Differences in Thinking Styles of Artists and Engineers

Seventy-one professional fine artists and 147 engineers completed Sternberg's Intellectual Styles Questionnaire (R. J. Sternberg & R. K. Wagner, 1991). Artists preferred less external input in their work than engineers preferred, and engineers were more inclined to prioritize their thinking. Artists preferred devising their own plans significantly more than did engineers. Artists and engineers both like to make things, and individuals in both professions share high visual-spatial abilities (Gelade, 2002; Harrison, Hunt, & Jackson, 1955; Holland, 1997; Holtzman, Swartz, & Thorpe, 1971; Humphreys, Lubinski, & Yao, 1993; Kandel, 1940; Roe, 1956; Roy, 1996; Strong, 1952). Despite these commonalities, however, previous research has indicated that artists have higher aesthetic interests than do engineers (Kunert, 1969), higher emotionality (Keniston, 1982; Roe, 1947), and a more pronounced tendency for personal introspection (Keniston, 1982; Kunert, 1969). Whether they also differ in other respects remained a question awaiting systematic investigation. Anecdotal reports, for instance, suggested that by comparison, engineers are more likely than artists to prioritize their thinking in hierarchies, less likely to "fly by the seat of the pants," so to speak, and are more inclined to accept input from others than to follow their own muse. By contrast, artists have a reputation for preferring an attitude of "anything goes." The present study was undertaken to learn more about the differences between these two occupational groups. Hypotheses Four hypotheses were tendered: 1. By comparison with artists, engineers would be more interested in executing the plans of others. 2. By comparison with engineers, artists would show more interest in devising their own plans. 3. By comparison with artists, engineers would prefer more highly prioritized thinking. 4. By comparison with engineers, artists would be more likely to prefer working without input from others. These differences were expected to be exhibited in participants' scores on the Executive, Legislative, Hierarchic, Anarchic, and Internal scales of the Intellectual Styles Questionnaire (ISQ; Sternberg & Wagner, 1991) when collected from full-time professional fine artists and engineers. Method Participants Artists were solicited at juried art fairs in Michigan and Ohio and at galleries in Ohio and in Ontario, Canada. The artists' residences and principal places of business represented many states. Thirty-six men and 35 women (ages 29-74 years, M- 45 years, SD - 12.25) completed the ISQ at their exhibition sites; all of the artists derived at least 60% of their income from selling their work and winning prizes and awards. Engineers were solicited at receptions for local chapters of their specialty organizations (e.g., Society of Industrial Engineers, Society of Materials Engineers) and at the public areas for a national convention of the Society for Women Engineers, providing 94 women (ages 21-70 years, M = 34.49, SD = 9.52) and 53 men (ages 27-74 years, M = 43.64, SD = 11.27). They represented a wide variety of specialties, for instance, industrial, mechanical, civil, electrical, aeronautical, biomedical, metallurgical, and automotive engineering. Some questionnaires were completed at the site of the meetings; other questionnaires were completed after the meetings and were mailed to me. Instrument The ISQ is a self-administered questionnaire that is composed of 104 self-descriptive sentences. Respondents use a 7-point scale, with a midpoint of 4, to indicate how well each item's description characterizes their thinking. The ISQ has 13 scales of eight questions each. None of the scales share each others' questions (Sternberg & Wagner, 1991). Some of the ISQ scales (e.g., Legislative and Executive) measure respondent's preferred activities. High scores on the Legislative scale indicate that individuals like to invent tiieir own rules. …