Lisa Bardach, Aki Schumacher, Ulrich Trautwein, Enkelejda Kasneci, Maike Tibus, Franz Wortha, Peter Gerjets, Tobias Appel
{"title":"Taking another look at intelligence and personality using an eye-tracking approach.","authors":"Lisa Bardach, Aki Schumacher, Ulrich Trautwein, Enkelejda Kasneci, Maike Tibus, Franz Wortha, Peter Gerjets, Tobias Appel","doi":"10.1038/s41539-024-00252-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Intelligence and personality are both key drivers of learning. This study extends prior research on intelligence and personality by adopting a behavioral-process-related eye-tracking approach. We tested 182 adults on fluid intelligence and the Big Five personality traits. Eye-tracking information (gaze patterns) was recorded while participants completed the intelligence test. Machine learning models showed that personality explained 3.18% of the variance in intelligence test scores, with Openness and, surprisingly, Agreeableness most meaningfully contributing to the prediction. Facet-level measures of personality explained a larger amount of variance (7.67%) in intelligence test scores than the trait-level measures, with the largest coefficients obtained for Ideas and Values (Openness) and Compliance and Trust (Agreeableness). Gaze patterns explained a substantial amount of variance in intelligence test performance (35.91%). Gaze patterns were unrelated to the Big Five personality traits, but some of the facets (especially Self-Consciousness from Neuroticism and Assertiveness from Extraversion) were related to gaze. Gaze patterns reflected the test-solving strategies described in the literature (constructive matching, response elimination) to some extent. A combined feature vector consisting of gaze-based predictions and personality traits explained 37.50% of the variance in intelligence test performance, with significant unique contributions from both personality and gaze patterns. A model that included personality facets and gaze explained 38.02% of the variance in intelligence test performance. Although behavioral data thus clearly outperformed \"traditional\" psychological measures (Big Five personality) in predicting intelligence test performance, our results also underscore the independent contributions of personality and gaze patterns in predicting intelligence test performance.</p>","PeriodicalId":48503,"journal":{"name":"npj Science of Learning","volume":"9 1","pages":"41"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11217503/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"npj Science of Learning","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-024-00252-8","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Intelligence and personality are both key drivers of learning. This study extends prior research on intelligence and personality by adopting a behavioral-process-related eye-tracking approach. We tested 182 adults on fluid intelligence and the Big Five personality traits. Eye-tracking information (gaze patterns) was recorded while participants completed the intelligence test. Machine learning models showed that personality explained 3.18% of the variance in intelligence test scores, with Openness and, surprisingly, Agreeableness most meaningfully contributing to the prediction. Facet-level measures of personality explained a larger amount of variance (7.67%) in intelligence test scores than the trait-level measures, with the largest coefficients obtained for Ideas and Values (Openness) and Compliance and Trust (Agreeableness). Gaze patterns explained a substantial amount of variance in intelligence test performance (35.91%). Gaze patterns were unrelated to the Big Five personality traits, but some of the facets (especially Self-Consciousness from Neuroticism and Assertiveness from Extraversion) were related to gaze. Gaze patterns reflected the test-solving strategies described in the literature (constructive matching, response elimination) to some extent. A combined feature vector consisting of gaze-based predictions and personality traits explained 37.50% of the variance in intelligence test performance, with significant unique contributions from both personality and gaze patterns. A model that included personality facets and gaze explained 38.02% of the variance in intelligence test performance. Although behavioral data thus clearly outperformed "traditional" psychological measures (Big Five personality) in predicting intelligence test performance, our results also underscore the independent contributions of personality and gaze patterns in predicting intelligence test performance.