Tatiana V. Kornilova

Background. This study is based on the idea of unity between affect and intelligence. It explores how different types of intelligence (fluid, verbal, self-assessed, and emotional) contribute to emotional creativity and implicit theories of creativity and emotion.

Objective. To identify the contributions of various types of intelligence to emotional creativity and the implicit theories of creativity and emotion.

Design. Linear regression and mediation analyses were conducted on a sample of 244 students. These analyses aimed to uncover the relationships between different types of intelligence, emotional creativity, and related components of self-awareness (at the levels of self-assessment and implicit theories).

Results. The findings demonstrated the intricate connections between various forms of intelligence – fluid, crystallized, emotional, emotional creativity, and self-awareness components such as self-assessment of intelligence and creativity. Specifically, the impact of intelligence on emotional intelligence traits and emotional creativity was mediated by measures of self-esteem in intelligence and creativity. To test specific hypotheses, we conducted a series of regression analyses and developed two structural models. The first model included linear regression equations with each emotional creativity (EC) scale as the dependent variable and both types of intelligence, as well as self-assessments—SAI and SAC—as predictors. The second model demonstrated the mediation effect of implicit theories of emotions (ITE) in the influence of emotional intelligence (EI) on emotional creativity.

Conclusion. This study highlights the complexity of the interplay between different types of intelligence and emotional creativity. It reveals the mediating role of self-esteem in these relationships and underscores the distinct nature of emotional creativity domains. Additionally, it establishes the link between implicit theories of emotions and creativity, with emotional intelligence and self-esteem, offering valuable insights for further research.

Background. There is no generally accepted psychological understanding of how a doctor’s representation of risk and uncertainty affects professional medical decision-making. The concept of a Unified Intellectual and Personal Potential can serve as a framework to explain its multiple and multilevel regulation. Our objective was to research the connections between medics’ perceptions of risk and related personal factors.

Design. Medical doctors were compared to different control groups to identify their personal and motivational characteristics in three studies. 

Study 1 assessed the motivational profile of doctors (using Edwards Personal Preference Schedule) in connection with their risk-readiness and rationality (measured by the Personal Factors of Decision-making questionnaire, also known as LFR) in a sample of 33 doctors, as compared to 35 paramedics and 33 detectives. 

Study 2 compared 125 medical students and 182 non-medical students to 65 doctors as to the levels of their risk perception (measured by Implicit Theories of Risk questionnaire, the LFR, and their direct self-esteem of riskiness [1]), tolerance for uncertainty (measured by Budner's questionnaire), and rating on the Big-Five personality traits (TIPI). 

Study 3 presented two new methods of risk perception assessment and investigated the connection between personality traits, risk reduction strategies, and cognitive representations of risk in 66 doctors, as compared to 44 realtors.

Results. Study 1 found differences between the doctors’, paramedics’, and investigators’ motivational profiles. The doctors’ motivations were not associated with conscious self-regulation. In Study 2, risk-readiness was positively related to tolerance for uncertainty (TU) and the self-esteem of riskiness. The latter was significantly lower in doctors compared to the student groups and had different relationships with personality variables. In Study 3, doctors differed from realtors not only in their traits (i.e.,being less willing to take risks), but also in their choices and greater integration of their risk representations.

Conclusions. The three studies demonstrated the multilevel processes behind the willingness to take risks and risk acceptance, as well as the relationship between the multilevel personality traits and doctors’ assessments of medical risks and their preferences in risky decision-making.

1. The “self-esteem of riskiness” refers to an individual’s self-esteem in light of their willingness to take risks. This formulation will be used throughout this article, as to constantly elaborate its meaning would be too unwieldy.

Background. This article reports on the results of an empirical study of interrelationships between indicators of decision-making strategies (indexed by the Iowa Gambling Task, IGT) and traits of tolerance and intolerance for uncertainty that capture the unity of cognitive and personality components of situational representations. 

Objective. Our study tested the hypothesis that overcoming uncertainty in decision making goes beyond cognitive representations of the task but instead is rooted in the construction of the amodal image of an uncertain situation that captures the meaning regulation of perception and action. We hypothesized that when a person is faced with multi-stage decisions, their strategies reflect the contribution of individual differences in attitudes towards uncertainty. 

Design. Using data obtained from n=60 typically developing adults (68% men; Mage = 30.58), we examined the contribution of tolerance/intolerance for uncertainty to a variety of IGT dependent variables at five different stages of the game. 

Results. The data was analyzed using the mixed linear model method as implemented in the lme4 package for R. The results indicated that tolerance for uncertainty significantly contributes to the initial level of behavioral risk, ensuring readiness for decision making under uncertainty. 

Conclusion. Tolerance for uncertainty plays an important role in early stages of orientation in an uncertain modeled game situation, and contributes to the productive development of probabilistic expectations. Intolerance for uncertainty, on the other hand, was shown to contribute to risk in decision making after trial failure, potentially limiting learning in uncertain conditions through risk aversion. 

Background. Choice, under conditions of uncertainty, is mediated by integral dynamic regulatory systems that represent hierarchies of cognitive and personality processes. As such, individual decision-making patterns can be studied in the context of intellectual and personality potential. This article presents the results of a cross-cultural comparison of personality characteristics, such as coping with uncertainty, emotional intelligence, and academic achievement, between Azerbaijani and Russian university students.

Objective. We aimed at establishing metric invariance and at highlighting relationships between emotional intelligence and the scales of the Melbourne Decision Making Questionnaire (MDMQ).

Design. Azerbaijani and Russian student samples were selected for this study due to the almost identical educational programs offered by Moscow State University to students in Moscow and its branch in Baku. Coping with uncertainty was measured by the MDMQ, emotional intelligence by the EmIn questionnaire, and academic achievement by GPA scores. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to verify factor structure invariance and congruence.

Results. The congruence of factor structures for both questionnaires was verified. For the MDMQ four-factor structure for both samples was confirmed. For the EmIn questionnaire, invariance for two scales was established — “Understanding other people’s emotions” and “Managing own emotions”. Relationships among personality traits, gender, age, and academic achievements are explained for the Lomonosov Moscow State University students in Moscow (Russia) and its branch in Baku (Azerbaijan). No crosscultural differences were found for emotional intelligence and productive coping (Vigilance). A cultural difference was established in unproductive coping preference for Buck Passing. A similarity between the cultures was captured in the relationship of higher emotional intelligence (EQ) scores to higher Vigilance scores and to lower levels of unproductive coping patterns. Vigilance was a predictor of academic achievement, but only in the Russian sample.

Conclusion. The similarity of the educational systems, as both samples studied similar programs, demonstrates very few cross-cultural differences.

The current study investigated the relationships among creativity, tolerance for uncertainty (TU), and emotional intelligence (EI) in a selected sample of undergraduate students (n=145). We found differential patterns of intercorrelations among these constructs in students majoring in psychology, music, and stage directing, and we also established group differences in these constructs in the three groups of students. Thus, the use of emotional information in personal decision making in different subsamples is assumed to be achieved through hierarchies of diverse processes. Overall, creativity, EI, and TU acted as predictors of the use of emotional information in decision making.

The contribution of Oleg K. Tikhomirov (1933-2001), his disciples and representatives of Tikhomirov’s school in psychology of thinking is analyzed. Tikhomirov was the initiator of the Personal Meanings Theory of thinking, one of the leading schools of cognitive studies in Russia. Tikhomirov is known outside Russia as well: more than once, he presented his work at international congresses and conferences; his writings have been translated into several European languages. The paper includes brief biographical information about Tikhomirov. The main components of the Personal Meanings Theory are presented, such as the regulative function of (intellectual) emotions during problem solving, the actual genesis of goal-setting, the formation of personal meanings during the processes involved in thinking, and the personality-related determinants of decision making. Tikhomirov’s pioneering ideas in the studies of creativity, including jointparticipation in creative activities, are discussed in the paper. In the last section of the paper, Tikhomirov’s studies of the impact of information and communication technology on the psychological transformations undergone by adepts of high technologies and technology’s effect on their intellectual and communicative activities are discussed; these studies accelerated a new field of research in Russia, namely cyberpsychology or Internet psychology.

In the current study, self-assessed intelligence (SAI) is presented as a multidimensional construct related both to personality and to psychometric intelligence. On the basis of data obtained from a Russian student sample (N = 496), the authors validate a structural model in which SAI acts as a mediating variable between latent variables of measured IQ and the trait of acceptance of uncertainty. Evidence for signifi cant gender diff erences in SAI in favor of men is also given.

The present paper describes two studies that investigated incremental predictive value of tolerance and intolerance for uncertainty in predicting creativity. The first study shows significant positive incremental predictive power of tolerance for uncertainty over general intelligence in predicting creativity. The second study reveals a negative relationship between intolerance for uncertainty and creativity with fluid intelligence scores being already accounted for. Overall, tolerance for uncertainty promotes creativity, whereas intolerance for uncertainty impedes it, demonstrating that creativity draws on both intellectual potential and processes of uncertainty acceptance.

The study examined the relationship between self-, peer- and test-estimated intelligence, academic self-concept and academic achievement. Subjective evaluations of intelligence and academic self-concept had incremental predictive value over conventional intelligence when predicting achievement accounting for more than 40% of its variance. The obtained pattern of results is presented via SEM-model which accounts for 75% variance in the latent factor of academic achievement. Author suggests the importance of further studying complex sets of achievement predictors from ability, personality and mediating domains.