Relation of spatial abilities and selected personality traits.

Abstract

Witkin, et al. (1954, 1962) classified Ss into field-independent and field-dependent categories on the basis of their responses to perceptual tasks. It was also found that different personality characteristics were associated with these classifications. Field-independent Ss depended less on the field and more on themselves as a referent point in perceptual judgments than the field-dependent Ss. Independent Ss were generally more aggressive, more dominant, and required less environmental support for he i r decisions. Field-dependent Ss were found to be more accepting of authority, more anxious, and required more support from the environment. The present study was conducted as a preliminary investigation to determine whether other spatial tests would show similar relationships with personality for 106 undergraduates, given the Guilford-Zimmerman Spatial Orientation Test, Guilford-Zimmerman Spatial Visualization Test, and the 16 P.F. These spatial tests were chosen because the definitions of these abilities seemed closely parallel to those of field-independence. Although the Pearsonian rs were relatively low, several were significant. The traits correlated with G-Z Spatial Orientation were Factor E (Dominance) .36, Factor A (Cyclothpmia) M.26, and Factor B (General Ability) .24. G-Z Spatial Visualization was related to Factor E (Dominance) .36, Facror A (Cyclothymia) -.24, Factor B (General Ability) .33, Factor I (Sensitivity) -.27, and Factor L (Protention) .24. Ss were also divided into two groups designated field-independent and field-dependent on the basis of their scores on the spatial tests. The means of the two groups on the personality measures were: fieldindependent-Factor A 9.64, Factor B 9.14, Factor E 16.28, Factor I 10.00, and Factor L 10.35, Field-dependent-Factor A 11.20, Factor B 7.89, Factor E 13.25, Factor I 11.79, and Factor L 8.17. These relationships are congruous with previous findings. If these spatial tests do measure field-independence, a positive relationship would be expected between independence and dominance and a negative relationship with cyclothymia and sensitivity. These expectations were confirmed in this study. In general, these correlations support the concept that these spatial ability tests tend to measure the characteristics of field-independence and with further research may be useful in personality assessment.