Adelstein, J. S., Shehzad, Z., Mennes, M., DeYoung, C. G., Zuo, X. N., Kelly, C., et al. (2011). Personality is reflected in the brain’s intrinsic functional architecture. PloS ONE, 6(11), e27633.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Allport, G. W., & Odbert, H. S. (1936). Trait-names: a psycho-lexical study. Psychological Monographs, 47(1), 171–220.Google Scholar

Alpaugh, P. K., Parham, I. A., Cole, K. D., & Birren, J. E. (1982). Creativity in adulthood and old age: an exploratory study. Educational Gerontology: An International Quarterly, 8(2), 101–16.Google Scholar

Andrews-Hanna, J. R., Smallwood, J., & Spreng, R. N. (2014). The default network and self-generated thought: component processes, dynamic control, and clinical relevance. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences USA, 1316(1), 29–52.Google Scholar

Baer, J. (1998). The case for domain specificity of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 11(2), 173–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Baer, J. (2010). Is Creativity Domain Specific? In Kaufman, J. C. & Sternberg, R. J. (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Creativity (p. 321). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Barron, F., & Harrington, D. M. (1981). Creativity, intelligence, and personality. Annual Review of Psychology, 32(1), 439–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Baruch, I., Hemsley, D. R., & Gray, J. A. (1988a). Differential performance of acute and chronic schizophrenics in a latent inhibition task. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 176(10), 598–606.Google Scholar

Baruch, I., Hemsley, D. R., & Gray, J. A. (1988b). Latent inhibition and “psychotic proneness” in normal subjects. Personality and Individual Differences, 9(4), 777–83.Google Scholar

Batey, M., & Furnham, A. (2006). Creativity, intelligence, and personality: a critical review of the scattered literature. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 132(4), 355–429.Google Scholar

Beaty, R. E., Benedek, M., Silvia, P. J., & Schacter, D. L. (in press a). Creative cognition and brain network dynamics. Trends in Cognitive Sciences.Google Scholar

Beaty, R. E., Kaufman, S. B., Benedek, M., Jung, R. E., Kenett, Y. N., et al. (in press b). Personality and complex brain networks: the role of openness to experience in default network efficiency. Human Brain Mapping.Google Scholar

Benedek, M., Jauk, E., Sommer, M., Arendasy, M., & Neubauer, A. C. (2014). Intelligence, creativity, and cognitive control: the common and differential involvement of executive functions in intelligence and creativity. Intelligence, 46, 73–83.Google Scholar

Benedek, M., Mühlmann, C., Jauk, E., & Neubauer, A. C. (2013). Assessment of divergent thinking by means of the subjective top-scoring method: effects of the number of top-ideas and time-on-task on reliability and validity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 7(4), 341.Google Scholar

Buckner, R. L., Andrews-Hanna, J. R., & Schacter, D. L. (2008). The brain’s default network. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences USA, 1124 (1), 1–38.Google Scholar

Carson, S. H. (2011). Creativity and psychopathology: a shared vulnerability model. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 56(3), 144.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Carson, S. H., Peterson, J. B., & Higgins, D. M. (2003). Decreased latent inhibition is associated with increased creative achievement in high-functioning individuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(3), 499–506.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Carson, S. H., Peterson, J. B., & Higgins, D. M. (2005). Reliability, validity, and factor structure of the Creative Achievement Questionnaire. Creativity Research Journal, 17(1), 37–50.Google Scholar

Chang, L., Connelly, B. S., & Geeza, A. A. (2012). Separating method factors and higher order traits of the Big Five: a meta-analytic multitrait–multimethod approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(2), 408.Google Scholar

Chermahini, S. A., & Hommel, B. (2010). The (b) link between creativity and dopamine: spontaneous eye blink rates predict and dissociate divergent and convergent thinking. Cognition, 115(3), 458–65.Google Scholar

Coan, R. W. (1972). Measurable components of openness to experience. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 39(2), 346.Google Scholar

Connelly, B. S., Ones, D. S., Davies, S. E., & Birkland, A. (2014). Opening up openness: a theoretical sort following critical incidents methodology and a meta-analytic investigation of the trait family measures. Journal of Personality Assessment, 96(1), 17–28.Google Scholar

Conner, T. S., Silvia, P. J. B., Gray, J. R., Peterson, J. B., & DeYoung, C. G. (2015). Creative days: a daily diary study of emotion, personality, and everyday creativity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 9(4), 463–70.Google Scholar

Costa, P. T. Jr, & McCrae, R. R. (1985). The NEO Personality Inventory Manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar

Costa, P. T. Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). NEO PI-R Professional Manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar

De Manzano, O., Cervenka, S., Karabanov, A., Farde, L., & Ullen, F. (2010). Thinking outside a less intact box: thalamic dopamine D2 receptor densities are negatively related to psychometric creativity in healthy individuals. PLoS ONE, 5(5), e10670.Google Scholar

Depue, R. A., Luciana, M., Arbisi, P., Collins, P., & Leon, A. (1994). Dopamine and the structure of personality: relation of agonist-induced dopamine activity to positive emotionality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(3), 485.Google Scholar

DeYoung, C. G. (2006). Higher-order factors of the Big Five in a multi-informant sample. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91(6), 1138–51.Google Scholar

DeYoung, C. G. (2013). The neuromodulator of exploration: a unifying theory of the role of dopamine in personality. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

DeYoung, C. G. (2015). Cybernetic big five theory. Journal of Research in Personality, 56, 33–58.Google Scholar

DeYoung, C. G. (2015). Openness/Intellect: A Dimension of Personality Reflecting Cognitive Exploration. In Cooper, M. L. & Larsen, R. J. (eds.), APA Handbook of Personality and Social Psychology: Personality Processes and Individual Differences (Vol. 4, pp. 369–99). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar

DeYoung, C. G., Grazioplene, R. G., & Peterson, J. B. (2012). From madness to genius: the openness/intellect trait domain as a paradoxical simplex. Journal of Research in Personality, 46(1), 63–78.Google Scholar

DeYoung, C. G., Peterson, J. B., & Higgins, D. M. (2005). Sources of openness/intellect: cognitive and neuropsychological correlates of the fifth factors of personality. Journal of Personality, 73(4), 825–58.Google Scholar

DeYoung, C. G., Quilty, L. C., & Peterson, J. B. (2007). Between facets and domains: 10 aspects of the Big Five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(5), 880–96.Google Scholar

DeYoung, C. G., Shamosh, N. A., Green, A. E., Braver, T. S., & Gray, J. R. (2009). Intellect as distinct from openness: differences revealed by fMRI of working memory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97(5), 883–92.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Dollinger, S. J., Urban, K. K., & James, T. A. (2004). Creativity and openness: further validation of two creative product measures. Creativity Research Journal, 16(1), 35–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Feist, G. J. (1998). A meta-analysis of personality in scientific and artistic creativity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2(4), 290–309.Google Scholar

Feist, G. J., & Barron, F. X. (2003). Predicting creativity from early to late adulthood: intellect, potential, and personality. Journal of Research in Personality, 37(2), 62–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fiske, D. W. (1949). Consistency of the factorial structures of personality ratings from different sources. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 44(3), 329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fitzgerald, E. T. (1966). Measurement of openness to experience: a study of regression in the service of the ego. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4(6), 655–63.Google Scholar

Ghisletta, P., & Lubart, T. (2014). Toward an integrative model of creativity and personality: theoretical suggestions and preliminary empirical testing. Journal of Creative Behavior, 50(2), 87–108.Google Scholar

Goldberg, L. R. (1990). An alternative “description of personality”: the Big-Five factor structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(6), 1216–29.Google Scholar

Goldberg, L. R. (1999). A Broad-Bandwidth, Public Domain, Personality Inventory Measuring the Lower-Level Facets of Several Five-Factor Models. In Mervielde, I., Deary, I., De Fruyt, F., & Ostendorf, F. (eds.), Personality Psychology in Europe (Vol. 7, pp. 7–28). Tilburg, Netherlands: Tilburg University Press.Google Scholar

Grazioplene, R. G., Chavez, R. S., Rustichini, A., & DeYoung, C. G. (2016). Personality, psychosis, and connectivity: white matter correlates of psychosis-linked traits support continuity between personality and psychopathology. Submitted.Google Scholar

Greenberg, D. M., Müllensiefen, D., Lamb, M. E., & Rentfrow, P. J. (2015). Personality predicts musical sophistication. Journal of Research in Personality, 58, 154–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jang, K. L., Hu, S., Livesley, W. J., Angleitner, A., Riemann, R., et al. (2002). Genetic and environmental influences on the covariance of facets defining the domains of the five-factor model of personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 33(1), 83–101.Google Scholar

Jauk, E., Benedek, M., & Neubauer, A. C. (2014). The road to experience and intellect differentially predict creative achievement in the arts and sciences: a latent variable model of ability and personality predictors. European Journal of Personality.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

John, O.P. (1990). The “Big Five” Factor Taxonomy: Dimensions of Personality in the Natural Language and in Questionnaires. In Pervin, L. A. (ed.), Handbook of Personality, Theory and Research (pp. 66–100). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar

John, O. P., Naumann, L. P., & Soto, C. J. (2008). Paradigm Shift to the Integrative Big Five Trait Taxonomy: History, Measurement, and Conceptual Issue. In John, O. P., Robins, R. W., & Pervin, L. A. (eds), Handbook of Personality: Theory and Research (pp. 114– 58). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar

Johnson, J. A. (1994). Clarification of factor five with the help of the AB5C model. European Journal of Personality, 8(4), 311–34.Google Scholar

Johnson, J. A., & Ostendorf, F. (1993). Clarification of the five-factor model with the Abridged Big Five Dimensional Circumplex. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65(3), 563.Google Scholar

Jung, R. E., Grazioplene, R., Caprihan, A., Chavez, R. S., & Haier, R. J. (2010). White matter integrity, creativity, and psychopathology: disentangling constructs with diffusion tensor imaging. PloS ONE, 5(3), e9818.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, Fast and Slow. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.Google Scholar

Karwowski, M., & Lebuda, I. (2015). The Big Five, the Huge Two, and creative self-beliefs: a meta-analysis. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts.Google Scholar

Kaufman, J. C., & Baer, J. (2004). Sure, I’m creative – but not in mathematics!: self-reported creativity in diverse domains. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 22(2), 143–55.Google Scholar

Kaufman, J. C., & Sternberg, R. J. (eds.). (2010). The Cambridge Handbook of Creativity. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Kaufman, J. C., Waterstreet, M. A., Ailabouni, H. S., Whitcomb, H. J., Roe, A. K., et al. (2010). Personality and self-perceptions of creativity across domains. Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 29(3), 193–209.Google Scholar

Kaufman, S. B. (2011). Intelligence and the Cognitive Unconscious. In Sternberg, R. J. & Kaufman, S. B. (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Intelligence (pp. 442–67). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Kaufman, S. B. (2013). Opening up openness to experience: a four-factor model and relations to creative achievement in the arts and sciences. Journal of Creative Behavior, 47(4), 233–55.Google Scholar

Kaufman, S. B., DeYoung, C. G., Gray, J. R., Jimenez, L., Brown, J. B., et al. (2010). Implicit learning as an ability. Cognition, 116(3), 321–40.Google Scholar

Kaufman, S. B., Quilty, L. C., Grazioplene, R. G., Hirsh, J. B., Gray, J. R., et al. (2015). Openness to experience and intellect differentially predict creative achievement in the arts and sciences. Journal of Personality.Google Scholar

King, L. A., Walker, L. M., & Broyles, S. J. (1996). Creativity and the five-factor model. Journal of Research in Personality, 30(2), 189–203.Google Scholar

Kozbelt, A., Kaufman, S. B., Walder, D. J., Ospina, L. H., & Kim, J. (2014). The Evolutionary Genetics of the Creativity-Psychosis Connection. In Kaufman, J. C. (ed.), Creativity and Mental Illness. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Kühn, S., Ritter, S. M., Müller, B. C., Baaren, R. B., Brass, M., et al. (2014). The importance of the default mode network in creativity – a structural MRI study. Journal of Creative Behavior, 48(2), 152–63.Google Scholar

Kyaga, S., Landén, M., Boman, M., Hultman, C. M., Långström, N., et al. (2013). Mental illness, suicide and creativity: 40-year prospective total population study. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 47(1), 83–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Lee, K., & Ashton, M. C. (2004). Psychometric properties of the HEXACO personality inventory. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 39(2), 329–58.Google Scholar

Lubow, R. E. (1989). Latent Inhibition and Conditioned Attention Theory (Vol. 9). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lubow, R. E., Ingberg-Sachs, Y., Zalstein-Orda, N., & Gewirtz, J. C. (1992). Latent inhibition in low and high “psychotic-prone” normal subjects. Personality and Individual Differences, 13(5), 563–72.Google Scholar

McCrae, R. R. (1987). Creativity, divergent thinking, and openness to experience. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(6), 1258–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Navas-Sánchez, F. J., Alemán-Gómez, Y., Sánchez-Gonzalez, J., Guzmán-De-Villoria, J. A., Franco, C., et al. (2014). White matter microstructure correlates of mathematical giftedness and intelligence quotient. Human Brain Mapping, 35(6), 2619–31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Nettle, D. (2006). Schizotypy and mental health amongst poets, visual artists, and mathematicians. Journal of Research in Personality, 40(6), 876–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nelson, B., & Rawlings, D. (2010). Relating schizotypy and personality to the phenomenology of creativity. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 36(2), 388–99.Google Scholar

Norman, W. T. (1963). Toward an adequate taxonomy of personality attributes: replicated factor structure in peer nomination personality ratings. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 66(6), 574.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Oleynick, V. C., Thrash, T. M., LeFew, M. C., Moldovan, E. G., & Kieffaber, P. D. (2014). The scientific study of inspiration in the creative process: challenges and opportunities. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8.Google Scholar

Passamonti, L., Terracciano, A., Riccelli, R., Donzuso, G., Cerasa, A., et al. (2015). Increased functional connectivity within mesocortical networks in open people. Neuroimage, 104, 301–9.Google Scholar

Peabody, D., & Goldberg, L. R. (1989). Some determinants of factor structures from personality-trait descriptors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(3), 552.Google Scholar

Penke, L., Maniega, S. M., Bastin, M. E., Valdés Hernández, M. C., Murray, C., et al. (2012). Brain white matter tract integrity as a neural foundation for general intelligence. Molecular Psychiatry, 17(10), 1026–30.Google Scholar

Perrine, N. E., & Brodersen, R. (2005). Artistic and scientific creative behavior: openness and the mediating role of interests. Journal of Creative Behavior, 39(4), 217–36.Google Scholar

Peterson, J. B., Smith, K. W., & Carson, S. (2002). Openness and extraversion are associated with reduced latent inhibition: replication and commentary. Personality and Individual Differences, 33, 1137–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Plucker, J. A., & Makel, M. C. (2010). Assessment of Creativity. In Kaufman, J. C. & Sternberg, R. J. (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Creativity (pp. 48–73). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Poe, E. A. (1899). The Mystery of Marie Roget. New York: R. F. Fenno.Google Scholar

Reber, A. S., Walkenfeld, F. F., & Hernstadt, R. (1991). Implicit and explicit learning: individual differences and IQ. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17, 888–96.Google Scholar

Runco, M. A., & Albert, R. S. (1986). Exceptional giftedness in early adolescence and intrafamilial divergent thinking. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 15(4), 335–44.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Saucier, G. (1992). Openness versus intellect: much ado about nothing? European Journal of Personality, 6(5), 381–6.Google Scholar

Saucier, G. (1994). Trapnell versus the lexical factor: more ado about nothing? European Journal of Personality, 8(4), 291–8.Google Scholar

Saucier, G. (2009). Recurrent personality dimensions in inclusive lexical studies: Indications for a Big Six structure. Journal of Personality, 77(5), 1577–1614.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Saucier, G., & Ostendorf, F. (1999). Hierarchical subcomponents of the Big Five personality factors: a cross-language replication. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76(4), 613.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Silvia, P. J., Beaty, R. E., Nusbaum, E. C., Eddington, K. M., Levin-Aspenson, H., et al. (2014). Everyday creativity in daily life: an experience-sampling study of “little c” creativity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 8(2), 183–8.Google Scholar

Silvia, P. J., Kaufman, J. C., & Pretz, J. E. (2009). Is creativity domain-specific? Latent class models of creative accomplishments and creative self-descriptions. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 3(3), 139–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Silvia, P. J., Nusbaum, E. C., Berg, C., Martin, C., & O’Connor, A. (2009). Openness to experience, plasticity, and creativity: exploring lower-order, high-order, and interactive effects. Journal of Research in Personality, 43(6), 1087–90.Google Scholar

Silvia, P. J., Wigert, B., Reiter-Palmon, R., & Kaufman, J. C. (2012). Assessing creativity with self-report scales: a review and empirical evaluation. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 6(1), 19–34.Google Scholar

Silvia, P. J., Winterstein, B. P., Willse, J. T., Barona, C. M., Cram, J. T., et al. (2008). Assessing creativity with divergent thinking tasks: exploring the reliability and validity of new subjective scoring methods. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 2(2), 68–85.Google Scholar

Simonton, D. K. (2003). Scientific creativity as constrained stochastic behavior: the integration of product, person, and process perspectives. Psychological Bulletin, 129(4), 475.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Spreng, R. N., Mar, R. A., & Kim, A. S. (2009). The common neural basis of autobiographical memory, prospection, navigation, theory of mind, and the default mode: a quantitative meta-analysis. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 21(3), 489–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Takeuchi, H., Taki, Y., Hashizume, H., Sassa, Y., Nagase, T., et al. (2012). The association between resting functional connectivity and creativity. Cerebral Cortex, 22(12), 2921–9.Google Scholar

Tellegen, A., & Atkinson, G. (1974). Openness to absorbing and self-altering experiences (“absorption”), a trait related to hypnotic susceptibility. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 83(3), 268–77.Google Scholar

Thrash, T. M., & Elliot, A. J. (2003). Inspiration as a psychological construct. Journal of Personality and Social psychology, 84(4), 871.Google Scholar

Thrash, T. M., Maruskin, L. A., Cassidy, S. E., Fryer, J. W., & Ryan, R. M. (2010). Mediating between the muse and the masses: inspiration and the actualization of creative ideas. Journal of Personality and Social psychology, 98(3), 469.Google Scholar

Tupes, E. C., & Christal, R. E. (1961). Recurrent personality factors based on trait ratings (ASD-TR-61–97). Lackland Air Force Base, TX: Aeronautical Systems Division, Personnel Laboratory (reprinted in 1992, Journal of Personality, 60, 225–51).Google Scholar

Wolfradt, U., & Pretz, J. E. (2001). Individual differences in creativity: personality, story writing, and hobbies. European Journal of Personality, 15(4), 297–310.Google Scholar

Woo, S. E., Chernyshenko, O. S., Longley, A., Zhang, Z. X., Chiu, C. Y., et al. (2014). Openness to experience: its lower level structure, measurement, and cross-cultural equivalence. Journal of Personality Assessment, 96(1), 29–45.Google Scholar

Yeo, B. T., Krienen, F. M., Sepulcre, J., Sabuncu, M. R., Lashkari, D., et al. (2011). The organization of the human cerebral cortex estimated by intrinsic functional connectivity. Journal of Neurophysiology, 106(3), 1125–65.Google Scholar

Zacks, R. T., Hasher, L., & Sanft, H. (1982). Automatic encoding of event frequency: further findings. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 8(2), 106.Google Scholar

Zillig, L. M. P., Hemenover, S. H., & Dienstbier, R. A. (2002). What do we assess when we assess a Big 5 trait? A content analysis of the affective, behavioral, and cognitive processes represented in Big 5 personality inventories. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28(6), 847–58.Google Scholar

Abraham, A., Beudt, S., Ott, D. V., & Yves von Cramon, D. (2012). Creative cognition and the brain: dissociations between frontal, parietal-temporal and basal ganglia groups. Brain Research, 1482, 55–70. doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2012.09.007Google Scholar

Adelstein, J. S., Shehzad, Z., Mennes, M., Deyoung, C. G., Zuo, X. N., et al. (2011). Personality is reflected in the brain’s intrinsic functional architecture. PloS One, 6(11), e27633. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0027633Google Scholar

Allen, T. A., & DeYoung, C. G. (2016). Personality Neuroscience and the Five Factor Model. In Widiger, T. A. (ed.), Oxford Handbook of the Five Factor Model. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Andrews-Hanna, J. R., Reidler, J. S., Sepulcre, J., Poulin, R., & Buckner, R. L. (2010). Functional-anatomic fractionation of the brain’s default network. Neuron, 65, 550–62.Google Scholar

Beaty, R. E., Benedek, M., Silvia, P. J., & Schacter, D. L. (2015a). Creative cognition and brain network dynamics. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20(2), 87–95. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2015.10.004Google Scholar

Beaty, R. E., Kaufman, S. B., Benedek, M., Jung, R. E., Kenett, Y. N., et al. (2015b). Personality and complex brain networks: the role of openness to experience in default network efficiency. Human Brain Mapping, 37(2), 773–9. doi:10.1002/hbm.23065Google Scholar

Cabeza, R., & Nyberg, L. (2000). Imaging cognition II: an empirical review of 275 PET and fMRI studies. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 12, 1–47.Google Scholar

Cattell, R. B., & Drevdahl, J. E. (1955). A comparison of the personality profile (16 P.F.) of eminent researchers with that of eminent teachers and administrators, and of the general population. British Journal of Psychology, 46(4), 248–61.Google Scholar

Cohen, M. X., Schoene-Bake, J. C., Elger, C. E., & Weber, B. (2009). Connectivity-based segregation of the human striatum predicts personality characteristics. Nature Neuroscience, 12(1), 32–4. doi:10.1038/nn.2228Google Scholar

Danielian, L. E., Iwata, N. K., Thomasson, D. M., & Floeter, M. K. (2010). Reliability of fiber tracking measurements in diffusion tensor imaging for longitudinal study. Neuroimage, 49(2), 1572–80. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.08.062Google Scholar

Deary, I. J. (2012). Intelligence. Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 453–82. doi: 10.1146/Annurev-Psych-120710-100353Google Scholar

Deary, I. J., Penke, L., & Johnson, W. (2010). The neuroscience of human intelligence differences. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 11(3), 201–11. doi: 10.1038/Nrn2793Google Scholar

Depue, R. A., & Collins, P. F. (1999). Neurobiology of the structure of personality: dopamine, facilitation of incentive motivation, and extraversion. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22(3), 491–517; discussion 518–19.Google Scholar

DeYoung, C. G. (2006). Higher-order factors of the Big Five in a multi-informant sample. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91(6), 1138–51. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.91.6.1138Google Scholar

DeYoung, C. G., & Grazioplene, R. G. (2013). “They who dream by day”: parallels between openness to experience and dreaming. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 36(6), 615; discussion 634–59. doi:10.1017/S0140525X13001283Google Scholar

DeYoung, C. G., Hirsh, J. B., Shane, M. S., Papademetris, X., Rajeevan, N. et al. (2010). Testing predictions from personality neuroscience brain structure and the Big Five. Psychological Science, 21, 820–8.Google Scholar

DeYoung, C. G., Peterson, J. B., & Higgins, D. M. (2002). Higher-order factors of the Big Five predict conformity: Are there neuroses of health? Personality and Individual Differences, 33(4), 533–52.Google Scholar

DeYoung, C. G., Peterson, J. G., & Higgins, D. M. (2005). Sources of openness/intellect: cognitive and neuropsychological correlates of the fifth factor of personality. Journal of Personality, 73(4), 825–58.Google Scholar

DeYoung, C. G., Quilty, L. C., & Peterson, J. B. (2007). Between facets and domains: 10 aspects of the Big Five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(5), 880–896.Google Scholar

DeYoung, C. G., Shamosh, N. A., Green, A. E., Braver, T. S., & Gray, J. R. (2009). Intellect as distinct from openness: differences revealed by fMRI of working memory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97(5), 883–92. doi:10.1037/a0016615Google Scholar

Dietrich, A. (2004). The cognitive neuroscience of creativity. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 1011–26.Google Scholar

Digman, J. M. (1997). Higher-order factors of the Big Five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73(6), 1246–56.Google Scholar

Eysenck, H. J. (1990). Biological Dimensions of Personality. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar

Eysenck, H. J., & Eysenck, S. B. J. (1976). Psychoticism as a Dimension of Personality. London: Hodder & Stoughton.Google Scholar

Feist, G. J. (1998). A meta-analysis of personality in scientific and artistic creativity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2(4), 290–309.Google Scholar

Fox, K. C., Spreng, R. N., Ellamil, M., Andrews-Hanna, J. R., & Christoff, K. (2015). The wandering brain: meta-analysis of functional neuroimaging studies of mind-wandering and related spontaneous thought processes. Neuroimage, 111, 611–21. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.02.039Google Scholar

Friedman, S. D., Brooks, W. M., Jung, R. E., Chiulli, S. J., Sloan, J. H., et al. (1999). Quantitative proton MRS predicts outcome after traumatic brain injury. Neurology, 52(7), 1384–91.Google Scholar

Friedman, S. D., Brooks, W. M., Jung, R. E., Hart, B. L., & Yeo, R. A. (1998). Proton MR spectroscopic findings correspond to neuropsychological function in traumatic brain injury. American Journal of Neuroradiology, 19(10), 1879–85.Google Scholar

Gasparovic, C., Bedrick, E. J., Mayer, A. R., Yeo, R. A., Chen, H., et al. (2010). Test-retest reliability and reproducibility of short-echo-time spectroscopic imaging of human brain at 3T. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, 66(2), 324–32. doi:10.1002/mrm.22858Google Scholar

Gray, J. R., Chabris, C. F., & Braver, T. S. (2003). Neural mechanisms of general fluid intelligence. Nature Neuroscience, 6, 316–22.Google Scholar

Green, A. E., Fugelsang, J. A., Kraemer, D. J., Shamosh, N. A., & Dunbar, K. N. (2006). Frontopolar cortex mediates abstract integration in analogy. Brain Research, 1096(1), 125–37. doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2006.04.024Google Scholar

Green, A. E., Kraemer, D. J., Fugelsang, J. A., Gray, J. R., & Dunbar, K. N. (2010). Connecting long distance: semantic distance in analogical reasoning modulates frontopolar cortex activity. Cerebral Cortex, 20(1), 70–6. doi:10.1093/cercor/bhp081Google Scholar

Grove, M., Pearce, E., & Dunbar, R. I. (2012). Fission-fusion and the evolution of hominin social systems. Journal of Human Evolution, 62(2), 191–200. doi:10.1016/j.jhevol.2011.10.012Google Scholar

Hirsh, J. B., Deyoung, C. G., & Peterson, J. B. (2009). Metatraits of the Big Five differentially predict engagement and restraint of behavior. Journal of Personality, 77(4), 1085–1102. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.2009.00575.xGoogle Scholar

Ishizu, T., & Zeki, S. (2013). The brain’s specialized systems for aesthetic and perceptual judgment. European Journal of Neuroscience, 37(9), 1413–20. doi:10.1111/ejn.12135Google Scholar

Jung, C. G. (1921). Psychologische Typen. Zurich: Rascher Verlag.Google Scholar

Jung, R. E. (2014). Evolution, creativity, intelligence, and madness: “Here Be Dragons”. Frontiers of Psychology, 5, 784. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00784Google Scholar

Jung, R. E., Brooks, W. M., Chiulli, S. J., Weers, D. C., Yeo, R. A., et al. (1999a). The biochemical markers of intelligence and cognition in normal human brain. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 1999, 61.Google Scholar

Jung, R. E., Brooks, W. M., Yeo, R. A., Chiulli, S. J., Weers, D. C., et al. (1999b). Biochemical markers of intelligence: a proton MR spectroscopy study of normal human brain. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B: Biological Sciences, 266(1426), 1375–9.Google Scholar

Jung, R. E., Chiulli, S. J., Yeo, R. A., & Brooks, W. M. (1999c). “Myths of neuropsychology”: intelligence and cognitive ability revisited. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 14(8), 720–1.Google Scholar

Jung, R. E., Gasparovic, C., Chavez, R. S., Caprihan, A., Barrow, R., et al. (2009a). Imaging intelligence with proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy. Intelligence, 37(2), 192–8. doi: 10.1016/J.Intell.2008.10.009Google Scholar

Jung, R. E., Gasparovic, C., Chavez, R. S., Flores, R. A., Smith, S. M., et al. (2009b). Biochemical support for the “threshold” theory of creativity: a magnetic resonance spectroscopy study. Journal of Neuroscience, 29(16), 5319–25. doi: 10.1523/Jneurosci.0588-09.2009Google Scholar

Jung, R. E., Grazioplene, R., Caprihan, A., Chavez, R. S., & Haier, R. J. (2010a). White matter integrity, creativity, and psychopathology: disentangling constructs with diffusion tensor imaging. PloS ONE, 5(3), e9818. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0009818Google Scholar

Jung, R. E., & Haier, R. J. (2007). The parieto-frontal integration theory (P-FIT) of intelligence: converging neuroimaging evidence. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 30(2), 135. doi: 10.1017/S0140525x07001185.Google Scholar

Jung, R. E., Haier, R. J., Yeo, R. A., Rowland, L. M., Petropoulos, H., et al. (2005). Sex differences in N-acetylaspartate correlates of general intelligence: an H-1-MRS study of normal human brain. Neuroimage, 26(3), 965–72. doi: 10.1016/J.Neuroimage.2005.02.039Google Scholar

Jung, R. E., Mead, B. S., Carrasco, J., & Flores, R. A. (2013). The structure of creative cognition in the human brain. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7, 330. doi: 10.3389/Fnhum.2013.00330Google Scholar

Jung, R. E., Segall, J. M., Bockholt, H. J., Flores, R. A., Smith, S. M., et al. (2010b). Neuroanatomy of creativity. Human Brain Mapping, 31(3), 398–409. doi: 10.1002/Hbm.20874Google Scholar

Jung, R. E., Yeo, R. A., Chiulli, S. J., Sibbitt, W. L., Weers, D. C., et al. (1999d). Biochemical markers of cognition: a proton MR spectroscopy study of normal human brain. Neuroreport, 10(16), 3327–31. doi: 10.1097/00001756-199911080-00014Google Scholar

Jung, R. E., Yeo, R. A., Sibbitt, W. L., Ford, C. C., Hart, B. L., et al. (2001). Gerstmann syndrome in systemic lupus erythematosus: neuropsychological, neuroimaging and spectroscopic findings. Neurocase, 7(6), 515–21. doi: 10.1093/Neucas/7.6.515Google Scholar

Kane, M. J., & Engle, R. W. (2002). The role of prefrontal cortex in working-memory capacity, executive attention, and general fluid intelligence: an individual-differences perspective. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 9(4), 637–71.Google Scholar

Krain, A. L., Wilson, A. M., Arbuckle, R., Castellanos, F. X., & Milham, M. P. (2006). Distinct neural mechanisms of risk and ambiguity: a meta-analysis of decision-making. Neuroimage, 32(1), 477–84. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2006.02.047Google Scholar

Kugler, L., & Laub, M. (1971). “Puppet show” theta rhythm. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 31, 532–3.Google Scholar

Le Bihan, D. (2003). Looking into the functional architecture of the brain with diffusion MRI. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 4, 469–80.Google Scholar

Li, W., Li, X., Huang, L., Kong, X., Yang, W., et al. (2015). Brain structure links trait creativity to openness to experience. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 10(2), 191–8. doi:10.1093/scan/nsu041Google Scholar

Lu, H., Zou, Q., Gu, H., Raichle, M. E., Stein, E. A., et al. (2012). Rat brains also have a default mode network. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the United States of America, 109(10), 3979–84. doi:10.1073/pnas.1200506109Google Scholar

Maulsby, R. L. (1971). An illustration of emotionally evoked theta rhythm in infancy: hedonic hypersynchrony. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 31(2), 157–65.Google Scholar

McCrae, R. R., & Ingraham, L. J. (1987). Creativity, divergent thinking, and openness to experience. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(6), 1258–65.Google Scholar

McCrae, R. R., & John, O. P. (1992). An introduction to the five-factor model and its applications. Journal of Personality, 60(2), 175–215.Google Scholar

McIntosh, A. M., Maniega, S. M., Lymer, G. K. S., McKirdy, J., Hall, J., et al. (2008). White matter tractography in bipolar disorder and schizophrenia. Biological Psychiatry, 64, 1088–92.Google Scholar

Mellars, P. (2004). Neanderthals and the modern human colonization of Europe. Nature, 432(7016), 461–5. doi:10.1038/nature03103Google Scholar

Mellars, P. (2006). Why did modern human populations disperse from Africa ca. 60,000 years ago? A new model. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the United States of America, 103(25), 9381–6. doi:10.1073/pnas.0510792103Google Scholar

Niendam, T. A., Laird, A. R., Ray, K. L., Dean, Y. M., Glahn, D. C., et al. (2012). Meta-analytic evidence for a superordinate cognitive control network subserving diverse executive functions. Cognitive, Affective and Behavioral Neuroscience, 12(2), 241–68. doi:10.3758/s13415-011-0083-5Google Scholar

Patel, T., & Talcott, J. B. (2014). Moderate relationships between NAA and cognitive ability in healthy adults: implications for cognitive spectroscopy. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8(39), 1–10.Google Scholar

Popa, D., Popescu, A. T., & Pare, D. (2009). Contrasting activity profile of two distributed cortical networks as a function of attentional demands. Journal of Neuroscience, 29(4), 1191–201. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4867-08.2009Google Scholar

Potts, R. (2002). Complexity and Adaptability in Human Evolution. In Moffat, M. G. a. A. S. (ed.), Probing Human Origins. Cambridge, MA: American Academy of Arts and Sciences.Google Scholar

Prabhakaran, V., Smith, J. A., Desmond, J. E., Glover, G. H., & Gabrieli, J. D. (1997). Neural substrates of fluid reasoning: an fMRI study of neocortical activation during performance of the Raven’s Progressive Matrices Test. Cognitive Psychology, 33, 43–63.Google Scholar

Raichle, M. E. (2015). The brain’s default mode network. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 38, 433–47.Google Scholar

Raichle, M. E., MacLeod, A. M., Snyder, A. Z., Powers, W. J., Gusnard, D. A., et al. (2001). A default mode of brain function. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 98, 676–82.Google Scholar

Ridderinkhof, K. R., Ullsperger, M., Crone, E. A., & Nieuwenhuis, S. (2004). The role of the medial frontal cortex in cognitive control. Science, 306, 443–7.Google Scholar

Ross, A. J., & Sachdev, P. S. (2004). Magnetic resonance spectroscopy in cognitive research. Brain Research Reviews, 44, 83–102.Google Scholar

Rowland, L. M., Mullins, P. G., Jung, R. E., Lenroot, R., Lauriello, J., et al. (2003). Neurochemistry in chronic schizophrenia: a 4T-proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy study. Schizophrenia Research, 60(1), 245–55. doi: 10.1016/S0920-9964(03)81257-4Google Scholar

Ryman, S. G., Gasparovic, C., Bedrick, E. J., Flores, R. A., Marshall, A. N., et al. (2011). Brain biochemistry and personality: a magnetic resonance spectroscopy study. PloS ONE, 6(11), e26758. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0026758Google Scholar

Sampaio, A., Soares, J. M., Coutinho, J., Sousa, N., & Goncalves, O. F. (2014). The Big Five default brain: functional evidence. Brain Structure & Function, 219(6), 1913–22. doi:10.1007/s00429-013-0610-yGoogle Scholar

Shulman, G. L., Fiez, J. A., Corbetta, M., Buckner, R. L., Miezin, F. M., et al. (1997). Common blood flow changes across visual tasks: II. Decreases in cerebral cortex. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 9(5), 648–63. doi:10.1162/jocn.1997.9.5.648Google Scholar

Stafford, J. M., Jarrett, B. R., Miranda-Dominguez, O., Mills, B. D., Cain, N., et al. (2014). Large-scale topology and the default mode network in the mouse connectome. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 111(52), 18745–50. doi:10.1073/pnas.1404346111Google Scholar

Stawarczyk, D., & D’Argembeau, A. (2015). Neural correlates of personal goal processing during episodic future thinking and mind-wandering: an ALE meta-analysis. Human Brain Mapping, 36(8), 2928–47. doi:10.1002/hbm.22818Google Scholar

Stough, C., Donaldson, C., Scarlata, B., & Ciorciari, J. (2001). Psychophysiological correlates of the NEO PI-R Openness, Agreeableness and Conscientiousness: preliminary results. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 41(1), 87–91. doi:10.1016/S0167-8760(00)00176-8Google Scholar

Sutin, A. R., Beason-Held, L. L., Resnick, S. M., & Costa, P. T. (2009). Sex differences in resting-state neural correlates of openness to experience among older adults. Cerebral Cortex, 19(12), 2797–802. doi:10.1093/cercor/bhp066Google Scholar

Swick, D., & Turken, A. U. (2002). Dissociation between conflict detection and error monitoring in the human anterior cingulate cortex. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 99(25), 16354–9. doi:10.1073/pnas.252521499Google Scholar

Taki, Y., Thyreau, B., Kinomura, S., Sato, K., Goto, R., et al. (2013). A longitudinal study of the relationship between personality traits and the annual rate of volume changes in regional gray matter in healthy adults. Human Brain Mapping, 34(12), 3347–53. doi:10.1002/hbm.22145Google Scholar

Vessel, E. A., Starr, G. G., & Rubin, N. (2013). Art reaches within: aesthetic experience, the self and the default mode network. Frontiers of Neuroscience, 7, 258. doi:10.3389/fnins.2013.00258Google Scholar

Vincent, J. L., Patel, G. H., Fox, M. D., Snyder, A. Z., Baker, J. T., et al. (2007). Intrinsic functional architecture in the anaesthetized monkey brain. Nature, 447(7140), 83–6. doi:10.1038/nature05758Google Scholar

Wren, C. D., Xue, J. Z., Costopoulos, A., & Burke, A. (2014). The role of spatial foresight in models of hominin dispersal. Journal of Human Evolution, 69, 70–8. doi:10.1016/j.jhevol.2014.02.004Google Scholar

Wynn, T., & Coolidge, F. L. (2010). Beyond symbolism and language. Current Anthropology, 51(1), S5–16.Google Scholar

Xu, J., & Potenza, M. N. (2012). White matter integrity and five-factor personality measures in healthy adults. Neuroimage, 59(1), 800–7. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.07.040Google Scholar

Ackerman, P. L. (1996). A theory of adult intellectual development: process, personality, interests, and knowledge. Intelligence, 22(2), 227–57.Google Scholar

Ackerman, P. L., Bowen, K. R., Beier, M., & Kanfer, R. (2001). Determinants of individual differences and gender differences in knowledge. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(4), 797–825.Google Scholar

Ackerman, P. L., & Heggestad, E. D. (1997). Intelligence, personality, and interests: evidence for overlapping traits. Psychological Bulletin, 121(2), 219–45.Google Scholar

Amabile, T. M. (1982). Social psychology of creativity: a consensual assessment technique. Personality Processes and Individual Differences, 43(5), 997–1013.Google Scholar

Amabile, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity: a componential conceptualization. Personality Processes and Individual Differences, 45(2), 357–76.Google Scholar

Amabile, T. M. (1988). A model of creativity and innovation in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 10, 123–67.Google Scholar

Amabile, T. M., Conti, R., Coon, H., Lazenby, J., & Herron, M. (1996). Assessing the work environment for creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 39(5), 1154–84.Google Scholar

Assouline, M., & Meir, E. I. (1987). Meta-analysis of the relationship between congruence and well-being measures. Journal of Vocational Behaviors, 31(3), 319–32.Google Scholar

Baer, J. (1991). Generality of creativity across performance domains. Creativity Research Journal, 4(1), 23–39.Google Scholar

Baer, J. (2010). Is Creativity Domain Specific? In Kaufman, J. C. & Sternberg, R. J. (eds.), Cambridge Handbook of Creativity (pp. 321–41). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Baer, J. (2012). Domain specificity and the limits of creativity theory. Journal of Creative Behavior, 46(1), 16–29.Google Scholar

Baer, M., & Oldham, G. R. (2006). The curvilinear relationship between experienced creative time pressure and creativity: moderating effects of openness to experience and support for creativity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 963–70.Google Scholar

Barrick, M. R., Mount, M. K., & Gupta, R. (2003). Meta-analysis of the relationship between the five-factor model of personality and Holland’s occupational types. Personnel Psychology, 56, 45–74.Google Scholar

Batey, M. (2012). The measurement of creativity: from definitional consensus to the introduction of a new heuristic framework. Creativity Research Journal, 24(1), 55–65.Google Scholar

Batey, M., Chamorro-Premuzic, T., & Furnham, A. (2009). Intelligence and personality as predictors of divergent thinking: the role of general, fluid and crystallized intelligence. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 4, 60–9.Google Scholar

Batey, M., Chamorro-Premuzic, T., & Furnham, A. (2010a). Individual differences in ideational behavior: can the Big Five and psychometric intelligence predict creativity scores? Creativity Research Journal, 22(1), 90–7.Google Scholar

Batey, M., & Furnham, A. (2006). Creativity, intelligence and personality: a critical review of the scattered literature. Genetic, General and Social Psychology Monographs, 132, 355–429.Google Scholar

Batey, M., Furnham, A., & Safiullina, X. (2010b). Intelligence, general knowledge and personality as predictors of creativity. Learning and Individual Differences, 20, 532–5.Google Scholar

Bender, S. W., Nibbelink, B., Towner-Thyrum, E., & Vredenburg, D. (2013). Defining characteristics of creative women. Creativity Research Journal, 25(1), 38–47.Google Scholar

Berlyne, D. E. (1960). Toward a Theory of Exploratory Behavior: II. Arousal Potential, Perceptual Curiosity, and Learning. In Berlyne, D. E. (ed.), Conflict, Arousal, and Curiosity (pp. 193–227), New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar

Brophy, D. R. (1998). Understanding, measuring, and enhancing individual creative problem-solving efforts. Creativity Research Journal, 11(2), 123–50.Google Scholar

Chamorro-Premuzic, T., & Reichenbacher, L. (2008). Effects of personality and threat of evaluation on divergent and convergent thinking. Journal of Research in Personality, 42, 1095–101.Google Scholar

Colquitt, J. A., & Simmering, M. J. (1998). Conscientiousness, goal orientation, and motivation to learn during the learning process: a longitudinal study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(4), 654–65.Google Scholar

Conti, R., Coon, H., & Amabile, T. M. (1996). Evidence to support the componential model of creativity: secondary analyses of three studies. Creativity Research Journal, 9(4), 385–9.Google Scholar

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1988). The Flow Experience and Its Significance for Human Psychology. In Csikszentmihalyi, M. & Csikszentmihalyi, I. S. (eds.), Optimal Experience: Psychological Studies of Flow in Consciousness (pp. 15–35). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Denissen, J. J., Zarrett, N. R., & Eccles, J. S. (2007). I like to do it, I’m able, and I know I am: longitudinal couplings between domain-specific achievement and self-concept, and interest. Child Development, 78(2), 430–47.Google Scholar

DeYoung, C. G., Quilty, L. C., & Peterson, J. B. (2007). Between facets and domains: 10 aspects of the Big Five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(5), 880–96.Google Scholar

Dollinger, S. J., Urban, K. K., & James, T. J. (2004). Creativity and openness: further validation of two creative products measures. Creativity Research Journal, 16(1), 35–48.Google Scholar

Feist, G. J. (1998). A meta-analysis of personality in scientific and artistic creativity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2, 290–309.Google Scholar

Feist, G. J. (2006). How development and personality influence scientific though, interest, and achievement. Review of General Psychology, 10(2), 163–82.Google Scholar

Ford, C. M. (1996). A theory of individual creative action in multiple social domains. Academy of Management Review, 21(4), 1112–42.Google Scholar

Ford, C. M., & Gioia, D. A. (2000). Factors influencing creativity in the domain of managerial decision making. Journal of Management, 26, 705–32.Google Scholar

Furnham, A., & Bachtiar, V. (2008). Personality and intelligence as predictors of creativity. Personality and Individual Differences, 45, 613–17.Google Scholar

Furnham, A., Batey, M., Anand, K., & Manfield, J. (2008). Personality, hypomania, intelligence, and creativity. Personality and Individual Differences, 44, 1060–9.Google Scholar

Furnham, A., Crump, J., & Swami, V. (2008–9). Abstract reasoning and Big Five personality correlates of creativity in a British occupational sample. Imagination, Cognition, and Personality, 28(4), 361–70.Google Scholar

Furnham, A., Hughes, D. J., & Marshall, E. (2013). Creativity, OCD, narcissism, and the Big Five. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 10, 91–8.Google Scholar

Gardner, H. (1988). Creativity: an interdisciplinary perspective. Creativity Research Journal, 1(1), 8–26.Google Scholar

George, J. M., & Zhou, J. (2001). When openness to experience and conscientiousness are related to creative behavior: an interactional approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 513–24.Google Scholar

Getzels, J. W., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1976). The Creative Vision: A Longitudinal Study of Problem Finding in Art. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar

Gong, Y., Cheung, S. Y., Wang, M., & Huang, J. C. (2012). Unfolding the proactive process for creativity: integration of the employee proactivity, information exchange, and psychological safety. Journal of Management, 38(5), 1611–33.Google Scholar

Gottfredson, G. D. (1977). Career stability and redirection in adulthood. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62, 436–45.Google Scholar

Grosul, M., & Feist, G. J. (2014). The creative person in science. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 8(1), 30–43.Google Scholar

Guilford, J. P. (1950). Creativity. American Psychologist, 5, 444–54.Google Scholar

Guilford, J. P. (1956). The structure of intellect. Psychological Bulletin, 53(4), 267–93.Google Scholar

Hambrick, D. Z., Pink, J. E., Meinz, E. J., Pettibone, J. C., & Oswald, F. L. (2008). The roles of ability, personality, and interests in acquiring current events knowledge: a longitudinal study. Intelligence, 36(3), 261–78.Google Scholar

Hart, J. W., Stasson, M. F., Mahoney, J. M., & Story, P. (2007). The Big Five and achievement motivation: exploring the relationship between personality and a two-factor model of motivation. Individual Differences Research, 5(4), 267–74.Google Scholar

Hidi, S., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2000). Motivating the academically unmotivated: a critical issue of the 21st century. Review of Educational Research, 70(2), 151–79.Google Scholar

Hocevar, D. (1976). Dimensionality of creativity. Psychological Reports, 39, 869–70.Google Scholar

Holland, J. L. (1959). A theory of vocational choice. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 6(1), 35–45.Google Scholar

Holland, J. L. (1985). Making Vocational Choices: A Theory of Vocational Personalities and Work Environments. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar

Holland, J. L. (ed.). (1997). Making Vocational Choices: A Theory of Vocational Personalities and Work Environments (3rd edn.). Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar

Holland, J. L., Sorenson, A. B., Clark, J. P., Nafziger, D. H., & Blum, Z. D. (1973). Applying an occupational classification to a representative sample of work histories. Journal of Applied Psychology, 58, 34–41.Google Scholar

Hughes, D. J., Furnham, A., & Batey, M. (2013). The structure and personality of self-rated creativity. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 9, 76–84.Google Scholar

Karwowski, M., Lebuda, I., Wisniewska, E., & Gralewski, J. (2013). Big Five personality traits as predictors of creative self-efficacy and creative personal identity: does genera matter?. Journal of Creative Behavior, 47(3), 215–32.Google Scholar

Kaufman, S. B. (2013). Opening up openness to experience: a four-factor model and relations to creative achievement in the arts and sciences. Journal of Creative Behavior, 47(4), 233–55.Google Scholar

Kaufman, J. C., Baer, J., Cropley, D. H., Reiter-Palmon, R., & Sinnet, S. (2013). Furious activity vs. understanding: how much expertise is needed to evaluate creative work?. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 7(4), 332–40.Google Scholar

Kaufman, J. C., & Beghetto, R. A. (2009). Beyond big and little: the four C model of creativity. Review of General Psychology, 13(1), 1–12.Google Scholar

Kaufman, J. C., & Beghetto, R. A. (2013). Do people recognize the four Cs? Examining layperson conceptions of creativity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 7(3), 229–36.Google Scholar

Kaufman, J. C., Pumaccahua, T., & Holt, R. (2013). Personality and creativity in realistic, investigative, artistic, social, and enterprising college majors. Personality and Individual Differences, 54, 913–17.Google Scholar

Kaufman, J. C., Waterstreet, M. A., Ailabouni, H. S., Whitcomb, H. J., Roe, A. K., et al. (2009–10). Personality and self-perceptions of creativity across domains. Imagination, Cognition, and Personality, 29, 193–209.Google Scholar

King, L., Walker, L., & Broyles, S. (1996). Creativity and the five factor model. Journal of Research in Personality, 30, 189–203.Google Scholar

Larson, L. M., Rottinghaus, P. J., & Borgen, F. H. (2002). Meta-analyses of Big Six interests and Big Five personality factors. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 61(2), 217–39.Google Scholar

Litman, J. A. (2005). Curiosity and the pleasures of learning: wanting and liking new information. Cognition and Emotion, 19, 793–814. doi: 10.1080/02699930541000101Google Scholar

Madjar, N. (2008). Emotional and informational support from different sources and employee creativity. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 81, 83–100.Google Scholar

Moneta, G. B., Amabile, T. M., Schatzel, E. A., & Kramer, S. J. (2010). Multirater assessment of creative contributions to team projects in organizations. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 19(2), 150–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McCrae, R. R. (1987). Creativity, divergent thinking, and openness to experience. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(6), 1258–65.Google Scholar

Montag, T., Maertz, C. P., & Baer, M. (2012). A critical analysis of the workplace creativity criterion space. Journal of Management, 38(4), 1362–86.Google Scholar

Mumford, M. D. (2003). Where have we been, where are we going? Taking stock in creativity research. Creativity Research Journal, 15(2–3), 107–20.Google Scholar

Mumford, M. D., Baughman, W. A., Supinski, E. P., & Maher, M. A. (1996a). Process-based measured of creative problem-solving skills: II. Information encoding. Creativity Research Journal, 9(1), 77–88.Google Scholar

Mumford, M. D. Baughman, W. A., Threlfall, K. V., Supinski, E. P., & Costanza, D. P. (1996b). Process-based measures of creative problem-solving skills: I. Problem construction. Creativity Research Journal, 9(1), 63–76.Google Scholar

Mumford, M. D., Medeiros, K. E., & Partlow, P. J. (2012). Creative thinking: processes, strategies, and knowledge. Journal of Creative Behavior, 46(1), 30–47.Google Scholar

Mumford, M.D., Supinski, E. P., Threlfall, K. V., & Baughman, W. A. (1996c). Process-based measures of creative problem-solving skills: III. Category selection. Creativity Research Journal, 9(4), 395–406.Google Scholar

Mussel, P. (2013). Intellect: a theoretical framework for personality traits related to intellectual achievements. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104, 885–906.Google Scholar

Mussel, P., McKay, A., Ziegler, M., Hewig, J., & Kaufman, J. C. (2015). Predicting creativity based on the facets of the theoretical intellect framework. European Journal of Personality, 29(4), 459–67. doi: 10.1002/per.2000Google Scholar

Ng, T. W. H., & Feldman, D. C. (2012). A comparison of self-ratings and non-self-report measures of employee creativity. Human Relations, 65(8), 1021–47.Google Scholar

Nusbaum, E. C., & Silvia, P. J. (2011). Are openness and intellect distinct aspects of openness to experience? A test of the O/I model. Personality and Individual Differences, 51, 571–4. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2011.05.013Google Scholar

Nye, C. D., Su, R., Rounds, J., & Drasgow, F. (2012). Vocational interests and performance. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(4), 384–403.Google Scholar

Oldham, G. R., & Cummings, A. (1996). Employee creativity: personal and contextual factors at work. Academy of Management Journal, 39(3), 607–34.Google Scholar

Perrine, N. E., & Brodersen, R. M. (2005). Artistic and scientific creative behavior: openness and the mediating role of interests. Journal of Creative Behavior, 39, 217–36.Google Scholar

Plucker, J. A. (1998). Beware of simple conclusions: the case for content generality of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 11(2), 179–82.Google Scholar

Plucker, J. A. (1999). Reanalyses of student responses to creativity checklists: evidence of content generality. Journal of Creative Behavior, 33(2), 126–37.Google Scholar

Puccio, G. J., & Cabra, J. F. (2010). Organizational Creativity: A Systems Approach. In Kaufman, J. C. & Sternberg, R. J. (eds.), Cambridge Handbook of Creativity (pp. 145–73). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Raine, A., Reynolds, C., Venables, P. H., & Mednick, S. A. (2002). Stimulation seeking and intelligence: a prospective longitudinal study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(4), 663–74.Google Scholar

Raja, U., & Johns, G. (2010). The joint effects of personality and job scope on in-role performance, citizenship behaviors, and creativity. Human Relations, 63(7), 981–1005.Google Scholar

Reiter-Palmon, R., Illies, M. Y., Cross, L. K., Buboltz, C., & Nimps, T. (2009). Creativity and domain specificity: the effect of task type on multiple indexes of creative problem-solving. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 3(2), 73–80.Google Scholar

Reiter-Palmon, R., Mumford, M. D., O’Connor Boes, J., & Runco, M. A. (1997). Problem construction and creativity: the role of ability, cue consistency, and active processing. Creativity Research Journal, 10(1), 9–23.Google Scholar

Rhodes, M. (1961). An analysis of creativity. Phi Delta Kappan, 42(7), 305–10.Google Scholar

Rounds, J., & Su, R. (2014). The nature and power of interests. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 23, 98–103.Google Scholar

Runco, M. A. (2004). Creativity. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 657–87.Google Scholar

Runco, M. A., & Charles, R. E. (1993). Judgements of originality and appropriateness as predictors of creativity. Personality and Individual Differences, 15(5), 537–46.Google Scholar

Runco, M. A., Illies, J. J., & Eisenman, R. (2005). Creativity, originality, and appropriateness: what do explicit instructions tell us about their relationships? Journal of Creative Behavior, 39(2), 137–48.Google Scholar

Scott, G. M., Lonergan, D. C., & Mumford, M. D. (2005). Conceptual combination: alternative knowledge structures, alternative heuristics. Creativity Research Journal, 17(1), 79–98.Google Scholar

Scratchley, L. S., & Hakstian, A. R. (2000–1). The measurement and prediction of managerial creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 13(3–4), 367–84.Google Scholar

Silvia, P. J. (2006). Discovering the Psychology of Interest. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Silvia, P. J. (2008). Another look at creativity and intelligence: exploring higher-order models and probable confounds. Personality and Individual Differences, 44, 1012–21.Google Scholar

Silvia, P. J., Kaufman, J. C., & Pretz, J. E. (2009). Is creativity domain-specific? Latent class models of creative accomplishments and creative self-descriptions. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 3, 139–48.Google Scholar

Silvia, P. J., Nusbaum, E. C., Berg, C., Martin, C., & O’Conner, A. (2009). Openness to experience, plasticity, and creativity: exploring lower order, higher order, and interactive effects. Journal of Research in Personality, 43, 1087–90.Google Scholar

Simmons, A. L. (2011). The influence of openness to experience and organizational justice on creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 23(1), 9–23.Google Scholar

Simonton, D. K. (2014). Creative performance, expertise acquisition, individual differences, and developmental antecedents: an integrative research agenda. Intelligence, 45, 66–73.Google Scholar

Sternberg, R. J. (1989). Domain-generality versus domain-specificity: the life and impending death of a false dichotomy. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 35(1), 115–30.Google Scholar

Sternberg, R. J. (2005). Creativity or creativities? International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 63, 370–82.Google Scholar

Strickland, S., & Towler, A. (2011). Correlates of creative behaviour: the role of leadership and personal factors. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 28, 41–51.Google Scholar

Su, R., & Nye, C. D. (in press). Interests and Person-Environment Fit: A New Perspective on Workforce Readiness and Success. In J. Burrus, K. D. Mattern, B. Naemi, & R. D. Roberts (eds.), Building Better Students: Preparation for the Workforce. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Sullivan, D. M., & Ford, C. M. (2010). The alignment of measures and constructs in organizational research: the case of testing measurement models of creativity. Journal of Business Psychology, 25, 505–21.Google Scholar

Sung, S. Y., & Choi, J. N. (2009). Do Big Five personality factors affect individual creativity? The moderating role of extrinsic motivation. Social Behavior and Personality, 37(7), 941–956.Google Scholar

Taft, R., & Rossiter, J. R. (1966). The remote associates test: divergent or convergent thinking? Psychological Reports, 19, 1313–14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Turner, S. A., & Silvia, P. J. (2006). Must interesting things be pleasant? A test of competing appraisal structures. Emotion, 6(4), 670–4.Google Scholar

Walker, B. R., & Jackson, C. J. (2014). How the five factor model and revised reinforcement sensitivity theory predict divergent thinking. Personality and Individual Differences, 57, 54–8.Google Scholar

Woo, S. E., Chernyshenko, O. S., Longley, A., Zhang, Z., Chiu, C. Y., et al. (2014). Openness to experience: its lower-level structure, measurement, and cross-cultural equivalence. Journal of Personality Assessment, 96(1), 29–45.Google Scholar

Zeng, L., Proctor, R. W., & Salvendy, G. (2011). Can traditional divergent thinking tests be trusted in measuring and predicting real-world creativity? Creativity Research Journal, 23(1), 24–7.Google Scholar

Zhou, J., & Hoever, I. J. (2014). Research on workplace creativity: a review and redirection. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1, 333–59.Google Scholar

Ziegler, M., Danay, E., Heene, M., Asendorpf, J., & Bühner, M. (2012). Openness, fluid intelligence, and crystallized intelligence: toward an integrative model. Journal of Research in Personality, 46(2), 173–83.Google Scholar

Acar, S., & Sen, S. (2013). A multilevel meta-analysis of the relationship between creativity and schizotypy. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 7(3), 214–28. doi:10.1037/a0031975Google Scholar

Agnoli, S., Franchin, L., Rubaltelli, E., & Corazza, G. E. (2015). An eye-tracking analysis of irrelevance processing as moderator of openness and creative performance. Creativity Research Journal, 27(2), 125–32. doi:10.1080/10400419.2015.1030304Google Scholar

American Psychiatric Association (2013). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual 5. Washington, DC: APA.Google Scholar

Austin, E. J. (2005). Personality correlates of the broader autism phenotype as assessed by the Autism Spectrum Quotient (AQ). Personality and Individual Differences, 38, 451–60.Google Scholar

Babbage, D. R., & Ronan, K. R. (2000). Philosophical worldview and personality factors in traditional and social scientists: study the world in our own image. Personality and Individual Differences, 28, 405–20.Google Scholar

Baron-Cohen, S., Wheelwright, S., Stott, C., Bolton, P., & Goodyer, I. (1997). Is there a link between engineering and autism? Autism, 1, 101–9.Google Scholar

Baron-Cohen, S. Bolton, P., Wheelwright, S., Short, L., Mead, G., et al. (1998). Autism occurs more often in families of physicists, engineers, and mathematicians, Autism, 2, 296–301.Google Scholar

Baron-Cohen, S., Wheelwright, S., Burtenshaw, A., & Hobson, E. (2007). Mathematical talent is linked to autism. Human Nature, 18, 125–31. doi: 10.1007/s12110-007–9014-0.Google Scholar

Baron-Cohen, S., Wheelwright, S., Robinson, J., & Woodbury-Smith, M. (2005). The Adult Asperger Assessment (AAA): A diagnostic method. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 35, 807–19.Google Scholar

Barron, F. X. (1955). The disposition toward originality. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51, 478–85.Google Scholar

Barron, F. X. (1963). Creativity and Psychological Health. New York: Van Nostrand.Google Scholar

Batey, M., & Furnham, A. (2008). The relationship between measures of creativity and schizotypy. Personality and Individual Differences, 45, 816–21.Google Scholar

Batey, M., Chamorro-Premuzic, T., & Furnham, A. (2010). Individual differences in ideational behavior: can the Big Five and psychometric intelligence predict creativity scores? Creativity Research Journal, 22(1), 90–7. doi:10.1080/10400410903579627Google Scholar

Billington, J., Baron-Cohen, S., & Wheelwright, S. (2007). Cognitive style predicts entry into physical sciences and humanities: questionnaire and performance tests of empathy and systemizing. Learning and Individual Differences, 17, 260–8.Google Scholar

Block, J. (1978). The Q-Sort Method in Personality Assessment and Psychiatric Research. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.Google Scholar

Busse, T. V., & Mansfield, R. S. (1984). Selected personality traits and achievement in male scientists. Journal of Psychology, 116, 117–31.Google Scholar

Carroll, J. M., & Yung, C. K. (2006). Sex and discipline differences in empathizing, systemizing, and autistic symptomatology: evidence from a student population. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 36, 949–57.Google Scholar

Carson, S. H. (2011). Creativity and psychopathology: a shared vulnerability model. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 56, 144–53.Google Scholar

Carson, S. H. (2014). Leveraging the “mad genius” debate: why we need a neuroscience of creativity and psychopathology. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, 1–4.Google Scholar

Casanova, M. F., Switala, A. E., Trippe, J., & Fitzgerald, M. (2007). Comparative minicolumnar morphometry of three distinguished scientists. Autism, 11, 557–69.Google Scholar

Chambers, J. A. (1964). Relating personality and biographical factors to scientific creativity. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 78, 1–20.Google Scholar

Chang, C., Wang, J., Liang, C.-T., & Liang, C. (2014). Curvilinear effects of openness and agreeableness on the imaginative capability of student designers. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 14, 68–75. doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2014.09.001Google Scholar

Chamorro-Premuzic, T. (2006). Creativity versus conscientiousness: which is a better predictor of student performance? Journal of Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20, 521–31.Google Scholar

Chiang, Y., Hsu, C., & Shih, H. (2015). Experienced high performance work system, extroversion personality, and creativity performance. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 32(2), 531–49. doi:10.1007/s10490-014–9403-yGoogle Scholar

Claridge, G., Pryor, R., & Watkins, G. (1990). Sounds from the Bell Jar: Ten Psychotic Authors. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar

Conway, J. B. (1988). Differences among clinical psychologists: scientists, practitioners, and science-practitioners. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 19, 642–55.Google Scholar

DeYoung, C. G., Grazioplene, R. G., & Peterson, J. B. (2012). From madness to genius: the openness/intellect trait domain as a paradoxical simplex. Journal of Research in Personality, 46(1), 63–78.Google Scholar

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.Google Scholar

Eysenck, H. J. (1993). Creativity and personality: suggestions for a theory. Psychological Inquiry, 4, 147–78.Google Scholar

Eysenck, H. J. (1995). Genius: The Natural History of Creativity. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Eysenck, S. G., White, O., & Eysenck, H. J. (1976). Personality and mental illness. Psychological Reports, 39, 1011–22.Google Scholar

Feist, G. J. (1993). A structural model of scientific eminence. Psychological Science, 4, 366–71.Google Scholar

Feist, G. J. (1998). A meta-analysis of the impact of personality on scientific and artistic creativity. Personality and Social Psychological Review, 2, 290–309.Google Scholar

Feist, G. J. (2006a). How development and personality influence scientific thought, interest, and achievement. Review of General Psychology, 10, 163–82.Google Scholar

Feist, G. J. (2006b). The Psychology of Science and the Origins of the Scientific Mind. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar

Feist, G. J. (2010). The Function of Personality in Creativity: The Nature and Nurture of the Creative Personality. In Kaufman, J. C. & Sternberg, R. J. (eds.). Cambridge Handbook of Creativity (pp. 113–30). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Feist, G. J. (2012). Predicting interest in and attitudes toward science from personality and need for cognition. Personality and Individual Differences, 52, 771–5. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2012.01.005Google Scholar

Feist, G. J., & Rosenberg, E. L. (2015). Psychology: Perspectives & Connections (3rd edn.). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar

Feist, J., Feist, G. J., & Roberts, T. A. (2013). Theories of Personality (8th edn.). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar

Francis, B., Skelton, C., & Read, B. (2012). The Identities and Practices of High Achieving Pupils: Negotiating Achievement and Peer Cultures. London: Continuum.Google Scholar

Frayling, C. (2005). Mad, Bad and Dangerous? The Scientist and the cinema. London: Reaktion Books.Google Scholar

Focquaert, F., Steven, M. S., Wolford, G. L., Colden, A., & Gazzaniga, M. S. (2007). Empathizing and systemizing cognitive traits in the sciences and humanities. Personality and Individual Differences, 43, 619–25.Google Scholar

Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar

Gardner, H. (1999). Intelligence Reframed: Multiple Intelligences for the 21st Century. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar

Gelade, G. A. (2002). Creative style, personality and artistic endeavour. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 128, 213–34.Google Scholar

Gough, H. G., & Woodworth, D. G. (1960). Stylistic variations among professional research scientists. Journal of Psychology, 49, 87–98.Google Scholar

Grosul, M. & Feist, G. J. (2014). The creative person in science. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity and the Arts, 8, 30–43. doi: 10.1037/a0034828Google Scholar

Gustafsson, L. (1997). Inadequate cortical feature maps: a neural circuit theory of autism. Biological Psychiatry, 42, 1138–47.Google Scholar

Haller, C. S., & Courvoiser, D. S. (2010). Personality and thinking style in different creative domains. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity and the Arts, 4, 149–60. doi: 10.1037/a00117084Google Scholar

Harris, J. A. (2004). Measured intelligence, achievement, openness to experience, and creativity. Personality and Individual Differences, 36, 913–29.Google Scholar

Hart, J. J. (1982). Psychology of the scientists: XLVI. Correlation between theoretical orientation in psychology and personality type. Psychological Reports, 50, 795–801.Google Scholar

Haynes, R. D. (1994). From Faust to Strangelove: Representations of the Scientist in Western Literature. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar

Helson, R., & Crutchfield, R. S. (1970). Mathematicians: the creative researcher and the average PhD. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 34, 250–7.Google Scholar

Heller, K. A. (2007). Scientific ability and creativity. High Ability Studies, 18, 209–34.Google Scholar

Helmreich, R. L., Spence, J. T., & Pred, R. S. (1988). Making it without losing it: type A, achievement motivation and scientific attainment revisited. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 14, 495–504.Google Scholar

Iuculano, T., Rosenberg-Lee, M., Supekar, K., Lynch, C. J., Khousam, A., et al. (2014). Brain organization underlying superior mathematical abilities in children with autism. Biological Psychiatry, 75, 223–30. doi: 10.1016/j.biopsych.2013.06.018.Google Scholar

Ivcevic, Z., & Brackett, M. A. (2015). Predicting creativity: interactive effects of openness to experience and emotion regulation ability. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 9(4), 480–7. doi:10.1037/a0039826Google Scholar

James, I. (2003). Singular scientists. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 96, 36–9.Google Scholar

John, O. P., & Srivastava, S. (1999). The Big Five Taxonomy: History, Measurement, and Theoretical Perspectives. In Pervin, L. A. & John, O. P. (eds.), Handbook of Personality: Theory and Research (pp. 102–38). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar

Johnson, J. A., Germer, C. K., Efran, J. S., & Overton, W. F. (1988). Personality as the basis for theoretical predilections. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 824–35.Google Scholar

Jones, R. A. (1997). The boffin: a stereotype of scientists in post-war British films (1945–1970). Public Understanding of Science, 6, 31–48.Google Scholar

Karmiloff-Smith, A. (1992). Beyond Modularity: A Developmental Perspective on Cognitive Science. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Karwowski, M., & Lebuda, I. (2016). The Big Five, the Huge Two, and creative self-beliefs: a meta-analysis. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 10(2), 214–32. doi:10.1037/aca0000035.Google Scholar

Kaufman, J. C., & Beghetto, R. A. (2009). Beyond big and little: the Four C model of creativity. Review of General Psychology, 13, 1–12.Google Scholar

Kaufman, S. B. (2013). Opening up openness to experience: a four-factor model and relations to creative achievement in the arts and sciences. Journal of Creative Behavior, 47, 233–55. doi: 10.1002/jocb.33Google Scholar

Kaufman, S. B., Kozbelt, A., Silvia, P., Kaufman, J. C., Ramesh, S., et al. (2014). Who finds Bill Gates sexy? Creative mate preferences as a function of cognitive ability, personality, and creative achievement. Journal of Creative Behavior, 48, 1–19. doi: 10.1002/jocb.78Google Scholar

Kaufman, S. B., Quilty, L. C., Grazioplene, R. G., Hirsh, J. B., Gray, J. R., et al. (2015). Openness to experience and intellect differentially predict creative achievement in the arts and sciences. Journal of Personality, 84(2), 248–58. doi:10.1111/jopy.12156Google Scholar

King, L. A., McKee, W. L., & Broyles, S. J. (1996). Creativity and the five-factor model. Journal of Research in Personality, 30, 189–203.Google Scholar

Ko, Y.-G., & Kim, J.-Y. (2008). Scientific geniuses’ psychopathology as a moderator in the relation between creative contribution types and eminence. Creativity Research Journal, 20, 251–61. doi: 10.1080/104004108022785677Google Scholar

Kokosh, J. (1969). MMPI personality characteristics of physical and social science students. Psychological Reports, 24, 883–93.Google Scholar

Kusumakar, V., Bond, J., & Yatham, L. N. (2002). Diagnosis and Treatment of Hypomania and Mania. In Yatham, L. N. & Kusumakar, V. (eds.), Bipolar Disorder: A Clinician’s Guide to Biological Treatments (2nd edn., pp. 1–18). New York: Brunner-Routledge.Google Scholar

Lippa, R. (1998). Gender-related individual differences and the structure of vocational interests: the importance of the people-things dimension. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(4), 996–1009.Google Scholar

Lloyd-Evans, R., Batey, M., & Furnham, A. (2006). Bipolar Disorder and Creativity: Investigating a Possible Link. In Columbus, A. & Columbus, A. (eds.), Advances in Psychology Research (Vol. 40, pp. 111–41). Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science Publishers.Google Scholar

Lounsbury, J. W., Foster, N., Patel, H., Carmody, P., Gibson, L. W., et al. (2012). An investigation of the personality traits of scientists versus nonscientists and their relationship with career satisfaction. R&D Management, 42, 47–59.Google Scholar

Lubow, R. E. (1989). Latent Inhibition and Conditioned Attention Theory. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Ludwig, A. M. (1995). The Price of Greatness: Resolving the Creativity and Madness Controversy. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar

Ludwig, A. M. (1998). Method and madness in the arts and sciences. Creativity Research Journal, 11, 93–101.Google Scholar

MacKinnon, D. W. (1978). In Search of Human Effectiveness. Buffalo, NY: Bearly.Google Scholar

Mason, O., Claridge, G., & Jackson, M. (1995). New scales for the assessment of schizotypy. Personality and Individual Differences, 18, 7–13.Google Scholar

McCrae, R. R. (1987). Creativity, divergent thinking, and openness to experience. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 1258–65. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.52.6.1258Google Scholar

McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1999). A Five-Factor Theory of Personality. In Pervin, L. A. & John, O. P. (eds.), Personality Theory and Research (pp. 139–53). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar