Abstract
The current study aimed to examine the associations between the Big Five personality dimensions, aesthetic judgment styles, and art interest. Participants (N = 253) were university students in Tehran, Iran. All participants completed measures of personality, aesthetic Judgment styles, and general interest in art. Results suggested that Openness to Experience was related to advanced styles of art judgment and interest in art-related activities. Regression analyses showed that sex (β = .18, t = 3.18, p = .002), Emotional Stability (β = .14, t = 2.47, p = .01), Openness to Experience (β = .18, t = 3.14, p = .002), symbolic aesthetic judgment style (β = .31, t = 4.63, p < .001), and concrete aesthetic judgment style (β = -.19, t = -3.25, p = .001) significantly predicted art interest. The role of personality and individual difference constructs in aesthetic judgment and art interest is discussed and future directions are outlined.
Highlights
The current study aimed to examine the associations between the Big Five personality dimensions, aesthetic judgment styles, and art interest
The present study aimed to examine the associations between the Big Five dimensions of personality, aesthetic judgment styles, and interest in art
Emotional Stability, Openness to Experience, and symbolic judgment style emerged as significant positive predictors and concrete aesthetic judgment style emerged as significant negative predictor of art interest
Summary
We recruited 253 individuals (54.9% women) from university settings in Tehran, Iran. The mean age of the participants was 24.4 years (SD = 5.5 years). The internal consistency coefficients (Cronbach’s alphas) for Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Emotional Stability, and Openness to Experience were .53, .21, .50, .37, and .34, respectively. As noted by Gosling et al (2003) internal consistency coefficient is not a good way to assess two-item scales’ reliability. A principal-axis exploratory factor analysis (EFA) suggested a unidimensional structure (KMO = .83, Bartlett’s χ2 [10] = 580.34, p < .01, λ1 = 3.20, item-factor loadings = .65 - .86), explaining 63.97 percent of the total variance Face validity of these items were initially confirmed by an independent panel of two art professionals. This scale was internally consistent in the current sample (Cronbach’s α = .85).
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
