanish subjects completedindependently standardized Spanish-language versions of the personality question-naires (the Sensation Seeking Scale and the Openness to Experience Scale).

The music category ratings

Subjects were asked to rate 16 music types on a four-point scale from `dislike' to `likevery much'. These music types consisted mainly of the primary categories in theMusical Preference Scale of Litle and Zuckerman (1986), but to these were added anumber of categories found useful in earlier studies by the ®rst author (Rawlings et al.,1995, 1998; Rawlings and Ciancerelli, 1997). The 16 items making up the present scalewere: `hard' rock music (e.g. `grunge', `heavy metal', àlternative', `punk', àcid');`soft' rock (e.g. `surfer', pop rock, `mainstream'); classical music (e.g. Bach, Mozart,Beethoven, Chopin, Stravinsky); electronic music; jazz; soul, and rhythm and blues;dance music/disco music; music typically in the top 40; èasy listening' music; `techno'music; Country and Western; folk music; the music of other cultures, world music;religious music; soundtracks (Broadway, movie, TV); rap music. Barrantes-Vidalproduced a Spanish translation of the music categories for the Spanish sample.

The Sensation Seeking Scale Ð Form V (Zuckerman, 1979)

This 40-item form of the scale has been used in numerous studies of aesthetic prefer-ence and includes four sub-scales measuring Thrill and Adventure Seeking (TAS),Experience Seeking (ES), Boredom Susceptibility (BS), and Disinhibition (Dis).

The Openness to Experience Scale from the NEO-PI-R (Costa and McCrae, 1994)

This 48-item scale includes six `facet' scales measuring openness in the areas ofFantasy, Aesthetics, Feelings, Actions, Ideas, and Values.



The slide-set

Eight separate categories of paintings were established. First, paintings were selectedto represent four di�erent content areas: paintings on highly unpleasant themesmostly associated with violence (`violent'); paintings involving nudity or sexualthemes (èrotic'); paintings on religious themes such as the nativity or cruci®xion(`religious'); and paintings not clearly in one of the earlier categories (`neutral'). Then,an equal number of paintings from each area were selected to represent traditional,`realistic' art, and modern or contemporary art which was called for convenience,àbstract' art.

The slides used in the present study were drawn from a set of about 200 slides ofworks of art developed in a number of pilot studies in which groups of studentsubjects were required to categorize, or to show preference for, slides of the type usedhere. Several were added speci®cally for the present study, with the ®nal categoriza-tion based on the agreement of two of the authors, one of whom is a ®ne-arts as wellas a psychology graduate. There were 11 slides in each of the `neutral' categories,seven in each of the èrotic' categories, and six in each of the other four categories. Theslides used are listed in the Appendix, though actual presentation was in the samepseudo-random order for each participant. Note that alpha coe�cients for eachcategory will be provided prior to the detailed examination of the slide data.

The slide presentation displayed each of the 60 paintings for approximately tenseconds. Subjects rated the paintings on a four-point scale from `dislike the painting'to `like it a lot'. Category preferences for each category were calculated by adding theratings in a particular category and then dividing the sum by the total sum for allcategories.

The music excerpts

Several excerpts of music were recorded onto an audio-tape. Excerpts varied in lengthfrom just over one minute to just over two minutes. Each excerpt began at thebeginning of the piece except for the last excerpt, which began about two minutes intothe piece. There was a pause of about eight seconds between each excerpt. Therecorder was left at the same `record' volume throughout the taping of the excerpts.

Music excerpts were chosen to represent several core music styles, to provide cross-validation for the two methods of measuring music preference reported in the presentstudies. Accordingly, we included three examples of classical music and two examplesof hard rock, jazz, easy listening, world music, and soundtracks. Below is a list of theexcerpts, indicating in parentheses the music type the particular excerpt was presumedto represent.

Louis Armstrong, There's a Boat that's Leavin' Soon for New York (Jazz)Paganini, Violin Concerto No. 2, 3rd Movement (Classical)Nat King Cole, Mona Lisa (Easy Listening)Nirvana, Very Ape (Hard Rock)Twin Peaks Theme (Soundtracks)Sergio Mendez, Desa®nado (World Music)Mozart, Ah, Fuggi Il Traditor from Don Giovanni (Classical)Charlie Parker, Slow Boat to China (Jazz)Andersson/Rice/Ulvaeus, Quartet from `Chess' (Soundtracks)



Boyz II Men, Water Runs Dry (Easy Listening)Nigerian Folk Music (World Music)Guns'N'Roses, Nightrain (Hard Rock)Stravinsky, Rite of Spring (Classical).

The audio-tape was played to the subjects with the tape recorder at the front ofthe room. Di�erent experimenters carried out the study in the two samples; eachhad been instructed to set the volume to a `comfortable' level on the ®rst piece andthen to leave the recorder at that volume. During each break subjects indicated on afour-point scale (`dislike the music' to `like it a lot') how much they enjoyed thepreceding excerpt. They also rated their familiarity with each piece on a four-pointscale from `you are sure you have never heard the piece' to `you are positive you haveheard the piece'.

RESULTS

The data associated with the various aesthetic preference measures will ®rst beexamined, followed by the analyses associating the aesthetic preference and person-ality measures.

Analysis of the music preference data

The product-moment correlations between the music category ratings and the ratingsof the excerpts (liking and familiarity) will ®rst be reported. Because of the largenumber of non-signi®cant ®ndings, we report in Table 1 only correlations signi®cantat the 1 per cent level, or signi®cant at the 5 per cent level across both samples. Forsimplicity, all signi®cance levels are based on two-tailed tests. As noted earlier, musicexcerpts were chosen to represent a particular music category. These `hypothesized'correlations obtained between each excerpt and its putative category will be presentedprior to the other correlations, and in italics.

A number of aspects of Table 1 are worthy of note. First, for hypothesizedrelationships between categories and excerpts presumed to exemplify those categories,there were strong correlations for hard rock, classical, and jazz music types. Therewere weaker correlations between expressed liking for a category and liking forexamples of easy listening music, world music, and soundtrack music. These correla-tions were low for both samples of soundtrack music, suggesting that the exampleschosen were atypical of the category. The correlations with world music wereparticularly low for the Spanish sample. In this context, we note the ambiguity in thewording of the `world music' item, in which subjects were required to indicate theirliking for `music of other cultures'. This allowed considerable room for interpretation,particularly to the Spanish subjects.

There were a number of correlations that were signi®cant in both samples thoughnot speci®cally predicted. In particular, there was a tendency for subjects who likedjazz to also enjoy classical music, for those who liked religious music to like classicalmusic, and for those who liked soul/rhythm and blues to like jazz. Further, thesubjects who liked soundtracks reported liking for excerpts of easy listening music; in



Table 1. Correlations between music categories and ratings of liking and familiarity of musicexcerpts in the two studies

Spanish study English study

Music category Excerpt Liking Familiarity Liking Familiarity

Hard rock Nirvana 0.64*** 0.58*** 0.64*** 0.37***Guns'N'Roses 0.59*** 0.52*** 0.35** 0.27*Boys II Men ÿ0.32* ÿ0.41***

Soft rock Louis Armstrong 0.35**Guns'N'Roses 0.30**

Classical Paganini 0.60*** 0.40*** 0.73***Mozart 0.48*** 0.49***Stravinksy 0.29* 0.30** 0.44*** 0.32**Louis Armstrong 0.24* 0.49***Nat King Cole 0.42***Charlie Parker 0.48***Chess 0.36**

Electronic No signi®cant correlations

Jazz Louis Armstrong 0.53*** 0.55***Charlie Parker 0.39*** 0.28* 0.60***Paganini 0.34** 0.29*Sergio Mendez 0.29* 0.44***Mozart 0.23* 0.23*

Soul/rhythm Louis Armstrong 0.38*** 0.25*and blues Paginini 0.34**

Nat King Cole 0.37***Twin Peaks 0.33**Mozart 0.31** 0.34**Charlie Parker 0.29** 0.33** 0.37**

Dance/disco Boyz II Men 0.35**

Top-40 music Nirvana ÿ0.32**Boys II Men 0.46** 0.42**

Easy listening Nat King Cole 0.28* 0.38***Boys II Men 0.39*** 0.27* 0.24*

Techno No signi®cant correlations

Country andwestern

No signi®cant correlations

Folk music Louis Armstrong 0.33**Nigerian folk music 0.36**

World music Sergio Mendez 0.37***Nigerian folk music 0.35**Louis Armstrong 0.31**Mozart 0.33**Charlie Parker 0.35** 0.30**Chess 0.33**

Religious music Paganini 0.42*** 0.28*Nirvana ÿ0.29**Mozart 0.44** 0.46***Charlie Parker 0.25* 0.26*Chess 0.33** 0.26*Nigerian music 0.30**

continued over page



this context it is noteworthy that in both studies the Boyz II Men excerpt was enjoyedby subjects who favoured top-40 music and disliked by subjects preferring hard rock.

A further notable feature of Table 1 is that the correlations with familiarity areusually lower than the correlations with liking. The table presents 56 correlations with`liking' ratings meeting our criterion for inclusion; there are only 21 such `familiarity'correlations and these tend to be lower than those for `liking'. This pattern isparticularly strong for less `popular' music styles such as classical and jazz, where itmight be assumed that individuals have more control over the music they listen to.

Analysis of the relation between painting preference and music preference

Alpha coe�cients were calculated for each of the slide preference categories. Becauseof the nature of these data and the relatively small number of slides in the categories,we speci®ed 0.60 as a satisfactory level of reliability. For the Spanish data, the alphacoe�cient for the neutral±realistic category was 0.81, neutral±abstract 0.79, violent±realistic 0.62, violent±abstract 0.74, erotic±realistic 0.68, erotic±abstract 0.72,religious±realistic 0.77, and religious±abstract 0.61. The corresponding coe�cientsfor the English group were: neutral±realistic 0.61, neutral±abstract 0.74, violent±realistic 0.66, violent±abstract 0.72, erotic±realistic 0.69, erotic±abstract 0.77,religious±realistic 0.72, and religious±abstract 0.34. It can be seen that all but oneof the coe�cients reached our criterion level. As little could be done to improve thereliability of this category by removal of items, it was decided to leave all categoriesunchanged but to note that correlations involving the religious±abstract category forthe English sample would be most unlikely to reach statistical signi®cance. In fact, it isof interest that this category obtained the lowest alpha coe�cient in both samples,possibly due to the contrast within the category of paintings which are `pleasant', ifsomewhat distorted (e.g. Nativity scenes), and paintings which are violent and highlyunpleasant (e.g. Cruci®xion scenes).

The correlations of the slide categories with the music categories and excerptswill now be described. Again, we shall note only correlations attaining the 1 per centsigni®cance level in one sample or the 5 per cent level in both samples.

With respect to associations between slide and music categories, the strongestcorrelations obtained were with the slide category violent±abstract. In the Spanishsample this category correlated negatively with four music types, dance/disco music:

Table 1 continued


Music category Excerpt Liking Familiarity Liking Familiarity

Soundtracks Twin Peaks theme 0.29*Chess 0.31**Nat King Cole 0.25* 0.26*Boyz II Men 0.40*** 0.40*** 0.32**Guns `N' Roses ÿ0.31**

Rap music No signi®cant correlations

***p5 0.001, **p5 0.01, *p5 0.05, using two-tailed tests.Italicized entries represent hypothesized relationships.



r � ÿ0:32, p5 0.01, top-40 music: r � ÿ0:42, p5 0.001, easy listening music:r � ÿ0:33, p5 0.01, and soundtracks: r � ÿ0:38, p5 0.001. Two of these signi®cantcorrelations were also present in the English sample, top-40: r � ÿ0:31, p5 0.01, andsoundtracks: r � ÿ0:39, p5 0.001. Just one correlation was signi®cant, and negative,for the violent±realistic category, this being for top-40 music in the English sample:r � ÿ0:30, p5 0.01. No correlations reached the criterion in either of the èrotic'categories or in the religious±abstract or neutral±realistic categories. For thereligious±realistic category, there was a signi®cant relationship with liking for easylistening music in both the Spanish sample: r � 0.22, p5 0.05, and the Englishsample: r � 0.28, p5 0.01. Finally, liking for neutral±realistic paintings correlatednegatively with the `techno' category in the Spanish sample: r � ÿ0:30, p5 0.01; andpositively with the top-40 category in the Spanish sample: r � 0.32, p5 0.01, and theEnglish sample: r � 0.29, p5 0.01.

A small number of correlations reached the criterion when slide preferenceswere correlated with music excerpt ratings, most of these again involving the violent±abstract category. In the Spanish sample, liking for violent±abstract paintings wascorrelated negatively with liking for the Boyz II Men excerpt: r � ÿ0:37, p5 0.001and with familiarity with that excerpt: r � ÿ0:24, p5 0.05; it was correlatedpositively with familiarity with Nirvana: r � 0.30, p5 0.01. In the English sample,the same painting preference was correlated negatively with liking for Boyz II Men:r � 0.24, p5 0.05, familiarity with Boyz II Men: r � ÿ0:35, p5 0.01, and liking forSergio Mendez: r � ÿ0:29, p5 0.01. Other signi®cant correlations included, inthe English sample, the relationship between the violent±realistic category and likingfor Nirvana: r � 0.29, p5 0.01, and between the erotic±realistic category and likingfor both Paganini: r � 0.30, p5 0.01, and Sergio Mendez: r � 0.30, p5 0.01.Finally, in the Spanish sample there was a signi®cant relationship between liking forneutral±realistic paintings and liking for Nat King Cole: r � 0.31, p5 0.01.

The most obvious feature of the above results was the tendency for subjectspreferring violent±abstract paintings to dislike `popular' music such as top-40,soundtrack, and easy listening styles. Of the six correlations above 0.32, all areconcerned with this relationship. A much weaker pattern of relationships concerns thetendency for subjects who enjoy popular music to also like neutral±realistic paintings.The above relationships are further explored in the factor analyses described below.

Because of the relatively small number of subjects in the two studies, it wasnecessary to reduce the number of variables before we carried out factor analyses ofthe main aesthetic variables. Scores on the eight slide categories were included torepresent painting preference. As noted above, these scores were calculated for eachperson by adding preference scores on the slides in each category and dividing this bythe sum of the ratings for all 60 slides.

To represent music preference in the factor analyses, we used the six core categories(hard rock, classical, jazz, easy listening, world music, soundtracks) as the basis forthe calculation of music `summary scores'. An individual's summary score for each ofthe six categories was computed by ®rst establishing the person's score for theparticular category as a proportion of his or her score on all 16 categories. Then, the`liking' ratings on the two (or three) excerpts representing that category were dividedby the total liking ratings on all excerpts, and the mean of these proportionscalculated. The same process was carried out on the `familiarity' ratings. The threescores thus obtained from analysis of the category, liking, and familiarity ratings,



were combined in such a way that half of the ®nal summary score for each musicvariable was determined by the category rating and the other half equally determinedby the liking and familiarity ratings.

Principal components analyses were carried out on the two data sets, employing theeight slide category scores and the six music summary scores. The ®rst ten eigenvaluesobtained for the Spanish data were: 3.33, 2.16, 2.00, 1.50, 1.27, 0.85, 0.83, 0.71, 0.58,0.54. The ®rst ten eigenvalues for the English data were: 2.91, 2.63, 1.69, 1.36, 1.30,1.03, 0.89, 0.82, 0.62, 0.50. The scree plots suggested that both ®ve-factor and three-factor rotations should be examined. The orthogonal three-factor rotation showedgreater consistency across samples and is reported, excluding loadings under 0.3, inTable 2. The three-factor solution accounted respectively for 48.92 and 48.23 per centof the variance in the Spanish and English samples.

Factor one in both samples clearly contrasts liking for violent±abstract paintingsand hard rock music with liking for neutral±realistic paintings and easy listeningmusic. In the Spanish study, soundtrack music and religious±realistic paintings alsoload on this factor in the same direction as easy listening music and neutral±realisticpaintings. In the English sample, erotic±realistic paintings loads on the factor in thesame direction as neutral±realistic paintings and easy listening music, while religious±abstract paintings is associated with violent±abstract paintings and hard rock.

Factors two and three also show some noteworthy similarity across samples. Factortwo in the Spanish sample and factor three in the English sample di�erentiate`realistic' from àbstract' paintings, with slide categories obtaining high loadings onthe other factors (such as violent±abstract) not represented on the factor. There arealso some di�erences between the two analyses. For example, in the Spanish study theerotic±realistic category, but not the erotic±abstract category, loads on this factor; inthe English sample, the reverse is the case.

Factor three in the Spanish sample and factor two in the English sample contrastliking for jazz and world music styles with liking for soundtrack music. However, in

Table 2. Varimax rotation of the principal components analysis of slide categories and musicsummary scores in the two studies


Aesthetic variable F1 F2 F3 F1 F2 F3

Slide categoriesViolent±realistic 0.76 0.75Violent±abstract 0.72 ÿ0.85Erotic±realistic 0.67 0.61Erotic±abstract 0.39 ÿ0.64 0.38 ÿ0.63Religious±realistic ÿ0.50 0.66 0.78Religious±abstract ÿ0.69 ÿ0.35 ÿ0.36Neutral±realistic ÿ0.76 0.40 0.67 0.34Neutral±abstract ÿ0.77 ÿ0.72

Music summary scoresHard rock 0.68 ÿ0.48 ÿ0.49Classical 0.66Jazz 0.69 0.68Easy listening ÿ0.65 ÿ0.52 0.54World music 0.35 0.51Soundtracks ÿ0.55 ÿ0.40 ÿ0.73



the Spanish sample, strong negative loadings on this factor are also obtained by easylistening music and erotic±abstract paintings, while in the English sample, classicalmusic is strongly represented, and hard rock music is negatively loaded, on the factor.

Analysis of the relation between personality and the aesthetic preference variables

Pearson product-moment correlations were calculated associating the variousaesthetic preference measures with the SSS-V and the Openness to Experiencescale and their sub-scales. The most prominent patterns appearing in the tables ofzero-order correlations are noted below.

Correlations between personality measures and music category ratings are inTable 3. The table shows that, apart from several correlations between ES andmusic categories including hard rock, electronic, jazz, and techno, there are fewconsistencies between samples, though hard rock does correlate signi®cantly with Disin both studies. Also noteworthy in the English, but not the Spanish sample, is thetendency for the Aesthetics facet score to be linked to liking for classical and worldmusic styles, and for the Ideas and Values facets to be negatively related to liking for`soft-popular' styles such as top-40 and soundtrack music. Rather more di�cult toexplain is the pattern of results in the Spanish sample whereby electronic music ispreferred by subjects high on the Actions facet but low on two other Openness sub-scales.

Correlations between the personality measures and the ratings of liking for andfamiliarity with music excerpts are reported in Table 4. There was considerableconsistency across samples with respect to the pattern of correlations of theNirvana music excerpt with the sub-scales of the SSS-V. The total score on the SSS-V,the ES sub-scale score and the Dis sub-scale score each correlated with liking andfamiliarity ratings for both samples. An equally consistent, though somewhat weaker,pattern was found when we inspected the relationship between SSS-V, and the otherhard rock excerpt, Guns'N'Roses. Also noteworthy is that Openness to Experience,and various Openness facets, do show some moderate to strong correlations withparticular music measures, particularly in the English study. However, none of thecorrelations involving Openness are common to both samples.

Correlations between personality and slide preferences are in Table 5. When SSS-Vmeasures were correlated with painting preferences, two correlations were signi®cantin both samples, indicating that ES is associated with liking for violent±abstract anddislike of neutral±realistic paintings. Two other correlations were consistent acrossstudies, these being the negative correlation of Dis with the neutral±realistic categoryand the positive correlation of the same sub-scale with the erotic±abstract category.No correlations involving Openness were consistent across studies; the most note-worthy feature of the Openness data was the tendency of English subjects high on thatscale and several facet scales (particularly Values) to dislike neutral±realisticpaintings.

In summarizing Tables 1±5, it is noteworthy that all correlations signi®cant atthe one per cent level or at the ®ve per cent level in both samples involved thetotal SSS-V or the ES or Dis sub-scales, and almost half of these involved the ES sub-scale. Further, it is noted that eight correlations between aesthetic and personalitymeasures were signi®cant at the 0.1 per cent level. Six of these involved the SSS-V orits sub-scales, of which three involved ES. These strong correlations with SSS-V



Table3.

Correlationsofpersonality

scalesandsub-scaleswithmusiccategories

inthetw

ostudies

Personality

scalesandsub-scales

Musiccategory

SSS

TAS

ES

BS

Dis

Ototal

O1

O2

O3

O4

O5

O6

Spanishstudy

Hard

rock

26*

01

28*

13

34**

05

ÿ07

18

ÿ07

ÿ01

10

03

Soft

rock

00

02

ÿ01

ÿ06

06

11

02

11

11

14

11

ÿ01

Classical

13

23*

15

ÿ08

01

21

17

13

18

ÿ02

26*

09

Electronic

10

05

23*

ÿ17

18

ÿ08

ÿ11

11

ÿ25*

33**

ÿ12

ÿ23*

Jazz

15

11

26*

ÿ07

13

16

13

19

08

02

14

08

Soul/rhythm

&blues

ÿ01

ÿ05

01

ÿ11

14

19

21

12

12

ÿ17

21

16

Dance/disco

ÿ13

ÿ11

ÿ07

ÿ13

ÿ03

08

16

02

12

08

ÿ07

ÿ01

Top40

ÿ09

ÿ10

ÿ18

07

ÿ03

18

13

12

27*

ÿ04

07

24*

Easy

listening

ÿ03

ÿ03

ÿ07

01

02

00

ÿ12

10

ÿ01

02

ÿ13

03

Techno

16

03

25*

03

15

ÿ05

07

00

12

19

ÿ20

ÿ17

Country

ÿ03

ÿ11

ÿ07

16

ÿ05

17

23*

08

18

ÿ04

08

17

Folk

12

ÿ04

16

20

05

08

12

06

12

ÿ04

02

12

World

15

12

23*

ÿ06

11

23

26*

06

11

ÿ01

18

08

Religious

ÿ03

11

11

ÿ26*

ÿ06

05

18

ÿ03

01

ÿ04

04

ÿ11

Soundtracks

ÿ03

12

ÿ14

00

ÿ12

04

07

ÿ17

18

09

05

07

Rap

13

ÿ05

25*

11

12

13

26*

16

ÿ00

ÿ02

ÿ13

05

English

study

Hard

rock

17

ÿ05

26*

03

26*

17

19

13

ÿ02

20

02

13

Soft

rock

ÿ10

ÿ03

ÿ06

ÿ11

ÿ08

04

10

08

19

06

ÿ26*

ÿ05

Classical

05

07

17

ÿ10

00

26*

ÿ02

37***

09

08

21

22*

Electronic

28**

19

30**

02

27*

20

08

17

ÿ01

14

20

15

Jazz

22

17

26*

03

14

29**

09

25*

19

13

18

22*

Soul/rhythm

&blues

02

08

10

ÿ15

02

13

ÿ06

17

02

06

11

17

Dance/disco

21

17

31**

03

10

13

ÿ07

10

17

13

05

08

Top40

ÿ11

03

ÿ09

ÿ08

ÿ17

ÿ14

ÿ06

07

18

ÿ11

ÿ32**

ÿ27**

Easy

listening

02

10

08

ÿ01

ÿ11

ÿ07

06

07

ÿ05

ÿ04

ÿ14

ÿ15

Techno

31**

27*

36***

12

14

12

ÿ08

19

ÿ12

27*

02

15

Country

17

32**

ÿ01

06

04

12

06

17

00

15

20

ÿ12

Folk

01

22*

03

ÿ07

ÿ14

06

ÿ03

13

ÿ05

11

11

ÿ05

World

07

28*

17

ÿ07

ÿ17

12

ÿ09

31**

ÿ00

15

10

ÿ02

Religious

ÿ08

14

02

ÿ11

ÿ25*

01

ÿ13

11

ÿ15

13

08

01

Soundtracks

ÿ01

ÿ07

09

ÿ04

ÿ31**

ÿ24*

ÿ01

ÿ07

09

ÿ04

ÿ31**

ÿ24*

Rap

12

07

14

ÿ05

15

19

07

22

10

08

06

18

***p5

0.001,**p5

0.01,*p5

0.05,usingtw

o-tailed

tests.

Decim

alpoints

havebeenremoved.

Abbreviationsofpersonality

variables:

SSS,TotalSensationSeeking;TAS,ThrillandAdventure

Seeking;ES,Experience

Seeking;BS,Boredom

Susceptibility;Dis,

Disinhibition;Ototal,TotalOpennessto

Experience;O1to

O6,Fantasy,Aesthetics,Feelings,Actions,Ideas,Values.



Table4.


scalesandsub-scaleswithlikingforandfamiliarity

withmusicexcerpts

inthetw

ostudies

Personality

scalesandsub-scales

Musicexcerpt

SSS

TAS

ES

BS

Dis

Ototal

O1

O2

O3

O4

O5

O6

Spanishstudy

LouisArm

strong

L:

ÿ03

ÿ02

05

ÿ18

10

26*

23*

16

25*

04

14

10

F:

17

09

ÿ03

14

25*

13

06

16

10

ÿ16

18

17

Paganini

L:

14

19

03

ÿ07

17

14

03

ÿ01

19

13

11

06

F:

11

15

09

ÿ05

09

13

11

00

08

07

14

05

Nat

KingCole

L:

ÿ15

ÿ08

ÿ04

ÿ15

ÿ13

27*

31**

09

21

06

12

30*

F:

06

15

ÿ14

09

ÿ01

01

ÿ04

03

ÿ02

ÿ03

16

08

Nirvana

L:

42***

26*

31**

19

37**

11

ÿ02

31**

ÿ06

09

15

07

F:

27*

08

27*

15

29*

06

ÿ10

28*

ÿ15

12

17

00

`Twin

Peaks'

L:

ÿ19

ÿ25*

ÿ15

ÿ13

08

10

22

ÿ08

10

08

ÿ08

08

F:

ÿ17

ÿ16

ÿ09

ÿ15

01

17

15

04

16

ÿ00

14

15

Sergio

Mendez

L:

ÿ20

ÿ14

ÿ01

ÿ21

ÿ13

16

18

01

27*

04

ÿ01

12

F:

ÿ02

02

ÿ02

ÿ07

02

13

02

10

07

16

21

01

Mozart

L:

ÿ07

ÿ03

ÿ04

ÿ17

06

09

11

04

13

ÿ09

08

02

F:

ÿ08

ÿ07

ÿ11

ÿ04

ÿ00

25*

14

16

21

04

31**

13

Charlie

Parker

L:

ÿ05

00

06

ÿ13

ÿ05

11

16

00

12

ÿ16

06

16

F:

ÿ04

ÿ16

02

ÿ06

17

14

05

05

01

05

25*

09

`Chess'

L:

17

22

06

ÿ07

19

ÿ02

02

15

03

ÿ17

ÿ05

ÿ06

F:

ÿ06

ÿ11

ÿ16

ÿ05

17

ÿ13

ÿ21

01

ÿ14

ÿ13

ÿ16

03

Boys

IIMen

L:

ÿ22

ÿ10

ÿ27

ÿ12

ÿ13

15

31**

ÿ02

23

ÿ11

02

19

F:

ÿ26*

ÿ25*

ÿ35**

01

ÿ07

05

06

ÿ09

09

07

06

04

Nigerianfolk

music

L:

10

ÿ00

19

ÿ02

14

19

19

14

26*

ÿ23*

13

22

F:

13

17

08

ÿ00

06

14

01

12

20

02

24*

04

Guns`N

'Roses

L:

31**

22

22

15

24*

17

ÿ03

27*

07

21

16

03

F:

28*

11

27*

11

30**

12

ÿ07

32**

08

11

12

ÿ01

Stravinsky

L:

29*

36***

24

ÿ05

15

ÿ15

ÿ09

ÿ23

00

ÿ00

ÿ12

ÿ20

F:

16

23*

03

ÿ00

10

ÿ06

ÿ07

32**

08

11

12

ÿ01



English

study

LouisArm

strong

L:

04

14

23*

ÿ15

ÿ07

13

ÿ22

22

ÿ03

19

11

22

F:

21

02

34**

04

22

22

ÿ10

09

16

27*

10

26*

Paganini

L:

02

03

21

ÿ12

ÿ02

18

ÿ07

26*

ÿ06

13

21

18

F:

10

ÿ01

11

17

03

ÿ00

10

ÿ01

11

17

03

ÿ00

Nat

KingCole

L:

ÿ19

ÿ12

03

ÿ27*

ÿ15

01

ÿ09

02

ÿ15

04

07

14

F:

ÿ13

ÿ07

01

ÿ27*

ÿ04

04

ÿ15

04

ÿ01

ÿ06

12

21

Nirvana

L:

31**

07

36**

19

26

31***

19

19

07

25*

16

26*

F:

33**

ÿ01

27*

25*

41***

31**

17

21

07

27*

25

16

`Twin

Peaks'

L:

ÿ04

10

ÿ25*

ÿ04

ÿ00

ÿ13

ÿ04

ÿ15

ÿ03

ÿ10

ÿ10

ÿ06

F:

02

05

ÿ01

ÿ06

07

ÿ03

01

ÿ04

ÿ07

ÿ03

09

ÿ06

Sergio

Mendez

L:

01

ÿ03

23*

ÿ14

02

26*

ÿ04

ÿ15

ÿ03

ÿ10

ÿ10

ÿ06

F:

05

ÿ01

08

ÿ02

08

05

ÿ03

07

07

13

ÿ16

06

Mozart

L:

ÿ10

ÿ15

04

ÿ05

ÿ07

07

ÿ10

22

06

ÿ01

08

02

F:

16

01

13

15

14

08

01

05

06

10

04

04

Charlie

Parker

L:

06

ÿ00

29*

ÿ11

04

33**

06

32**

05

25*

20

37**

F:

ÿ09

ÿ07

ÿ02

01

ÿ13

ÿ00

ÿ17

02

ÿ09

07

05

08

`Chess'

L:

ÿ08

05

08

ÿ33**

ÿ04

26

06

24*

06

21

16

21

F:

ÿ10

01

ÿ01

ÿ22

ÿ06

ÿ07

ÿ05

ÿ08

01**

06

ÿ02

ÿ14

BoyzII

Men

L:

ÿ16

02

29*

04

ÿ23*

ÿ27*

ÿ16

ÿ23*

17

ÿ12

ÿ33**

ÿ35**

F:

ÿ10

ÿ07

ÿ14

14

03

06

ÿ02

08

32**

ÿ04

ÿ04

ÿ10

Nigerianfolk

music

L:

ÿ05

07

09

ÿ10

ÿ16

19

ÿ06

27*

ÿ06

08

26*

23*

F:

ÿ08

12

00

ÿ18

ÿ15

12

02

13

ÿ05

16

03

16

Guns`N

'Roses

L:

23*

05

22

11

26*

38***

33**

13

25*

31**

11

25*

F:

27*

06

27*

15

28*

24*

22

04

10

21

11

18

Stravinsky

L:

ÿ07

ÿ20

25

ÿ16

ÿ00

26*

06

32**

05

13

16

23*

F:

06

ÿ04

19

ÿ02

08

12

07

03

07

10

06

10

***p5

0.001,**p5

0.01,*p5

0.05,usingtw

o-tailed

tests.

Decim

alpoints

havebeenremoved.

L,likingrating;F,familiarity

rating.Abbreviationsofpersonality

variables:asforTable

3.



Table5.


scalesandsub-scaleswithslidecategories

inthetw

ostudies

Personality

scalesandsub-scales

Slidecategory

SSS

TAS

ES

BS

Dis

Ototal

O1

O2

O3

O4

O5

O6

Spanishstudy

Violent±realistic

03

18

07

ÿ20

ÿ02

08

11

19

02

05

01

03

Violent±abstract

20

ÿ02

40***

09

17

ÿ08

ÿ12

ÿ03

ÿ13

00

ÿ10

ÿ07

Erotic±

realistic

ÿ04

ÿ10

ÿ16

02

15

ÿ11

ÿ06

ÿ02

ÿ01

ÿ19

ÿ10

ÿ04

Erotic±

abstract

06

ÿ26*

11

19

26*

03

08

11

10

ÿ06

ÿ04

ÿ00

Religious±realistic

ÿ11

16

ÿ14

ÿ27*

ÿ16

ÿ07

00

11

ÿ09

ÿ05

ÿ02

02

Religious±abstract

09

12

17

01

ÿ05

ÿ05

ÿ11

ÿ05

ÿ12

12

05

ÿ15

Neutral±realistic

ÿ17

14

ÿ33**

ÿ08

ÿ29**

11

04

02

08

04

19

14

Neutral±abstract

04

ÿ17

08

18

10

ÿ00

00

ÿ22

05

03

ÿ09

ÿ04

English

study

Violent±realistic

06

13

ÿ06

ÿ02

05

09

ÿ00

06

ÿ13

07

25*

10

Violent±abstract

27*

24*

24*

14

12

04

06

ÿ03

ÿ24*

20

07

09

Erotic±

realistic

ÿ10

ÿ25*

03

ÿ07

05

21

ÿ06

23*

21

07

18

14

Erotic±

abstract

15

ÿ11

30**

01

26*

24*

00

19

17

09

17

25*


ÿ23*

ÿ02

ÿ25*

ÿ07

ÿ30**

ÿ17

ÿ16

ÿ04

ÿ03

ÿ04

ÿ13

ÿ24*

Religious±abstract

07

13

ÿ04

14

ÿ04

ÿ12

ÿ12

ÿ05

ÿ00

ÿ05

ÿ15

ÿ07

Neutral±realistic

ÿ31**

ÿ13

ÿ42***

ÿ13

ÿ22*

ÿ22*

04

ÿ12

06

ÿ22*

ÿ22*

ÿ34**

Neutral±abstract

08

05

13

02

04

ÿ01

11

ÿ12

ÿ03

ÿ04

ÿ06

08

***p5

0.001,**p5

0.01,*p5

0.05,usingtw

o-tailed

tests.

Decim

alpoints

havebeenremoved.Abbreviationsofpersonality

variables:asforTable

3.



measures were not con®ned to one sample, with four occurring in the Spanish andtwo in the English study. Of the remaining such correlations, two involved totalOpenness or the Aesthetics facet of Openness in the English sample.

Multivariate examination of the patterns of relationship appearing in the abovecorrelations was attempted in two ways. First, we report the results of correlationsbetween the various personality measures and the factor scores obtained in the factoranalyses in Table 2. A number of multiple regressions were then carried out using thepersonality measures as dependent variables and the various aesthetic preferencemeasures employed in the analyses in Table 2 as independent variables.

While there was noteworthy similarity between the factor structures obtained inTable 2, there were also some important di�erences which are relevant to theinterpretation of the correlations between personality measures and factor scores. Thereversed direction of the signs of factor one in the two studies should also be recalled.We report below the correlations reaching the ®ve per cent level of statisticalsigni®cance.

Factor one, representing the contrast of violent±abstract paintings and hard rockmusic with neutral±realistic paintings and easy listening music correlated, in theSpanish sample, with total SSS-V: r � 0.34, p5 0.01, ES: r � 0.45, p5 0.001, andDis: r � 0.41, p5 0.001. Signi®cant correlations in the English sample were withSSS-V: r � ÿ0:31, p5 0.01, ES: r � ÿ0:23, p5 0.05, and Values: r � ÿ0:23,p5 0.05. Factor two in the Spanish sample and factor three in the English samplerepresented the contrast between realistic and abstract art. This factor did notcorrelate signi®cantly with any personality measure in the Spanish study. In theEnglish study it correlated with ES: r � ÿ0:24, p5 0.05. Factor three in the Spanishstudy and factor two in the English study represented the contrast of jazz and worldmusic with soundtrack music. This factor correlated in the Spanish sample with TAS:r � 0.31, p5 0.01, and Ideas: r � 0.28, p5 0.05. In the English study, it wasassociated with ES: r � 0.38, p5 0.001, total Openness: r � 0.46, p5 0.001,Aesthetics: r � 0.42, p5 0.001, Actions: r � 0.26, p5 0.05, Ideas: r � 0.41,p5 0.001, and Values: r � 0.37, p5 0.001. It can be seen that sensation seeking isassociated with factor one in both samples, though there is considerable di�erence inthe size of the correlations obtained by the speci®c sub-scales of the SSS-V. SeveralOpenness measures are associated with factor three, but only in the English sample;this factor is also strongly associated with ES.

Stepwise regression analyses were employed using the various personalityscales and sub-scales as dependent variables and the aesthetic measures employedin the factor analyses in Table 2 as the independent variables. Details of thesigni®cant models and their signi®cant predictor variables are in Table 6. It can beseen that SSS-V and two of its sub-scales provided signi®cant models in both samples,while ES is clearly the most important determinant of aesthetic preference measures ifboth samples are taken into account. On the other hand, the predictor variables in thetwo samples are always di�erent in these analyses. Of the Openness variables, onlyAesthetics provides a signi®cant model in both samples. In the English sample,however, some of the strongest models are provided by Openness and its facets,particularly Ideas and Values. Also of note in the English sample is the frequency withwhich Soundtracks appears as a signi®cant predictor Ð in six of the nine signi®cantmodels. Soundtracks is also a signi®cant predictor of Aesthetics in the Spanishsample.



Table6.

Stepwiseregressionanalyseswithpersonality

scalesandsub-scalesasdependentvariablesandaesthetic

measuresasindependentvariables

inthetw

ostudies

Personality

scale/sub-

scale

Spanishstudy

English

study

F-value

Predictors

Beta

tF-value

Predictors

Beta

t

SSS-V

(total)

8.38**

Hard

rock

0.32

2.90**

5.62**

Neutral±realistic

ÿ0.26

ÿ2.35*

Soundtracks

ÿ0.23

ÿ2.06*

TAS

5.28**

Classicalmusic

0.27

2.36*

Non-signi®cantmodel

Erotic±

abstract

ÿ0.24

ÿ2.16*

ES

21.67***

Violent±abstract

0.31

2.76**

11.92***

Soundtracks

ÿ0.34

ÿ3.45***

Easy

listening

ÿ0.27

ÿ2.36*

Neutral±realistic

ÿ0.27

ÿ2.55*

Erotic±

abstract

0.22

2.04*

BS

7.87*


ÿ0.31

2.76**


Dis

6.45**

Hard

rock

0.26

2.27*

6.73


ÿ0.51

ÿ3.67***

Neutral±realistic

ÿ0.23

ÿ2.06*

Neutral±abstract

ÿ0.30

ÿ2.18*

Openness(total)


9.49***

Erotic±

abstract

0.40

3.48***

Soundtracks

ÿ0.34

ÿ3.35***

Violent±realistic

0.29

2.56*

Fantasy


inboth

studies

Aesthetics

8.00***

Soundtracks

ÿ0.35

ÿ3.46***

8.44***

Soundtracks

ÿ0.29

ÿ2.67**

Neutral±abstract

ÿ0.26

ÿ2.42*

Worldmusic

ÿ0.26

2.38*

Feelings


5.60**

Violent±abstract

ÿ0.30

ÿ2.67**

Soundtracks

ÿ0.26

ÿ2.36*

Actions


5.32*

Soundtracks

ÿ0.26

ÿ2.31*

Ideas


12.02***

Erotic±

abstract

0.52

4.50***

Violent±realistic

0.45

3.84***

Values


9.88***

Jazz

0.37

3.66***

Neutral±realistic

ÿ0.36

ÿ3.50***

Erotic±

realistic

0.22

2.15*

***p5

0.001,**p5

0.01,*p5

0.05,usingtw

o-tailed

tests.



DISCUSSION

A major aim of the present studies was to discover whether a factor could be ident-i®ed, in two separate language-groups, which cut across measures of both musical andvisual preference. A factor contrasting liking for hard music and violent±abstract artwith liking for easy listening music and neutral±realistic art appeared in both studies.There were di�erences in this factor between the two groups, particularly involvingthe appearance of soundtrack music on the factor in the Spanish sample and oferotic±realistic art in the English sample. However, the similarities between the two`®rst factors' in Table 2 clearly outweigh the di�erences.

Of the various personality variables included in the study, it is SSS-V, and mostparticularly the ES sub-scale, that produces the strongest relationships with aestheticvariables if consistency across studies is our major criterion. This is evident whetherwe consider the individual correlations or the regression analyses. It is thereforenoteworthy that the three aesthetic variables which load most reliably across samplesin factor one of Table 2 (hard rock music, violent±abstract art, neutral±realistic art)are represented by six of the nine aesthetic variables which are reliably correlated withES. Speci®cally, in both studies ES scores are correlated signi®cantly with the hardrock category, liking for and familiarity with Nirvana (the most clearly `hard rock'excerpt), familiarity with Guns'N'Roses (another `hard rock' excerpt), and liking forviolent±abstract paintings and (negatively) neutral±abstract paintings. Further, SSS-V and ES are the only two personality variables correlated at the 5 per cent level withfactor one of Table 2 in both studies.

Clearly, the present results provide substantial support to previous studies associat-ing sensation seeking measures with liking for such classes of aesthetic stimuli as hardrock music and abstract, non-representational forms of painting (Furnham andAvison, 1997; Litle and Zuckerman, 1986; Rawlings et al., 1998). However, whilesensation seeking is associated with a factor contrasting certain music and paintingpreferences, as outlined above, the strongest relationships between sensation seekingand aesthetic variables seem to be di�erent in the two samples. Thus, while Spanishsensation seekers show clear preferences for hard rock music and violent±abstract artand a dislike for easy listening music, English sensation seekers show a strongtendency to dislike neutral±realistic art and soundtrack music.

As well as a factor contrasting hard rock and violent±abstract categories with easylistening and neutral±realistic categories, the factor analysis of aesthetic measuresproduced two other factors showing some similarity in the two studies. A factorcontrasting realistic with abstract art appeared in each study; this factor correlatedonly with the ES scale in the English sample. A third factor contrasting jazz and worldmusic with soundtrack music correlated with Openness and several of its sub-scales inthe English sample. This result is in accord with a number of previous studies in whichopen individuals report liking for more sophisticated forms of traditional music anddislike of popular music (Dollinger, 1993; Rawlings and Ciancarelli, 1997; Rawlingset al., 1998). In fact, some of the strongest models in the regression analyses of ourEnglish data involved Openness measures. The strongest of these equations areprovided by Ideas, Values, and Aesthetics, again substantially supporting earlierstudies using quite di�erent àesthetic' measures (Rawlings et al., 1998). The patternsof results in the regression analyses of the Openness facets show some similarity tothose in the SSS models, particularly regarding dislike of soundtrack music. However,



some of the highest beta weights on these regression analyses are concerned withliking for erotic, particularly erotic±abstract, paintings.

In contrast to the strength of the Openness scale in the English sample, therewere only a few signi®cant, and relatively low, zero-order correlations betweenOpenness and its facets and the music preference measures in the Spanish sample, andjust one regression equation was signi®cant. This result reinforces the importance ofthe Aesthetics facet established in earlier studies (Rawlings et al., 1998). However, italso raises the question of why the other Openness facets were so poorly correlatedwith aesthetics measures. In consideration of the possibility that the di�erence in thetwo studies was due to the unrealiability of the Openness scale in the Spanish sample,alpha-coe�cients were calculated. The reliability coe�cient was actually higher in theSpanish sample (0.81) than the English sample (0.79).

An alternative possibility was that the di�erence between the two studies was due inpart to somewhat di�erent interpretations of the questionnaire items by the Spanishand English groups resulting from de®ciencies in the translation of the scales or,possibly, genuine cultural di�erences between the samples. In this context, it is ofinterest that the correlations in our study between the SSS and its sub-scales andOpenness and its facets were much higher for the English than the Spanish sample.For the latter, only two of the 35 inter-correlations barely reached the 5 per centsigni®cance level. In the English sample, 20 inter-correlations reached the correspond-ing signi®cance level, with a highest correlation of 0.54 (p5 0.001). Our Englishcorrelations were comparable to those reported in a larger United States sample byMcCrae (1987), with the strongest correlations involving the ES sub-scale. OurSpanish correlations were much lower than those found in the McCrae study.

Several weaknesses in our aesthetic measures have already been noted, includingthe low reliability of the religious±realistic painting category in the English sampleand the ambiguity of the `music of other cultures' category for the Spanish subjects. Afurther point concerned the need for review of some of the music excerpts employedin the present studies, which sometimes correlated poorly with the category they werepresumed to represent. Future studies might also expand the range of excerpts,including excerpts to represent all categories. We note particularly the ®nding that EScorrelated with both electronic and techno music categories in both of the presentstudies, whereas we included no excerpts of these music styles.

In conclusion, the present studies found a factor cutting across musical andpainting preference and reliably appearing, though with some di�erences, in twolanguage groups. This factor was related to the SSS-V scale, and particularly to theES sub-scale. Our data reinforce previous literature pointing to Sensation Seeking andOpenness to Experience as important personality dimensions underlying aestheticjudgment.

REFERENCES

Cattell RB, Saunders D. 1954. Musical preferences and personality diagnosis. Journal of SocialPsychology 39: 3±24.

Costa PT, McCrae PR. 1994. Revised NEO Personality Inventory: Professional Manual.Psychological Assessment Resources: Odessa, FL.



Daoussis L, McKelvie SJ. 1986. Musical preferences and e�ects of music on areading comprehension test for extraverts and introverts. Perceptual and Motor Skills 62:283±289.

DeFruyt F, Mervielde I. 1997. The ®ve factor model of personality and Holland's RIASECinterest types. Personality and Individual Di�erences 23: 87±103.

Dellas M, Gaier EL. 1970. Identi®cation of creativity: the individual. Psychological Bulletin 73:55±73.

Dollinger S. 1993. Research note: personality and music preference: extraversion andexcitement seeking or openness to experience? Psychology of Music 21: 73±77.

Eysenck HJ. 1941. `Type' factors in aesthetic judgments. British Journal of Psychology 31:262±270.

Eysenck HJ. 1982. Arousal, intrinsic motivation, and personality. In Advances in IntrinsicMotivation and Aesthetics, Day HI (ed.). Plenum: New York; 131±148.

Eysenck HJ. 1993a. Creativity and personality: suggestion for a theory. Psychological Inquiry4: 147±178.

Eysenck HJ. 1993b. World association, origence and psychoticism. Creativity Research Journal7: 209±216.

Eysenck HJ. 1995. Genius: The Natural History of Creativity. Cambridge University Press:Cambridge.

Frith C, Nias D. 1974. What determines aesthetic preferences. Journal of General Psychology91: 163±173.

Furnham A, Avison M. 1997. Personality and preference for surreal paintings. Personality andIndividual Di�erences 23: 923±935.

Furnham A, Bunyan M. 1988. Personality and art preferences. European Journal of Personality2: 67±74.

Glasgow MR, Cartier AM, Wilson GD. 1985. Conservatism, sensation seeking and musicpreferences. Personality and Individual Di�erences 6: 395±396.

Goldberg LR. 1993. The structure of phenotypic traits. American Psychologist 48: 26±34.Hargreaves DJ, Colman AM. 1981. The dimension of aesthetic reactions to music. Psychologyof Music 9: 15±20.

Holland JL. 1985. Manual for the Vocational Preference Inventory. Psychological AssessmentResources: Odessa, FL.

Juhasz J, Paxson L. 1978. Personality and preference for painting style. Perceptual and MotorSkills 46: 347±349.

Litle P, Zuckerman M. 1986. Sensation seeking and music preferences. Personality andIndividual Di�erences 7: 575±577.

Looft WR, Baranowski MD. 1971. An analysis of ®ve measures of sensation seeking andpreference for complexity. Journal of General Psychology 85: 307±313.

McCrae RR. 1987. Creativity, divergent thinking and openness to experience. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology 52: 1258±1265.

McCrae RR, Costa PT. 1997. Conceptions and correlates of openness to experience. InHandbook of Personality Psychology, Hogan R, Johnson JA, Briggs SR (eds). Academic:New York; 825±847.

Osborne JW, Farley FH. 1970. The relationship between aesthetic preference and visualcomplexity in abstract art. Psychonomic Science 19: 69±70.

Payne E. 1967. Musical taste and personality. British Journal of Psychology 58: 133±138.Payne E. 1980. Towards an understanding of music appreciation. Psychology of Music 8:31±41.

Rawlings D, Ciancarelli V. 1997. Music preference and the ®ve-factor model of the NEOPersonality Inventory. Psychology of Music 25: 120±132.

Rawlings D, Freeman JL. 1997. Measuring Paranoia/Suspiciousness. In Schizotypy:Implications for Illness and Health, Claridge G (ed.). Oxford University Press: Oxford;38±60.

Rawlings D, Hodge M, Sherr D, Dempsey A. 1995. Toughmindedness and preference formusical excerpts, categories and triads. Psychology of Music 23: 63±80.



Rawlings D, Twomey F, Burns E, Morris S. 1998. Personality, creativity and aestheticpreference: comparing Psychoticism, Sensation Seeking, Schizotypy, and Openness toExperience. Empirical Studies of the Arts 16: 153±178.

Schierman MJ, Rowland GL. 1985. Sensation seeking and selection of entertainment.Personality and Individual Di�erences 6: 599±603.

Tobacyck JJ, Myers H, Bailey L. 1981. Field-dependence, sensation-seeking and preference forpaintings. Journal of Personality Assessment 45: 270±277.

Welsh GS. 1987. Manual for the Welsh Figure Preference Test. Consulting Psychologist Press:Palo Alto, CA.

Wilson GD, Ausman J, Matthews TR. 1973. Conservatism and art preferences. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology 25: 286±289.

Zaleski Z. 1984. Sensation seeking and selection of entertainment. Personality and IndividualDi�erences 5: 609±611.

Zuckerman M. 1979. Sensation Seeking: Beyond the Optimal Level of Arousal. Erlbaum:Hillsdale, NJ.

Zuckerman M. 1994. Behavioural Expressions and Biosocial Bases of Sensation Seeking.Erlbaum: Hillsdale, NJ.

Zuckerman M, Bone RN, Neary R, Mangelsdor� D, Brustman B. 1972. What is thesensation seeker? Personality trait and experience correlates of the Sensation SeekingScales. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 39: 308±321.

Zuckerman M, Kuhlman DM, Joireman J, Teta P, Kraft M. 1993a. A comparison of threestructural models for personality: the big three, the big ®ve, and the alternative ®ve. Journalof Personality and Social Psychology 65: 757±768.

Zuckerman M, Litle P. 1986. Personality and curiosity about morbid and sexual events.Personality and Individual Di�erences 7: 49±56.

Zuckerman M, Ulrich RS, McLaughlin J. 1993. Sensation seeking and reactions to naturepaintings. Personality and Individual Di�erences 15: 563±576.

APPENDIX: SLIDES OF PAINTINGS (LISTED BY CATEGORY)

Violent±realistic

The executions of the third of May (Goya)Nastagio's story, picture 1 (Botticelli)Kryspina and Kryspiniana (Dutch, c. 1500)Anguish (Schenck)Judith slayes Holofernes (Gentileschi)Perseus turning Phineas and his followers to stone (Giordano)

Violent±abstract

A few little pricks (Kahlo)The death of my father (Allen)Woman seated in the underground (Moore)The death-bed (Munch)Man of the road (Booth)Arabe au Burnous (Dubu�et)

Erotic±realistic

Lovers spied upon by children (van der Wer�)The Turkish bath (Ingres)



An academic (French, c. 1825)Girl resting (Boucher)Young Spartans (Degas)Portrait of a woman (Melzi)Mars and Venus (Giovane)

Erotic±abstract

The kiss (Klimt)The embrace (Schiele)Adam and Eve (Lampicka)Woman (Magritte)Bathers (Cezanne)The adolescents (Picasso)Cinema nude (Hopkins)


The annunciation ( follower of Fra Angelica)The assumption of the virgin (Rubens)Presentation in the temple (de Gelder)The crossing of the Red Sea (Poussin)Christ on the cross (Delacroix)The adoration of the shepherds (Lerain)

Religious±abstract

White cruci®xion (Chagall)Christ on the Veil of St. Veronica (Roualt)The ®rst study for the madonna of Port Lligat (Dali)The blessing (Redon)Creation (Rivera)Cruci®xion (Guttoso)

Neutral±realistic

Horses in a landscape (Stubbs)A concert (Costa)Company in courtyard (de Hooch)Les tres riches heures: April (P., H. & H. Limbourg)The ship's deck (Manet)Praalgraf van Willem van Oranje (Houckgeest)The banquet of Cleopatra (Tiepolo)Helena van der Schzlcke (ter Borch)A scene on ice near a town (Avercamp)The umbrellas (Renoir)Two old men disputing (Rembrandt)



Neutral±abstract

Dog on a leash (Balla)Paris seen through the window (Chagall)Composition with grey, red, yellow and blue (Mondrian)Composition VII, no. 2 (Kandinsky)Kermistruc (Hakkaart)Pottery (Caul®eld)Maya with a boat (Picasso)Battle of lights (Stella)Two women holding ¯owers (Leger)White lines (Tuckson)Men shall know nothing of this (Ernst)



Documents

Personality and aesthetic preference in Spain and England: two studies relating sensation seeking and openness to experience to liking for paintings and music