- Email: [email protected]
Alexithymia – Imagination – Creativity
Personality and Individual Differences 45 (2008) 445–450
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Personality and Individual Differences journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/paid
Alexithymia – Imagination – Creativity _ Szymura b Karolina Czernecka a,*, Błazej a b
Jagiellonian University, Institute of Psychology, Al. Mickiewicza 3, 31-120, Cracow, Poland Warsaw School of Social Psychology, Faculty in Sopot, ul. Polna 16/20, 81-745 Sopot, Poland
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history: Received 23 September 2007 Received in revised form 8 February 2008 Accepted 20 May 2008 Available online 11 July 2008 Keywords: Alexithymia Personality Mental imagery Mental rotation Creativity
a b s t r a c t The study was aimed at examining the relationships between alexithymia, imagination functioning and the level of creativity. Contrary to previously conducted studies, a behavioural method of measuring imagination efficacy was used (neutral and emotional versions of the Mental Rotation Test). The level of creativity was assessed with the use of the Urban–Jellen test and Creative Visualisation Task. The NEO-FFI was also administered. It was hypothesized that individuals with high alexithymia scores would show a reduced imagery ability as well as low creativity level. In a sample of 136 participants, alexithymics were found to be significantly less creative than non-alexithymics. However, no differences in imagination efficacy were found with regard to alexithymia. The results are discussed in the context of personality impact on cognitive tasks performance, also shedding new light on alexithymia correlates. Ó 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction The term alexithymia (‘‘no words for feelings”) was introduced by Sifneos (1973, 1996), who coined it on the basis of clinical observations conducted on a group of psychosomatic patients. A specific pattern of difficulties emerged, including inappropriate affective responses, problems distinguishing emotions from bodily sensations, denying their very existence, shallow and primitive personality, a lack of sensitivity and chaotic relationships with other people. The most profound was the inability to find appropriate words to describe one’s affective states – a feature that gave the construct its name. Alexithymia has been closely related to a high incidence of psychosomatic illnesses and was thought to be a major risk factor. Therefore, psychologists’ efforts concentrated mainly on finding a suitable method of therapy, but it was soon discovered that all of them offered only a limited success (Sifneos, 1996). After many years of studies, an understanding of the alexithymia concept has evolved. It is now considered to be a multifaceted personality trait, normally distributed in the general population (e.g. Salminen, Saarijärvi, Äärelä, Toikka, & Kauhanen, 1999) with stable in time degree (e.g. Martinez-Sanchez, Ato-Garcia, & OrtizSoria, 2003). A number of studies have also successfully linked this construct to other basic personality dimensions. Pandey and Mandal (1996) reported that alexithymia correlates positively with neuroticism (r = 0.56) and negatively with extraversion (sociabil-
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +48 12 634 13 05x267; fax: +48 12 623 76 99. E-mail address: [email protected] (K. Czernecka). 0191-8869/$ - see front matter Ó 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2008.05.019
ity; r = 0.30). In turn, Zimmermann, Rossier, de Stadelhofen, and Gaillard (2005) revealed positive associations again with neuroticism (the strongest correlation with vulnerability; r = 0.49–0.50, depending on the alexithymia measurement method), negative with extraversion (the strongest correlation with assertiveness; r = 0.32–0.39), openness (fantasy subscale; r = 0.21–0.22) and conscientiousness (competence and self-discipline subscales; r = 0.21). A similar pattern of results was also obtained by Luminet, Bagby, Wagner, Taylor, and Parker (1999). This data corroborate the expected partial overlap between personality dimensions, proving the new conceptualization of alexithymia to be quite reasonable. With the acceptance of alexithymia as a trait, the construct is now seen as a continuum, with approximately 13% of individuals in the general population being highly alexithymic (epidemiological studies; e.g. Salminen et al., 1999). Nevertheless, the level of alexithymia is significantly higher in a number of clinical groups, including substance abusers (e.g. Uzun, 2003). Moreover, the construct is now thought to comprise two distinct types of correlates. The affective component of alexithymia includes difficulties in identifying and verbalizing feelings as well as a reduced ability to disentangle emotional experience from physiology, whereas the cognitive component comprises of a reduced fantasy life, lack of daydreaming and a concrete, externally oriented style of thinking. The affective correlates of alexithymia, being more distinctive and profound, have caught the attention of researchers for a long time. Thus, this component is now quite well understood while the cognitive has been somewhat neglected. Nevertheless, a number of researches have been targeted on the most cognitive correlate of the syndrome – the paucity of fantasy life and a
446
K. Czernecka, B. Szymura / Personality and Individual Differences 45 (2008) 445–450
dysfunctional imagination. This deficit was the first of all alexithymia correlates to be formally described, in the early sixties, later being incorporated into Sifneos’ concept (Bagby, Taylor, & Parker, 1997). Results obtained from conducted studies support the hypothesis of alexithymics being unable to evoke or/and maintain mental images. Friedlander, Lumley, Farchione, and Doyal (1997) discovered subjective differences with regard to alexithymia when autogenic relaxation was administered to the participants. Individuals with high scores of alexithymia reported less involvement and poorer imagery during the procedure. A similar result was obtained by Trajdos-Giejdasz (2004) – alexithymics were unable to visualize their own emotional states, something which proved to be rather easy for non-alexithymics. Using the Vividness of Visual Imagery Questionnaire (VVIQ), Campos, Chiva, and Moreau (2000) found that people scoring high on alexithymia scales also have high scores in VVIQ, indicating low imaging capacity, low intensity and less vivid images. Alexithymics were also proved to have not only constricted conscious imagery, but also a dysfunction of nocturnal dreams (Lumley & Bazydlo, 2000). People with alexithymia syndrome often experience dull, concrete and uninteresting dreams or claim not to have any at all. Assuming that night dreams are mentally formed and manipulated in a similar manner to daydreams, this result indirectly supports the imagination deficit hypothesis. Additionally, it also suggests that this deficiency might be deeply rooted, manifesting itself even at an unconscious, uncontrollable level. Indeed, an fMRI study conducted by Mantani, Okamoto, Shirao, Okada, and Yamawaki (2005) revealed that reduced vividness and emotional intensity of imagined scenes are accompanied by significantly reduced activation in the posterior cingulate cortex (PCC), an area associated with both memory and emotion processing. These results show that alexithymics’ imagination disturbance may have a solid, neurobiological basis. Overall, it seems that the imagination deficiency hypothesis in alexithymics has been empirically supported. Nonetheless, a number of important issues concerning research cited above must be acknowledged. First, most of the studies used questionnaires and self-description methods to estimate a participant’s performance during the imagery task. These measures are subjective, thus vulnerable to many biases (e.g. a response tendency or an inclination to present oneself in a good or a bad light). Second, only a few researches included baseline or neutral conditions in an imagery task, concentrating solely on evoking affect-loaded mental images. Unfortunately, a task constructed in such a manner makes a decision on the deficit’s severity or range practically impossible (i.e. it cannot be determined whether poor performance is a result of a general imagination dysfunction or a specific dysfunction limited to affective material only). Third, most of the studies were conducted on general population samples, generating relative alexithymia scores. Taken together, these important issues make inferences and generalizations about obtained results limited and questionable. The concept of creativity can be linked to both alexithymia and imagination, in terms of some shared features and correlates. Although the relationship between alexithymia and creativity level has not been extensively studied, a pool of empirical data indirectly suggests that such an association may exist. First, an alexithymic personality seems to be diametrically opposed to that which can be labelled a creative personality. Alexithymics tend to be very concrete, hyperlogical and mentally rigid: showing a strong preference for routine and stability. On the other hand, according to Barron and Harrington (1981), creative individuals favour novel, complex stimuli and can be broadly described as having flexible, easily adjustable minds. Alexithymia also correlates significantly but negatively with the Big Five openness trait, a variable that consistently shows a positive relationship to creativity (Wolfradt & Pretz, 2001). Secondly, some researchers suggested
that an efficient, rich imagination is necessary for creative processes to occur (Finke, Ward, & Smith, 1992), with some even claiming that differing degrees of imagery ability reflect differing creativity abilities (see LeBoutillier & Marks, 2003). As stated above, alexithymic individuals seem to have profound difficulties with visualization, experience less vivid mental images and show a tendency to avoid fantasizing. Finally, many studies stress the importance of affect and emotion during creative process (Kolan´czyk, Jankowska, Pawłowska-Fusiara, & Sterczyn´ski, 2004). Alexithymics cannot take creative advantage of their own various affective phenomena due to their inability to experience, identify and label such experiences. Bearing these factors in mind, it is reasonable to assume that the cognitive and personality characteristics of alexithymia syndrome have a negative impact on creative performance. In light of all above, we expected previously reported imagination dysfunction in alexithymics to be confirmed in our study, with the use of objective, behavioural method. The local character of alexithymic imagination shortage was also assumed: the deficit was supposed to be limited to emotional material only. Finally, we hypothesized that the structure of an alexithymic personality, as well as the lack of imaginative ability, will be linked to poor creative performance. 2. Method 2.1. Participants Hundred and thirty six volunteers took part in the study. The participants were recruited from two distinct populations in order to differentiate alexithymia scores in the whole sample: recovering alcoholics, certified by their therapists as having no cognitive impairment (N = 68; mean abstinence period was 19 months with 45 participants below 6 months) and non-drinking adults (N = 68). Table 1 provides descriptive statistics for age, gender and level of education regarding both groups. 2.2. Materials 2.2.1. Personality questionnaires The Bermond-Vorst ALEX-40 questionnaire in the Polish adaptation by Maruszewski and S´cigała (1998) was used to assess alexithymia levels. The inventory consists of five subscales, labelled: verbalizing (‘‘I find it difficult to verbally express my feelings”), emotionalizing (‘‘When friends around me argue violently, I become emotional”), identifying (‘‘When I am distressed, I know whether I am afraid or sad or angry”), fantasizing (‘‘Before I fall asleep, I make up all kinds of events, encounters and conversations”) and analyzing (‘‘I hardly ever go into my emotions”). The overall questionnaire score indicates the general alexithymia level – low scores characterize alexithymic participants.
Table 1 Descriptive statistics for participants’ age, gender and level of education
Age Gender Level of education
Mean SD Female Male Elementary Vocational Secondary University
Recovering alcoholics
Non-drinking adults
44.22 10.19 16 52 7 25 21 15
39.60 9.91 16 52 5 27 21 15
68
68
K. Czernecka, B. Szymura / Personality and Individual Differences 45 (2008) 445–450
The NEO-FFI questionnaire, designed by McCrae and Costa Jr. in the Polish adaptation by Zawadzki, Strelau, Szczepaniak, and S´liwin´ska (1998), was also employed to assess the intensity of five basic personality traits: extraversion, neuroticism, openness, conscientiousness and agreeableness. 2.2.2. Mental rotation test (MRT) The stimuli were either hexagrams or pictures of facial expressions. The hexagrams were emotionally neutral but differed in picture harmony (ordered versus chaotic representation; Sterczyn´ski & Kolan´czyk, 2001; Fig. 1). The pictures of facial expressions were chosen from the Ekman and Friesen set. The photographs were affect-loaded and differed in the expressed emotion (anger versus sadness) as well as in the intensity of the expression (low versus high; Fig. 2). We used the form identification task version of the Mental Rotation Test (see Cohen & Kubovy, 1993). Pairs of stimuli were presented simultaneously on the computer screen until a response
447
was given. The stimulus appearing on the right was rotated from 0° to 300° in 60° increments. Two versions of MRT were created: neutral (N) and affect-loaded (A). The hexagrams were presented exclusively in the N-MRT, whereas the photographs served solely as stimuli in the A-MRT. The task was to decide whether two presented hexagrams were the same or differed in shape (N-MRT) and whether the emotions expressed by the actors on two photographs were the same or different (A-MRT; response required in both versions: yes or no). There were 48 trials in each part of the MRT, with a short prior training session. The experimental design for A-MRT consisted of 2(expressed emotion) 2(emotion intensity) 6(rotation angle) 2(response required) experimental conditions, whereas the N-MRT design included 2(picture harmony) 2(stimuli repetition) 6(rotation angle) 2(response required) conditions. The validity of the MRT was confirmed in two separate pilot studies (the mental rotation effect was obtained). In the present experiment, speed and accuracy of responses were recorded, but the subsequent analyses were carried out on reaction times only. 2.2.3. Creativity tests We used two different tests to assess the level of creativity. The first one, the Creative Visualization Task (CVT; Finke et al., 1992), requires the construction of as many new objects as possible from a set of geometrical shapes, using imagination only. Two measures of creative thinking were applied: fluidity (the overall number of legal drawings) and originality (based on intra-group frequency rank of drawings). The second creativity test, a nonverbal version of the Urban–Jellen test (Dollinger, Urban, & James, 2004) was used to assess the general level of creativity. 2.3. Procedure
Fig. 1. Hexagrams used in the N-MRT, (a) ordered hexagrams, (b) chaotic hexagrams.
The experiment consisted of two separate sessions. During the first session, participants working in small groups completed personality questionnaires and creativity tests in fixed order. During the second, the MRT was administered. Half of the participants completed a N-MRT version first, whereas the second half started with an A-MRT version. 3. Results 3.1. Alexithymia sample scores The overall alexithymia score ranged from 89 to 175 points out of maximum 200 in the whole sample (M = 130.38; SD = 18.42). The two groups of participants also differed in the average alexithymia level, indicating recovering alcoholics to be more alexithymic, F(1,134) = 4.72, p < 0.03. Nevertheless, further analyses were carried out using dichotomised alexithymia level (‘‘low” versus ‘‘high”), not group factor (‘‘clinical” versus ‘‘normal”), as an independent variable. 3.2. Alexithymia and personality traits Alexithymia correlated with personality traits as measured by the Big Five questionnaire: strongly with extraversion, openness and agreeability and weakly with neuroticism. Table 2 provides detailed statistics. 3.3. Alexithymia and mental rotation
Fig. 2. Facial pictures used in the A-MRT: (a) low expression intensity, (b) high expression intensity.
Due to only partial compatibility, the scores obtained with the use of N-MRT and A-MRT were analyzed separately. A 2(alexithymia) 2(picture harmony) 2(stimuli repetition) 6(rotation angle) 2(response required) analysis of variance
448
K. Czernecka, B. Szymura / Personality and Individual Differences 45 (2008) 445–450
Table 2 ALEX-40 correlations with the NEO-FFI questionnaire The NEO-FFI factors Neuroticism ALEX-40 factors
a b c
0.31c 0.17b 0.46c 0.13 0.17 0.15a
Verbalizing Fantasizing Identifying Emotionalizing Analyzing General alexithymia
Extraversion
Openness
Agreeableness
0.40c 0.17b 0.28c 0.11 0.26c 0.37c
0.46c 0.52c 0.37c 0.31c 0.52c 0.67c
0.18b 0.10 0.23c 0.09 0.27c 0.25c
Conscientiousness 0.27c 0.15a 0.33c 0.14 0.10 0.10
0.1 < p 6 0.05. 0.05 < p 6 0.01. p < 0.01.
(ANOVA) was conducted for the neutral version of the Mental Rotation Test (N-MRT). As predicted, we obtained a linear relationship between rotation angle and reaction times, although not all differences between a given and subsequent angle were statistically significant. Picture harmony, repetition and response factors also influenced participants’ reactions that were faster when hexagrams were ordered, repeated and ‘‘different” was the required response. Table 3 provides more details. Analyses concerning alexithymia as a factor did not reveal any systematic, significant differences, either as a main effect or in interactions with any of N-MRT variables. This also holds true when the relationships between N-MRT performance level and all five alexithymia factors measured by subscales of ALEX-40 questionnaire were analyzed separately. A similar 2(alexithymia) 2(emotion intensity) 2(expressed emotion) 6(rotation angle) 2(response required) analysis of variance (ANOVA) was carried out for the affective version of the Mental Rotation Test (A-MRT). Participants’ reaction times increased with angle increment from 0° to 180° and decreased with angle increment from 180° to 300°. The reactions were faster when the intensity of facial expressions was low, photos depicted anger and ‘‘different” was the required response, what proves the intratask manipulations to be successful (see Table 4 for details). Similarly to N-MRT analyses, both general alexithymia and all five ALEX-40 factors yielded no main effects in the case of AMRT. Also, no interactions between those variables and A-MRT performance level were observed. 3.4. Alexithymia and creativity In accordance with our initial assumptions, alexithymia correlated significantly with creativity levels as measured by both methods. A high alexithymia questionnaire score was associated with better performance in the Urban–Jellen test (r = 0.29, p < 0.001). As far as Finke’s Creative Visualization Test results were
Table 3 N-MRT analysis of variance results Neutral mental rotation test (N-MRT)
Stimuli repetition Picture harmony Response required Rotation angle
Mean RT (s)
F(1,134)
p
First Second Ordered Chaotic Same Different 0°/60° 60°/120° 120°/180° 180°/240° 240°/300°
3.39 2.80 2.72 3.47 3.24 2.95 2.83/3.05 3.05/3.10 3.10/3.25 3.25/3.18 3.18/3.16
112.33
p < 0.00001
117.61
p < 0.00001
26.41
p < 0.00001
17.82 – 5.44 – –
p < 0.0001 ns p < 0.05 ns ns
Table 4 A-MRT analysis of variance results Affective mental rotation test (A-MRT)
Emotion intensity Expressed emotion Response required Rotation angle
Mean RT (s)
F(1,134)
p
Low High Anger Sadness Same Different 0°/60° 60°/120° 120°/180° 180°/240° 240°/300°
2.91 3.39 3.08 3.23 3.58 2.72 2.51/2.80 2.80/3.30 3.30/3.77 3.77/3.55 3.55/2.98
82.53 7.63
p < 0.00001 p < 0.0065
43.54
p < 0.00001
21.65 35.34 24.78 3.09 19.16
p < 0.00001 p < 0.00001 p < 0.00001 p < 0.08 p < 0.00001
Table 5 ALEX-40 correlations with creativity tests Creative visualization task Fluidity ALEX-40 factors
Verbalizing Fantasizing Identifying Emotionalizing Analyzing General alexithymia
0.01 0.07 0.19b 0.14 0.20b 0.17a
Originality 0.09 0.22b 0.24c 0.03 0.14 0.20b
‘Human’ 0.04 0.18a 0.21b 0.19b 0.24c 0.26c
Urban–Jellen score 0.05b 0.23b 0.27c 0.06 0.35c 0.29c
Fluidity: the overall number of legal drawings; Originality: intra-group frequency rank of drawings; ‘Human’: the overall number of human drawings. a 0.1 < p 6 0.05. b 0.05 < p 6 0.01. c p < 0.01.
concerned, a significant correlation between alexithymia scores and relative originality of created objects was also discovered (r = 0.20, p < 0.03). Non-alexithymic participants tended to be more original than alexithymics. In further analysis, all drawings were categorized into two classes: human and non-human, according to criteria set by Roivainen and Ruuska (2005). Alexithymia scores were found to correlate with the number of human drawings (r = 0.26, p < 0.005), but not with non-human objects. Scores obtained on two of five ALEX-40 subscales were mainly responsible for the alexithymia-creativity correlation. Creative individuals were characterized by high scores mainly in identifying and analyzing subscales but also, to a lesser extent, in fantasizing and emotionalizing. Table 5 provides a more detailed description. 4. Discussion In the presented study, we attempted to examine the moderating impact of alexithymia on the efficiency of visual imagination as
K. Czernecka, B. Szymura / Personality and Individual Differences 45 (2008) 445–450
well as on the level of creative performance. Overall, most of the gathered data substantiates that of results obtained in previously conducted studies, although some of the results are rather surprising. As expected, alexithymia was linked to a particular personality profile, as indicated by the Big Five questionnaire. Alexithymic participants were less open to experience and more introverted than their non-alexithymic counterparts. Alexithymics are characterized by social withdrawal, a reduced need for interpersonal relations (Maruszewski & S´cigała, 1998), anhedonia or inability to experience positive affect (Lundh & Simonsson-Sarnecki, 2001), all of which are well-known negative correlates of extraversion. Furthermore, openness to experience is connected with flexibility of thinking, differentiated emotions, a need for variety and holding of unconventional values (McCrae & John, 1992), while alexithymic individuals exhibit opposite qualities. It is highly possible that the rather puzzling relationship between alexithymia and agreeableness, which was also apparent, is limited only to some of the lower order traits such as altruism or modesty, thus being responsible for alexithymics’ lack of empathy and self-confidence (see Zimmermann et al., 2005, for similar results). Unfortunately, in the presented study the short version of the Big Five questionnaire was used and this explanation remains purely hypothetical. Finally, high level of neuroticism, also typical of high alexithymics, may be linked to the anxiety and depression that frequently accompany the syndrome (Hendryx, Haviland, & Shaw, 1991). Overall, our data corroborate the results reported by other authors and seems to support the view that the alexithymia syndrome corresponds to a specific configuration of basic personality traits within the Five Factor Model. As far as the Mental Rotation Test is concerned, it yielded the expected results. The classic mental rotation curve (the non-linear association between reaction times and angular departure from the canonical position) was observed for both the N-MRT and AMRT versions, although being more salient in the latter. The lesser validity of the N-MRT version is probably due to the use of ‘‘mutants”, as opposed to mirror images, in ‘‘different” response conditions. According to Cohen and Kubovy (1993), such situation might facilitate non-rotational strategies, such as features comparison. Nevertheless, the attempt to construct an emotional version of MRT can be considered to be successful. The effectiveness of most of the intra-task manipulations was consistent with previous findings (see e.g. Bethell-Fox & Shepard, 1988 for stimulus complexity effect; Roberts & Bell, 2000 for stimuli repetition effect). In the case of A-MRT, trials with anger expressions evoked shorter response times. This is also consistent with the results obtained in previous studies, showing an understandable priority for this emotion in emotional information processing (Ekman & Davidson, 1994). On the other hand, ‘‘the same” response was paradoxically more difficult than ‘‘different” condition, as indicated by reaction times. This result is inconsistent with previously conducted studies. However, as Farell (1985) suggested, such effects might be caused by specificity of stimuli. Responses in the ‘‘different” condition are faster when the differences between stimuli are clearly visible and salient, which may be the case in the stimulation used in the presented research. The most surprising result obtained in this study was the lack of a relationship between alexithymia and performance levels in both versions of the MRT task. The time needed to rotate a stimulus was not affected either by general or by subscale scores of the ALEX-40 questionnaire. Thus, the imagination deficiency hypothesis was not supported in this study. Several alternative explanations can be provided to explain such a baffling result. The most obvious one, concerning the method itself, has to be ruled out. Mental Rotation Tests met the majority of imposed requirements and proved to be valid tools in assessing various aspects of mental imagery. How-
449
ever, it is possible that the imagination dysfunction of alexithymics is very subtle and, therefore, was not captured by the kind of task we used. Mental rotation is rather a basic cognitive function and the test itself may not be sensitive enough to assess alexithymics’ difficulties if they are entangled in more complex, higher-order processes. Additionally, stimuli used in the task were simple and had no meaning for the participants. It is probable that the imagination dysfunction is limited only to personal, emotion-evoking, real-life images (see Mantani et al., 2005). Finally, the most perilous explanation assumes that no real imagination impairment exists for alexithymic individuals. Previous studies were carried out using self-reports measures. The results obtained by their use may be biased, especially in the case of alexithymics characterised by low self-esteem, negative perfectionism (Lundh, Johnsson, Sundqvist, & Olsson, 2002) and an aversion towards imagery. Alexithymics may present themselves as having imagination dysfunction under subjective testing, but objective measures will show the opposite, resulting in this specific dissociation. It cannot be decided which of three above presented explanations is the correct one, thus more research is needed. If our results were indeed replicated, it would suggest that one of the key components of the alexithymia syndrome is ill-defined and needs to be revisited. Finally, the hypothesis linking low level of creativity to alexithymia was supported. Alexithymic individuals were characterized by a lower level of general creativity (Urban–Jellen test) as well as by lower originality of responses (Finke’s CVT) than non-alexithymics. These results seem to reflect an ‘‘anti-creative” personality of alexithymic individuals. A rigid cognitive style and lack of openness to experience seem to disrupt and/or prevent creative thinking. Scores in two of ALEX-40 subscales (identifying and analyzing) were mostly responsible for the obtained results. The ability to perceive one’s own emotional state along with an appreciation of, and openness for, various affective phenomena seem to be crucial for the successful creative process to occur. Many researchers have pointed out the importance of emotions in creativity: affective states can trigger creation and accompany it as facilitators or energizers and even aids during the evaluation process (Kolan´czyk et al., 2004). Alexithymics are unable to derive such advantages. What is most interesting is that alexithymia appears to have an impact not only on the fluidity but also on the type of given responses. The number of humans drawn in CVT significantly differed with regard to alexithymia, favouring non-alexithymics. A similar result, in a different test, was also obtained by Roivainen and Ruuska (2005). It can be assumed that a human, being the main source of emotions, may be unconsciously treated as ‘‘taboo” and avoided as a form of self-protection. A separate study must be conducted to verify this hypothesis, though. References Bagby, R. M., Taylor, G. J., & Parker, J. D. A. (1997). The nomological domain of the alexithymia construct. In A. Vingerhoets, F. Bussel, & J. Boelhouwer (Eds.), The (non)expression of emotions in health and disease (pp. 95–102). Tilburg: University Press. Barron, F. X., & Harrington, D. M. (1981). Creativity, intelligence and personality. Annual Review of Psychology, 32, 439–476. Bethell-Fox, C. E., & Shepard, R. N. (1988). Mental rotation of stimulus complexity and familiarity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 14, 12–23. Campos, A., Chiva, M., & Moreau, M. (2000). Alexithymia and mental imagery. Personality and Individual Differences, 29, 787–791. Cohen, D. J., & Kubovy, M. (1993). Mental rotation, mental representation, and flat slopes. Cognitive Psychology, 25, 351–382. Dollinger, S. J., Urban, K. K., & James, T. A. (2004). Creativity and openness: Further validation of two creative product measures. Creativity Research Journal, 16, 35–47. Ekman, P., & Davidson, R. (1994). The nature of emotion. New York: University Press. Farell, B. (1985). ‘‘Same”–‘‘Different” judgements: A review of current controversies in perceptual comparison. Psychological Bulletin, 98, 419–456. Finke, R. A., Ward, T. B., & Smith, S. M. (1992). Creative cognition: Theory, research and applications. Cambridge: MIT Press.
450
K. Czernecka, B. Szymura / Personality and Individual Differences 45 (2008) 445–450
Friedlander, L., Lumley, M., Farchione, T., & Doyal, G. (1997). Testing the alexithymia hypothesis: Physiological and subjective responses during relaxation and stress. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 185, 233–239. Hendryx, M. S., Haviland, M. G., & Shaw, D. G. (1991). Dimensions of alexithymia and their relationships to anxiety and depression. Journal of Personality Assessment, 56, 227–237. Kolan´czyk, A., Jankowska, A., Pawłowska-Fusiara, M., & Sterczyn´ski, R. (2004). Serce w rozumie. Afektywne podstawy orientacji w otoczeniu. [The heart in the mind. The affective basis of orientation in the environment]. Gdan´sk: GWP. LeBoutillier, N., & Marks, D. F. (2003). Mental imagery and creativity: A metaanalytic review. British Journal of Psychology, 94, 29–44. Luminet, O., Bagby, R. M., Wagner, H., Taylor, G. J., & Parker, J. D. A. (1999). Relation between alexithymia and the five-factor model of personality: A facet-level analysis. Journal of Personality Assessment, 73, 345–358. Lumley, M. A., & Bazydlo, R. A. (2000). The relationship of alexithymia characteristics to dreaming. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 48, 561–567. Lundh, L., Johnsson, A., Sundqvist, K., & Olsson, H. (2002). Alexithymia, memory of emotion, emotional awareness and perfectionism. Emotion, 2, 361–379. Lundh, L., & Simonsson-Sarnecki, M. (2001). Alexithymia, emotions and somatic complaints. Journal of Personality, 69(3), 483–510. Mantani, T., Okamoto, Y., Shirao, N., Okada, G., & Yamawaki, S. (2005). Reduced activation of posterior cingulate cortex during imagery in subjects with high degrees of alexithymia: A functional magnetic resonance imaging study. Biological Psychiatry, 57, 982–990. Martinez-Sanchez, F., Ato-Garcia, M., & Ortiz-Soria, B. (2003). Alexithymia – state or trait? The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 6(1), 51–59. Maruszewski, T., & S´cigała, E. (1998). Emocje – aleksytymia – poznanie. [Emotionsalexithymia-cognition]. Poznan´: Wydawnictwo Fundacji Humaniora. McCrae, R. R., & John, O. (1992). An introduction to the five-factor model and its applications. Journal of Personality, 60, 174–214. Pandey, R., & Mandal, M. K. (1996). Eysenckian personality dimensions and alexithymia: examining the overlap in terms of perceived autonomic arousal. Personality and Individual Differences, 20, 499–504.
Roberts, J. E., & Bell, M. A. (2000). Sex differences on a computerized mental rotation task disappear with computer familiarization. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 91, 1027–1034. Roivainen, E., & Ruuska, P. (2005). The use of projective drawings to assess alexithymia: The validity of the Wartegg test. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 21, 199–201. Salminen, J. K., Saarijärvi, S., Äärelä, E., Toikka, T., & Kauhanen, J. (1999). Prevalence of alexithymia and its association with sociodemographic variables in the general population of Finland. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 46(1), 75–78. Sifneos, P. E. (1973). The prevalence of ‘alexithymic’ characteristics in psychosomatic patients. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, 22, 255–262. Sifneos, P. E. (1996). Alexithymia: Past and present. The American Journal of Psychiatry, 153(7S). Supplement. Sterczyn´ski, R., & Kolan´czyk, A. (2001). Rola bodz´ca docelowego w paradygmacie wizualnego poprzedzania. [The role of a target in the paradigm of affective visual priming]. Studia Psychologiczne, 39, 81–98. Trajdos-Giejdasz, M. (2004). Funkcjonowanie wyobraz´ni u aleksytymików i osób niealeksytymicznych. [Imagination functioning of alexithymic and non_ alexithymic individuals]. Psychologia Jakos´ci Zycia, 3, 21–38. Uzun, O. (2003). Alexithymia in male alcoholics: Study in a Turkish sample. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 44(4), 349–352. Wolfradt, U., & Pretz, J. E. (2001). Individual differences in creativity: Personality, story writing and hobby. European Journal of Personality, 15, 297–310. Zawadzki, B., Strelau, J., Szczepaniak, P., & S´liwin´ska, M. (1998). Inwentarz Osobowos´ci NEO-FFI Costy i McCrae. Adaptacja polska. Podre˛cznik. [The NEO-FFI questionnaire. Polish adaptation. The manual]. Warszawa: Pracownia Testów Psychologicznych PTP. Zimmermann, G., Rossier, J., de Stadelhofen, F. M., & Gaillard, F. (2005). Alexithymia assessment and relations with dimensions of personality. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 21, 23–33.
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Personality and Individual Differences journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/paid
Alexithymia – Imagination – Creativity _ Szymura b Karolina Czernecka a,*, Błazej a b
Jagiellonian University, Institute of Psychology, Al. Mickiewicza 3, 31-120, Cracow, Poland Warsaw School of Social Psychology, Faculty in Sopot, ul. Polna 16/20, 81-745 Sopot, Poland
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history: Received 23 September 2007 Received in revised form 8 February 2008 Accepted 20 May 2008 Available online 11 July 2008 Keywords: Alexithymia Personality Mental imagery Mental rotation Creativity
a b s t r a c t The study was aimed at examining the relationships between alexithymia, imagination functioning and the level of creativity. Contrary to previously conducted studies, a behavioural method of measuring imagination efficacy was used (neutral and emotional versions of the Mental Rotation Test). The level of creativity was assessed with the use of the Urban–Jellen test and Creative Visualisation Task. The NEO-FFI was also administered. It was hypothesized that individuals with high alexithymia scores would show a reduced imagery ability as well as low creativity level. In a sample of 136 participants, alexithymics were found to be significantly less creative than non-alexithymics. However, no differences in imagination efficacy were found with regard to alexithymia. The results are discussed in the context of personality impact on cognitive tasks performance, also shedding new light on alexithymia correlates. Ó 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction The term alexithymia (‘‘no words for feelings”) was introduced by Sifneos (1973, 1996), who coined it on the basis of clinical observations conducted on a group of psychosomatic patients. A specific pattern of difficulties emerged, including inappropriate affective responses, problems distinguishing emotions from bodily sensations, denying their very existence, shallow and primitive personality, a lack of sensitivity and chaotic relationships with other people. The most profound was the inability to find appropriate words to describe one’s affective states – a feature that gave the construct its name. Alexithymia has been closely related to a high incidence of psychosomatic illnesses and was thought to be a major risk factor. Therefore, psychologists’ efforts concentrated mainly on finding a suitable method of therapy, but it was soon discovered that all of them offered only a limited success (Sifneos, 1996). After many years of studies, an understanding of the alexithymia concept has evolved. It is now considered to be a multifaceted personality trait, normally distributed in the general population (e.g. Salminen, Saarijärvi, Äärelä, Toikka, & Kauhanen, 1999) with stable in time degree (e.g. Martinez-Sanchez, Ato-Garcia, & OrtizSoria, 2003). A number of studies have also successfully linked this construct to other basic personality dimensions. Pandey and Mandal (1996) reported that alexithymia correlates positively with neuroticism (r = 0.56) and negatively with extraversion (sociabil-
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +48 12 634 13 05x267; fax: +48 12 623 76 99. E-mail address: [email protected] (K. Czernecka). 0191-8869/$ - see front matter Ó 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2008.05.019
ity; r = 0.30). In turn, Zimmermann, Rossier, de Stadelhofen, and Gaillard (2005) revealed positive associations again with neuroticism (the strongest correlation with vulnerability; r = 0.49–0.50, depending on the alexithymia measurement method), negative with extraversion (the strongest correlation with assertiveness; r = 0.32–0.39), openness (fantasy subscale; r = 0.21–0.22) and conscientiousness (competence and self-discipline subscales; r = 0.21). A similar pattern of results was also obtained by Luminet, Bagby, Wagner, Taylor, and Parker (1999). This data corroborate the expected partial overlap between personality dimensions, proving the new conceptualization of alexithymia to be quite reasonable. With the acceptance of alexithymia as a trait, the construct is now seen as a continuum, with approximately 13% of individuals in the general population being highly alexithymic (epidemiological studies; e.g. Salminen et al., 1999). Nevertheless, the level of alexithymia is significantly higher in a number of clinical groups, including substance abusers (e.g. Uzun, 2003). Moreover, the construct is now thought to comprise two distinct types of correlates. The affective component of alexithymia includes difficulties in identifying and verbalizing feelings as well as a reduced ability to disentangle emotional experience from physiology, whereas the cognitive component comprises of a reduced fantasy life, lack of daydreaming and a concrete, externally oriented style of thinking. The affective correlates of alexithymia, being more distinctive and profound, have caught the attention of researchers for a long time. Thus, this component is now quite well understood while the cognitive has been somewhat neglected. Nevertheless, a number of researches have been targeted on the most cognitive correlate of the syndrome – the paucity of fantasy life and a
446
K. Czernecka, B. Szymura / Personality and Individual Differences 45 (2008) 445–450
dysfunctional imagination. This deficit was the first of all alexithymia correlates to be formally described, in the early sixties, later being incorporated into Sifneos’ concept (Bagby, Taylor, & Parker, 1997). Results obtained from conducted studies support the hypothesis of alexithymics being unable to evoke or/and maintain mental images. Friedlander, Lumley, Farchione, and Doyal (1997) discovered subjective differences with regard to alexithymia when autogenic relaxation was administered to the participants. Individuals with high scores of alexithymia reported less involvement and poorer imagery during the procedure. A similar result was obtained by Trajdos-Giejdasz (2004) – alexithymics were unable to visualize their own emotional states, something which proved to be rather easy for non-alexithymics. Using the Vividness of Visual Imagery Questionnaire (VVIQ), Campos, Chiva, and Moreau (2000) found that people scoring high on alexithymia scales also have high scores in VVIQ, indicating low imaging capacity, low intensity and less vivid images. Alexithymics were also proved to have not only constricted conscious imagery, but also a dysfunction of nocturnal dreams (Lumley & Bazydlo, 2000). People with alexithymia syndrome often experience dull, concrete and uninteresting dreams or claim not to have any at all. Assuming that night dreams are mentally formed and manipulated in a similar manner to daydreams, this result indirectly supports the imagination deficit hypothesis. Additionally, it also suggests that this deficiency might be deeply rooted, manifesting itself even at an unconscious, uncontrollable level. Indeed, an fMRI study conducted by Mantani, Okamoto, Shirao, Okada, and Yamawaki (2005) revealed that reduced vividness and emotional intensity of imagined scenes are accompanied by significantly reduced activation in the posterior cingulate cortex (PCC), an area associated with both memory and emotion processing. These results show that alexithymics’ imagination disturbance may have a solid, neurobiological basis. Overall, it seems that the imagination deficiency hypothesis in alexithymics has been empirically supported. Nonetheless, a number of important issues concerning research cited above must be acknowledged. First, most of the studies used questionnaires and self-description methods to estimate a participant’s performance during the imagery task. These measures are subjective, thus vulnerable to many biases (e.g. a response tendency or an inclination to present oneself in a good or a bad light). Second, only a few researches included baseline or neutral conditions in an imagery task, concentrating solely on evoking affect-loaded mental images. Unfortunately, a task constructed in such a manner makes a decision on the deficit’s severity or range practically impossible (i.e. it cannot be determined whether poor performance is a result of a general imagination dysfunction or a specific dysfunction limited to affective material only). Third, most of the studies were conducted on general population samples, generating relative alexithymia scores. Taken together, these important issues make inferences and generalizations about obtained results limited and questionable. The concept of creativity can be linked to both alexithymia and imagination, in terms of some shared features and correlates. Although the relationship between alexithymia and creativity level has not been extensively studied, a pool of empirical data indirectly suggests that such an association may exist. First, an alexithymic personality seems to be diametrically opposed to that which can be labelled a creative personality. Alexithymics tend to be very concrete, hyperlogical and mentally rigid: showing a strong preference for routine and stability. On the other hand, according to Barron and Harrington (1981), creative individuals favour novel, complex stimuli and can be broadly described as having flexible, easily adjustable minds. Alexithymia also correlates significantly but negatively with the Big Five openness trait, a variable that consistently shows a positive relationship to creativity (Wolfradt & Pretz, 2001). Secondly, some researchers suggested
that an efficient, rich imagination is necessary for creative processes to occur (Finke, Ward, & Smith, 1992), with some even claiming that differing degrees of imagery ability reflect differing creativity abilities (see LeBoutillier & Marks, 2003). As stated above, alexithymic individuals seem to have profound difficulties with visualization, experience less vivid mental images and show a tendency to avoid fantasizing. Finally, many studies stress the importance of affect and emotion during creative process (Kolan´czyk, Jankowska, Pawłowska-Fusiara, & Sterczyn´ski, 2004). Alexithymics cannot take creative advantage of their own various affective phenomena due to their inability to experience, identify and label such experiences. Bearing these factors in mind, it is reasonable to assume that the cognitive and personality characteristics of alexithymia syndrome have a negative impact on creative performance. In light of all above, we expected previously reported imagination dysfunction in alexithymics to be confirmed in our study, with the use of objective, behavioural method. The local character of alexithymic imagination shortage was also assumed: the deficit was supposed to be limited to emotional material only. Finally, we hypothesized that the structure of an alexithymic personality, as well as the lack of imaginative ability, will be linked to poor creative performance. 2. Method 2.1. Participants Hundred and thirty six volunteers took part in the study. The participants were recruited from two distinct populations in order to differentiate alexithymia scores in the whole sample: recovering alcoholics, certified by their therapists as having no cognitive impairment (N = 68; mean abstinence period was 19 months with 45 participants below 6 months) and non-drinking adults (N = 68). Table 1 provides descriptive statistics for age, gender and level of education regarding both groups. 2.2. Materials 2.2.1. Personality questionnaires The Bermond-Vorst ALEX-40 questionnaire in the Polish adaptation by Maruszewski and S´cigała (1998) was used to assess alexithymia levels. The inventory consists of five subscales, labelled: verbalizing (‘‘I find it difficult to verbally express my feelings”), emotionalizing (‘‘When friends around me argue violently, I become emotional”), identifying (‘‘When I am distressed, I know whether I am afraid or sad or angry”), fantasizing (‘‘Before I fall asleep, I make up all kinds of events, encounters and conversations”) and analyzing (‘‘I hardly ever go into my emotions”). The overall questionnaire score indicates the general alexithymia level – low scores characterize alexithymic participants.
Table 1 Descriptive statistics for participants’ age, gender and level of education
Age Gender Level of education
Mean SD Female Male Elementary Vocational Secondary University
Recovering alcoholics
Non-drinking adults
44.22 10.19 16 52 7 25 21 15
39.60 9.91 16 52 5 27 21 15
68
68
K. Czernecka, B. Szymura / Personality and Individual Differences 45 (2008) 445–450
The NEO-FFI questionnaire, designed by McCrae and Costa Jr. in the Polish adaptation by Zawadzki, Strelau, Szczepaniak, and S´liwin´ska (1998), was also employed to assess the intensity of five basic personality traits: extraversion, neuroticism, openness, conscientiousness and agreeableness. 2.2.2. Mental rotation test (MRT) The stimuli were either hexagrams or pictures of facial expressions. The hexagrams were emotionally neutral but differed in picture harmony (ordered versus chaotic representation; Sterczyn´ski & Kolan´czyk, 2001; Fig. 1). The pictures of facial expressions were chosen from the Ekman and Friesen set. The photographs were affect-loaded and differed in the expressed emotion (anger versus sadness) as well as in the intensity of the expression (low versus high; Fig. 2). We used the form identification task version of the Mental Rotation Test (see Cohen & Kubovy, 1993). Pairs of stimuli were presented simultaneously on the computer screen until a response
447
was given. The stimulus appearing on the right was rotated from 0° to 300° in 60° increments. Two versions of MRT were created: neutral (N) and affect-loaded (A). The hexagrams were presented exclusively in the N-MRT, whereas the photographs served solely as stimuli in the A-MRT. The task was to decide whether two presented hexagrams were the same or differed in shape (N-MRT) and whether the emotions expressed by the actors on two photographs were the same or different (A-MRT; response required in both versions: yes or no). There were 48 trials in each part of the MRT, with a short prior training session. The experimental design for A-MRT consisted of 2(expressed emotion) 2(emotion intensity) 6(rotation angle) 2(response required) experimental conditions, whereas the N-MRT design included 2(picture harmony) 2(stimuli repetition) 6(rotation angle) 2(response required) conditions. The validity of the MRT was confirmed in two separate pilot studies (the mental rotation effect was obtained). In the present experiment, speed and accuracy of responses were recorded, but the subsequent analyses were carried out on reaction times only. 2.2.3. Creativity tests We used two different tests to assess the level of creativity. The first one, the Creative Visualization Task (CVT; Finke et al., 1992), requires the construction of as many new objects as possible from a set of geometrical shapes, using imagination only. Two measures of creative thinking were applied: fluidity (the overall number of legal drawings) and originality (based on intra-group frequency rank of drawings). The second creativity test, a nonverbal version of the Urban–Jellen test (Dollinger, Urban, & James, 2004) was used to assess the general level of creativity. 2.3. Procedure
Fig. 1. Hexagrams used in the N-MRT, (a) ordered hexagrams, (b) chaotic hexagrams.
The experiment consisted of two separate sessions. During the first session, participants working in small groups completed personality questionnaires and creativity tests in fixed order. During the second, the MRT was administered. Half of the participants completed a N-MRT version first, whereas the second half started with an A-MRT version. 3. Results 3.1. Alexithymia sample scores The overall alexithymia score ranged from 89 to 175 points out of maximum 200 in the whole sample (M = 130.38; SD = 18.42). The two groups of participants also differed in the average alexithymia level, indicating recovering alcoholics to be more alexithymic, F(1,134) = 4.72, p < 0.03. Nevertheless, further analyses were carried out using dichotomised alexithymia level (‘‘low” versus ‘‘high”), not group factor (‘‘clinical” versus ‘‘normal”), as an independent variable. 3.2. Alexithymia and personality traits Alexithymia correlated with personality traits as measured by the Big Five questionnaire: strongly with extraversion, openness and agreeability and weakly with neuroticism. Table 2 provides detailed statistics. 3.3. Alexithymia and mental rotation
Fig. 2. Facial pictures used in the A-MRT: (a) low expression intensity, (b) high expression intensity.
Due to only partial compatibility, the scores obtained with the use of N-MRT and A-MRT were analyzed separately. A 2(alexithymia) 2(picture harmony) 2(stimuli repetition) 6(rotation angle) 2(response required) analysis of variance
448
K. Czernecka, B. Szymura / Personality and Individual Differences 45 (2008) 445–450
Table 2 ALEX-40 correlations with the NEO-FFI questionnaire The NEO-FFI factors Neuroticism ALEX-40 factors
a b c
0.31c 0.17b 0.46c 0.13 0.17 0.15a
Verbalizing Fantasizing Identifying Emotionalizing Analyzing General alexithymia
Extraversion
Openness
Agreeableness
0.40c 0.17b 0.28c 0.11 0.26c 0.37c
0.46c 0.52c 0.37c 0.31c 0.52c 0.67c
0.18b 0.10 0.23c 0.09 0.27c 0.25c
Conscientiousness 0.27c 0.15a 0.33c 0.14 0.10 0.10
0.1 < p 6 0.05. 0.05 < p 6 0.01. p < 0.01.
(ANOVA) was conducted for the neutral version of the Mental Rotation Test (N-MRT). As predicted, we obtained a linear relationship between rotation angle and reaction times, although not all differences between a given and subsequent angle were statistically significant. Picture harmony, repetition and response factors also influenced participants’ reactions that were faster when hexagrams were ordered, repeated and ‘‘different” was the required response. Table 3 provides more details. Analyses concerning alexithymia as a factor did not reveal any systematic, significant differences, either as a main effect or in interactions with any of N-MRT variables. This also holds true when the relationships between N-MRT performance level and all five alexithymia factors measured by subscales of ALEX-40 questionnaire were analyzed separately. A similar 2(alexithymia) 2(emotion intensity) 2(expressed emotion) 6(rotation angle) 2(response required) analysis of variance (ANOVA) was carried out for the affective version of the Mental Rotation Test (A-MRT). Participants’ reaction times increased with angle increment from 0° to 180° and decreased with angle increment from 180° to 300°. The reactions were faster when the intensity of facial expressions was low, photos depicted anger and ‘‘different” was the required response, what proves the intratask manipulations to be successful (see Table 4 for details). Similarly to N-MRT analyses, both general alexithymia and all five ALEX-40 factors yielded no main effects in the case of AMRT. Also, no interactions between those variables and A-MRT performance level were observed. 3.4. Alexithymia and creativity In accordance with our initial assumptions, alexithymia correlated significantly with creativity levels as measured by both methods. A high alexithymia questionnaire score was associated with better performance in the Urban–Jellen test (r = 0.29, p < 0.001). As far as Finke’s Creative Visualization Test results were
Table 3 N-MRT analysis of variance results Neutral mental rotation test (N-MRT)
Stimuli repetition Picture harmony Response required Rotation angle
Mean RT (s)
F(1,134)
p
First Second Ordered Chaotic Same Different 0°/60° 60°/120° 120°/180° 180°/240° 240°/300°
3.39 2.80 2.72 3.47 3.24 2.95 2.83/3.05 3.05/3.10 3.10/3.25 3.25/3.18 3.18/3.16
112.33
p < 0.00001
117.61
p < 0.00001
26.41
p < 0.00001
17.82 – 5.44 – –
p < 0.0001 ns p < 0.05 ns ns
Table 4 A-MRT analysis of variance results Affective mental rotation test (A-MRT)
Emotion intensity Expressed emotion Response required Rotation angle
Mean RT (s)
F(1,134)
p
Low High Anger Sadness Same Different 0°/60° 60°/120° 120°/180° 180°/240° 240°/300°
2.91 3.39 3.08 3.23 3.58 2.72 2.51/2.80 2.80/3.30 3.30/3.77 3.77/3.55 3.55/2.98
82.53 7.63
p < 0.00001 p < 0.0065
43.54
p < 0.00001
21.65 35.34 24.78 3.09 19.16
p < 0.00001 p < 0.00001 p < 0.00001 p < 0.08 p < 0.00001
Table 5 ALEX-40 correlations with creativity tests Creative visualization task Fluidity ALEX-40 factors
Verbalizing Fantasizing Identifying Emotionalizing Analyzing General alexithymia
0.01 0.07 0.19b 0.14 0.20b 0.17a
Originality 0.09 0.22b 0.24c 0.03 0.14 0.20b
‘Human’ 0.04 0.18a 0.21b 0.19b 0.24c 0.26c
Urban–Jellen score 0.05b 0.23b 0.27c 0.06 0.35c 0.29c
Fluidity: the overall number of legal drawings; Originality: intra-group frequency rank of drawings; ‘Human’: the overall number of human drawings. a 0.1 < p 6 0.05. b 0.05 < p 6 0.01. c p < 0.01.
concerned, a significant correlation between alexithymia scores and relative originality of created objects was also discovered (r = 0.20, p < 0.03). Non-alexithymic participants tended to be more original than alexithymics. In further analysis, all drawings were categorized into two classes: human and non-human, according to criteria set by Roivainen and Ruuska (2005). Alexithymia scores were found to correlate with the number of human drawings (r = 0.26, p < 0.005), but not with non-human objects. Scores obtained on two of five ALEX-40 subscales were mainly responsible for the alexithymia-creativity correlation. Creative individuals were characterized by high scores mainly in identifying and analyzing subscales but also, to a lesser extent, in fantasizing and emotionalizing. Table 5 provides a more detailed description. 4. Discussion In the presented study, we attempted to examine the moderating impact of alexithymia on the efficiency of visual imagination as
K. Czernecka, B. Szymura / Personality and Individual Differences 45 (2008) 445–450
well as on the level of creative performance. Overall, most of the gathered data substantiates that of results obtained in previously conducted studies, although some of the results are rather surprising. As expected, alexithymia was linked to a particular personality profile, as indicated by the Big Five questionnaire. Alexithymic participants were less open to experience and more introverted than their non-alexithymic counterparts. Alexithymics are characterized by social withdrawal, a reduced need for interpersonal relations (Maruszewski & S´cigała, 1998), anhedonia or inability to experience positive affect (Lundh & Simonsson-Sarnecki, 2001), all of which are well-known negative correlates of extraversion. Furthermore, openness to experience is connected with flexibility of thinking, differentiated emotions, a need for variety and holding of unconventional values (McCrae & John, 1992), while alexithymic individuals exhibit opposite qualities. It is highly possible that the rather puzzling relationship between alexithymia and agreeableness, which was also apparent, is limited only to some of the lower order traits such as altruism or modesty, thus being responsible for alexithymics’ lack of empathy and self-confidence (see Zimmermann et al., 2005, for similar results). Unfortunately, in the presented study the short version of the Big Five questionnaire was used and this explanation remains purely hypothetical. Finally, high level of neuroticism, also typical of high alexithymics, may be linked to the anxiety and depression that frequently accompany the syndrome (Hendryx, Haviland, & Shaw, 1991). Overall, our data corroborate the results reported by other authors and seems to support the view that the alexithymia syndrome corresponds to a specific configuration of basic personality traits within the Five Factor Model. As far as the Mental Rotation Test is concerned, it yielded the expected results. The classic mental rotation curve (the non-linear association between reaction times and angular departure from the canonical position) was observed for both the N-MRT and AMRT versions, although being more salient in the latter. The lesser validity of the N-MRT version is probably due to the use of ‘‘mutants”, as opposed to mirror images, in ‘‘different” response conditions. According to Cohen and Kubovy (1993), such situation might facilitate non-rotational strategies, such as features comparison. Nevertheless, the attempt to construct an emotional version of MRT can be considered to be successful. The effectiveness of most of the intra-task manipulations was consistent with previous findings (see e.g. Bethell-Fox & Shepard, 1988 for stimulus complexity effect; Roberts & Bell, 2000 for stimuli repetition effect). In the case of A-MRT, trials with anger expressions evoked shorter response times. This is also consistent with the results obtained in previous studies, showing an understandable priority for this emotion in emotional information processing (Ekman & Davidson, 1994). On the other hand, ‘‘the same” response was paradoxically more difficult than ‘‘different” condition, as indicated by reaction times. This result is inconsistent with previously conducted studies. However, as Farell (1985) suggested, such effects might be caused by specificity of stimuli. Responses in the ‘‘different” condition are faster when the differences between stimuli are clearly visible and salient, which may be the case in the stimulation used in the presented research. The most surprising result obtained in this study was the lack of a relationship between alexithymia and performance levels in both versions of the MRT task. The time needed to rotate a stimulus was not affected either by general or by subscale scores of the ALEX-40 questionnaire. Thus, the imagination deficiency hypothesis was not supported in this study. Several alternative explanations can be provided to explain such a baffling result. The most obvious one, concerning the method itself, has to be ruled out. Mental Rotation Tests met the majority of imposed requirements and proved to be valid tools in assessing various aspects of mental imagery. How-
449
ever, it is possible that the imagination dysfunction of alexithymics is very subtle and, therefore, was not captured by the kind of task we used. Mental rotation is rather a basic cognitive function and the test itself may not be sensitive enough to assess alexithymics’ difficulties if they are entangled in more complex, higher-order processes. Additionally, stimuli used in the task were simple and had no meaning for the participants. It is probable that the imagination dysfunction is limited only to personal, emotion-evoking, real-life images (see Mantani et al., 2005). Finally, the most perilous explanation assumes that no real imagination impairment exists for alexithymic individuals. Previous studies were carried out using self-reports measures. The results obtained by their use may be biased, especially in the case of alexithymics characterised by low self-esteem, negative perfectionism (Lundh, Johnsson, Sundqvist, & Olsson, 2002) and an aversion towards imagery. Alexithymics may present themselves as having imagination dysfunction under subjective testing, but objective measures will show the opposite, resulting in this specific dissociation. It cannot be decided which of three above presented explanations is the correct one, thus more research is needed. If our results were indeed replicated, it would suggest that one of the key components of the alexithymia syndrome is ill-defined and needs to be revisited. Finally, the hypothesis linking low level of creativity to alexithymia was supported. Alexithymic individuals were characterized by a lower level of general creativity (Urban–Jellen test) as well as by lower originality of responses (Finke’s CVT) than non-alexithymics. These results seem to reflect an ‘‘anti-creative” personality of alexithymic individuals. A rigid cognitive style and lack of openness to experience seem to disrupt and/or prevent creative thinking. Scores in two of ALEX-40 subscales (identifying and analyzing) were mostly responsible for the obtained results. The ability to perceive one’s own emotional state along with an appreciation of, and openness for, various affective phenomena seem to be crucial for the successful creative process to occur. Many researchers have pointed out the importance of emotions in creativity: affective states can trigger creation and accompany it as facilitators or energizers and even aids during the evaluation process (Kolan´czyk et al., 2004). Alexithymics are unable to derive such advantages. What is most interesting is that alexithymia appears to have an impact not only on the fluidity but also on the type of given responses. The number of humans drawn in CVT significantly differed with regard to alexithymia, favouring non-alexithymics. A similar result, in a different test, was also obtained by Roivainen and Ruuska (2005). It can be assumed that a human, being the main source of emotions, may be unconsciously treated as ‘‘taboo” and avoided as a form of self-protection. A separate study must be conducted to verify this hypothesis, though. References Bagby, R. M., Taylor, G. J., & Parker, J. D. A. (1997). The nomological domain of the alexithymia construct. In A. Vingerhoets, F. Bussel, & J. Boelhouwer (Eds.), The (non)expression of emotions in health and disease (pp. 95–102). Tilburg: University Press. Barron, F. X., & Harrington, D. M. (1981). Creativity, intelligence and personality. Annual Review of Psychology, 32, 439–476. Bethell-Fox, C. E., & Shepard, R. N. (1988). Mental rotation of stimulus complexity and familiarity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 14, 12–23. Campos, A., Chiva, M., & Moreau, M. (2000). Alexithymia and mental imagery. Personality and Individual Differences, 29, 787–791. Cohen, D. J., & Kubovy, M. (1993). Mental rotation, mental representation, and flat slopes. Cognitive Psychology, 25, 351–382. Dollinger, S. J., Urban, K. K., & James, T. A. (2004). Creativity and openness: Further validation of two creative product measures. Creativity Research Journal, 16, 35–47. Ekman, P., & Davidson, R. (1994). The nature of emotion. New York: University Press. Farell, B. (1985). ‘‘Same”–‘‘Different” judgements: A review of current controversies in perceptual comparison. Psychological Bulletin, 98, 419–456. Finke, R. A., Ward, T. B., & Smith, S. M. (1992). Creative cognition: Theory, research and applications. Cambridge: MIT Press.
450
K. Czernecka, B. Szymura / Personality and Individual Differences 45 (2008) 445–450
Friedlander, L., Lumley, M., Farchione, T., & Doyal, G. (1997). Testing the alexithymia hypothesis: Physiological and subjective responses during relaxation and stress. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 185, 233–239. Hendryx, M. S., Haviland, M. G., & Shaw, D. G. (1991). Dimensions of alexithymia and their relationships to anxiety and depression. Journal of Personality Assessment, 56, 227–237. Kolan´czyk, A., Jankowska, A., Pawłowska-Fusiara, M., & Sterczyn´ski, R. (2004). Serce w rozumie. Afektywne podstawy orientacji w otoczeniu. [The heart in the mind. The affective basis of orientation in the environment]. Gdan´sk: GWP. LeBoutillier, N., & Marks, D. F. (2003). Mental imagery and creativity: A metaanalytic review. British Journal of Psychology, 94, 29–44. Luminet, O., Bagby, R. M., Wagner, H., Taylor, G. J., & Parker, J. D. A. (1999). Relation between alexithymia and the five-factor model of personality: A facet-level analysis. Journal of Personality Assessment, 73, 345–358. Lumley, M. A., & Bazydlo, R. A. (2000). The relationship of alexithymia characteristics to dreaming. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 48, 561–567. Lundh, L., Johnsson, A., Sundqvist, K., & Olsson, H. (2002). Alexithymia, memory of emotion, emotional awareness and perfectionism. Emotion, 2, 361–379. Lundh, L., & Simonsson-Sarnecki, M. (2001). Alexithymia, emotions and somatic complaints. Journal of Personality, 69(3), 483–510. Mantani, T., Okamoto, Y., Shirao, N., Okada, G., & Yamawaki, S. (2005). Reduced activation of posterior cingulate cortex during imagery in subjects with high degrees of alexithymia: A functional magnetic resonance imaging study. Biological Psychiatry, 57, 982–990. Martinez-Sanchez, F., Ato-Garcia, M., & Ortiz-Soria, B. (2003). Alexithymia – state or trait? The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 6(1), 51–59. Maruszewski, T., & S´cigała, E. (1998). Emocje – aleksytymia – poznanie. [Emotionsalexithymia-cognition]. Poznan´: Wydawnictwo Fundacji Humaniora. McCrae, R. R., & John, O. (1992). An introduction to the five-factor model and its applications. Journal of Personality, 60, 174–214. Pandey, R., & Mandal, M. K. (1996). Eysenckian personality dimensions and alexithymia: examining the overlap in terms of perceived autonomic arousal. Personality and Individual Differences, 20, 499–504.
Roberts, J. E., & Bell, M. A. (2000). Sex differences on a computerized mental rotation task disappear with computer familiarization. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 91, 1027–1034. Roivainen, E., & Ruuska, P. (2005). The use of projective drawings to assess alexithymia: The validity of the Wartegg test. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 21, 199–201. Salminen, J. K., Saarijärvi, S., Äärelä, E., Toikka, T., & Kauhanen, J. (1999). Prevalence of alexithymia and its association with sociodemographic variables in the general population of Finland. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 46(1), 75–78. Sifneos, P. E. (1973). The prevalence of ‘alexithymic’ characteristics in psychosomatic patients. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, 22, 255–262. Sifneos, P. E. (1996). Alexithymia: Past and present. The American Journal of Psychiatry, 153(7S). Supplement. Sterczyn´ski, R., & Kolan´czyk, A. (2001). Rola bodz´ca docelowego w paradygmacie wizualnego poprzedzania. [The role of a target in the paradigm of affective visual priming]. Studia Psychologiczne, 39, 81–98. Trajdos-Giejdasz, M. (2004). Funkcjonowanie wyobraz´ni u aleksytymików i osób niealeksytymicznych. [Imagination functioning of alexithymic and non_ alexithymic individuals]. Psychologia Jakos´ci Zycia, 3, 21–38. Uzun, O. (2003). Alexithymia in male alcoholics: Study in a Turkish sample. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 44(4), 349–352. Wolfradt, U., & Pretz, J. E. (2001). Individual differences in creativity: Personality, story writing and hobby. European Journal of Personality, 15, 297–310. Zawadzki, B., Strelau, J., Szczepaniak, P., & S´liwin´ska, M. (1998). Inwentarz Osobowos´ci NEO-FFI Costy i McCrae. Adaptacja polska. Podre˛cznik. [The NEO-FFI questionnaire. Polish adaptation. The manual]. Warszawa: Pracownia Testów Psychologicznych PTP. Zimmermann, G., Rossier, J., de Stadelhofen, F. M., & Gaillard, F. (2005). Alexithymia assessment and relations with dimensions of personality. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 21, 23–33.