Journal of Research in Personality 68 (2017) 15–22

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Research in Personality

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jrp

Seeing it both ways: Openness to experience and binocular rivalry

suppression
Anna Antinori, Olivia L. Carter, Luke D. Smillie ⇑
Melbourne School of Psychological Science, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Openness to experience is characterised by flexible and inclusive cognition. Here we investigated
Received 17 August 2016 whether this extends to basic visual perception, such that open people combine information more flex-
Revised 5 March 2017 ibly, even at low-levels of perceptual processing. We used binocular rivalry, where the brain alternates
Accepted 20 March 2017
between perceptual solutions and times where neither solution is fully suppressed, mixed percept.
Available online 21 March 2017
Study 1 showed that openness is positively associated with duration of mixed percept and ruled out
the possibility of response bias. Study 2 showed that mixed percept increased following a positive mood
Keywords:
induction particularly for open people. Overall, the results showed that openness is linked to differences
Openness to experience
Binocular rivalry
in low-level visual perceptual experience. Further studies should investigate whether this may be driven
Individual differences by common neural processes.
! 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

1. Introducion Several previous studies indirectly suggest that open people

experience things differently: For instance, openness predicts per-
Trait openness to Experience (hereafter, openness) represents a formance on divergent thinking tasks (Kaufman et al., 2016; Silvia
scientific frontier in personality psychology —it was the last of et al., 2008), which require one to identify multiple diverse uses for
the five major personality domains to gain acceptance, and is still ordinary objects. For open people this seems to happen effortlessly,
the least well understood (for a recent review see DeYoung, suggesting a more flexible way of combining information, perhaps
2014). A common theme linking the various characteristics even at low-levels of perceptual processing. For example, people
described by Openness is flexible and inclusive cognition: Open high in openness display reductions in latent inhibition (i.e.,
people are more curious, creative (Kaufman et al., 2016; Silvia attenuated attentional processing following repeated stimulus
et al., 2008) and motivated to explore the world and engage with exposure) suggesting individual differences in pre-conscious atten-
possibilities (DeYoung, 2014; McCrae & Costa, 1997). People high tional mechanisms (Peterson & Carson, 1999; Peterson, Smith, &
in openness may even experience the world differently to the aver- Carson, 2002). Latent inhibition reflects an adaptive attentional
age person as a result of their ‘‘breadth, depth, and permeability of ‘gating’ system for screening out irrelevant information, but for
consciousness, and . . .[their]. . . recurrent need to enlarge and open people this system appears to be more flexible, resulting in
examine experience” (McCrae & Costa, 1997, p. 826). In this paper, continued processing of stimuli from which the average individual
we ask whether this tendency toward inclusive cognition — which has disengaged. However, we are aware of no previous research
we could think of as increased flexibility in binding of different examining whether openness relates to how people actually see
representational elements in the brain — extends to basic visual visual stimuli.
perception. This objective is in line with recent research showing To address this question, we examined how openness relates to
that stable difference in personality mirror differences in structural the well-known perceptual phenomenon called binocular rivalry,
and functional properties of the brain (Passamonti et al., 2015). Our where contrasting stimuli are presented simultaneously to each
interest here is to determine whether similar relations between eye (for a review see Tong, Meng, & Blake, 2006). When faced with
personality and visual perceptual processing exist. this incompatible visual information, observers typically report
alternation or ‘flipping’ between these two continuously presented
stimuli every few seconds. Interestingly, another perceptual expe-
⇑ Corresponding author at: Melbourne School of Psychological Sciences, Faculty rience called ‘mixed percept’ occasionally occurs between these
of Medicine, Dentistry & Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, 3010 Victoria, serial alternations. In these cases the two stimuli appear fused into
Australia.
one, and complete suppression of either stimulus is inhibited
E-mail address: lsmillie@unimelb.edu.au (L.D. Smillie).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2017.03.005
0092-6566/! 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
16 A. Antinori et al. / Journal of Research in Personality 68 (2017) 15–22

(Yang, Rose, & Blake, 1992). The processes underlying mixed per- addition, positive mood tends to specifically decrease observers’
cept remain unclear, with some authors suggesting a role of neural inhibitory control in filtering unattended information, favouring
plasticity (Klink, Brascamp, Blake, & van Wezel, 2010) and others more inclusive processing (Rowe, Hirsh, & Anderson, 2007). Finally,
emphasizing an imbalance of excitatory and inhibitory neural contextualised perspectives on personality (e.g., DeYoung, 2015;
activity (Said, Egan, Minshew, Behrmann, & Heeger, 2013). One Tett & Guterman, 2000) suggest that effects of personality will be
interesting feature of mixed percept, however, is that it shows most pronounced in the context of trait-relevant stimuli or situa-
between-person variability and within-person stability over time tions. In the case of the current study we were interested in
(Miller et al., 2010), suggesting a possible relation with personality. whether one mood condition in particular would act as a trait-
In this paper, we hypothesised that the susceptibility to the relevant cue especially for open people. This would be expected
mixed percept experience may be related to openness. Because to increase the relative impact of factors associated with openness
openness reflects the tendency to actively explore information on perceptual processing and lead to an increased susceptibility to
and engage with complex possibilities (DeYoung, 2014), people experiencing the mixed percept for open people.
high in openness may also be more likely to experience creative
solutions to the incompatible rivalry stimuli. Furthermore, the sus- 2. Study 1
tained processing of non-instrumental stimuli by open people dur-
ing latent inhibition (Peterson & Carson, 1999; Peterson et al., 2.1. Method
2002), may also occur during rivalry, thereby impeding the com-
plete suppression of either percept. If openness does indeed predict 2.1.1. Participants
mixed percept, it would constitute the first empirical evidence that We recruited 134 University of Melbourne undergraduate stu-
open people may have different visual experiences to the average dents, who participated in the research for course credit. All partic-
individual. ipants had normal or corrected to normal vision. We excluded 11
To investigate this in study 1 we conducted two experiments. In participants prior to analysis: 5 because they did not report alter-
the first experiment we presented individuals with a simple binoc- nating stimuli, indicating that rivalry did not occur, and 6 because
ular rivalry task (red and green orthogonal gratings to alternate they responded for less than 50% of the total duration of the trial.
eyes) and administered the Big Five Aspects Scales (BFAS; There was therefore a final N of 123 participants (30% Male, aged
DeYoung, Quilty, & Peterson, 2007) which includes a measure of M = 19.49, SD = 2.92). This sample provides 80% power to detect
Openness/Intellect (O/I). This compound label reflects an early the average effect size in personality psychology (i.e., r ! 0.25;
debate about how to best conceptualise the fifth personality Fraley & Marks, 2007). All studies were approved by the University
domain (see Saucier, 1992), and the full scale can be divided into of Melbourne Human Research Ethics Committee, in accordance
separate openness and intellect sub-scales. While intellect is con- with the Declaration of Helsinki.
ceptualised as engagement with semantic or abstract information,
openness is conceptualised as engagement with aesthetic or per-
2.1.2. Personality questionnaire
ceptual information (DeYoung, 2013, 2014). In line with this, intel-
The Big Five Aspects Scales (BFAS) DeYoung et al. (2007) is a
lect (but not openness) predicts working memory performance
100-item measure of the Five Factor Model (McCrae & Costa,
(DeYoung, Shamosh, Green, Braver, & Gray, 2009) while openness
1987). It provides assessment of each of the five domains
(but not intellect) predicts implicit learning of patterned sequences
(Extraversion, Neuroticism, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness,
(Kaufman et al., 2010). Given the inherently perceptual nature of
and O/I) along with each of their two lower level aspects
the mixed percept phenomenon, we therefore hypothesised open-
(DeYoung et al., 2007). Respondents indicate the extent to which
ness more so than intellect would be associated with mixed
they agree or disagree with each of the items on a 5-point rating
percept.
scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) through 3 (neutral) to 5
In the second experiment (study 1b) we sought to rule out the
(strongly agree). Cronbach’s alpha for each trait domain and its
possibility that open people report more incidence of mixed per-
component was acceptable (see Table 2).
cept simply because they have a more lenient response threshold
for reporting more mixed. To do so, we manipulated the size of
the visual stimuli. The incidence of mixed percept reported during 2.1.3. Binocular rivalry
a ‘typical’ rivalry task is characterised by individual differences 2.1.3.1. Apparatus and stimuli. The rival targets were stationary
(Miller et al., 2010). However, the absolute duration of mixed per- green and red gratings (stimulus sizes 1.4", with a spatial fre-
cept is also sensitive to the stimulus characteristics. Specifically, quency of 4 cpd) oriented ±45" from vertical, within a circular
the overall incidence of mixed percept increases with larger stim- frame. Stimuli were generated in MatlabTM using the Psychophysics
ulus size, reflecting physiological properties of the visual cortex Toolbox extension (Brainard, 1997; Pelli, 1997), displayed on an
(for a more detailed description of the phenomenon see Blake, Apple computer monitor (23-in. monitor, 60 Hz frame rate,
O’Shea, & Mueller, 1992). Thus, by using larger stimuli we pre- 1280x800pixel resolution), and viewed through a mirror stereo-
dicted that the increased contribution of low-level properties of scope (viewing distance 33 cm).
the visual cortex would lead to a reduction of the influence of per-
sonality on one’s perceptual experience when viewing the task. 2.1.3.2. Instructions. Participants were instructed to continuously
In study 2, we administered the same rivalry task following a report what they were experiencing via key press. When perceiv-
positive mood induction procedure involving perceptually and aes- ing the red or green grating they had to press and hold down the
thetically pleasing imagery, to which open people appear particu- left or right arrow key, respectively. Participants were instructed
larly responsive (Fayn, MacCann, Tiliopoulos, & Silvia, 2015; to report any instances of mixed percept (time where the two stim-
McCrae, 2007; Silvia & Nusbaum, 2011). This served the purpose uli appeared as a grid or patchwork combination of the two per-
of exploring whether differences in one’s perceptual experience cepts) by holding down both the left and right arrow keys
may be influenced not only by stable factors (personality) but also simultaneously.
by transient states (mood). With respect to the effects of mood on
perceptual rivalry, a number of studies have shown that mood can 2.1.3.3. Response recording. Data were recorded continuously
alter the competition for visual awareness by favouring the stimu- throughout a single 120 s trial. While some rivalry studies use mul-
lus congruent to one’s mood (Anderson, Siegel, & Barrett, 2011). In tiple short (e.g., 10–20 s) trials, we opted for a single 120 s trial to
 A. Antinori et al. / Journal of Research in Personality 68 (2017) 15–22 17

Table 1 F(1, 122) = 5.15, p = 0.025, the remaining Big Five domains did not
Correlations between mixed percept and personality traits (Study 1 and 1b). account for significant incremental variance, Fch(4, 117) = 2.13,
Big aspect Mixed percept p = 0.081, nor contribute uniquely to prediction (all ps > 0.05; see
scales (BFAS)
Study 1 Study 1b Study 1b larger Table 2).
(n = 123) Replication (n = 79) stimuli (n = 79) In the current study we focused on mixed percept. Findings pre-
Openness/intellect 0.22** 0.22* 0.02
viously published by our group provide a more detailed account of
Openness 0.15* 0.15 0.04 the impact of personality and mood on switch rate (Antinori,
Intellect 0.18* 0.20* 0.08 Smillie, & Carter, 2017). Of most relevance to the current studies
Conscientiousness 0.05 "0.08 0.001 is the finding that people reporting more mixed percept are also
Orderliness 0.04 "0.20 "0.07
characterised by shorter mean percept durations so it is not the
Industriousness 0.08 0.10 0.06
Extraversion 0.22* "0.06 "0.01 case that people report longer periods of mixed percept because
Enthusiasm 0.08 "0.07 "0.05 they generally switch more slowly between states and end up with
Assertiveness 0.27** "0.02 0.08 a higher proportion of mixed percept reported overall. There was
Agreeableness 0.01 0.23* 0.16
no significant relation between openness /intellect and mean per-
Politeness "0.08 0.19 0.11
Compassion 0.08 0.19 0.15
cept duration (a significant correlation was seen with industrious-
Neuroticism "0.23** "0.09 "0.03 ness) or mood manipulation (Antinori et al., 2017).
Withdrawal "0.09 "0.16 "0.16
Volatility "0.24** "0.02 0.06
3. Study 1b (Control and Replication)
Note:
*
p < 0.05.
**
p < 0.001.
3.1. Method

3.1.1. Participants
A new sample was recruited consisting of 79 University of Mel-
reduce the impact of stimulus onset, which is often associated with
bourne undergraduates who participated in exchange for course
an initial period of fusion (Wolfe, 1983) or strong biases in percep-
credit (19% Male, aged M = 19.47, SD = 3.48). All participants had
tual state that are distinct from sustained viewing conditions
normal or corrected to normal vision.
(Carter & Cavanagh, 2007; Stanley, Forte, & Cavanagh, 2011). Prior
to the experimental task, participants underwent a 60 s training
session to ensure they understood the instructions. Mixed percept 3.1.2. Binocular rivalry
was calculated as the total duration that participants pressed both 3.1.2.1. Apparatus and stimuli. Two different stimulus sizes were
the left and right arrow keys simultaneously for at least 220 ms used: small (1.4") —identical to study 1 — and large (2.3"). The
(this threshold was chosen as a consequence of the response sam- two stimuli sizes were presented twice to all participants in blocks
pling rate and the desire to exclude the very brief periods of dual of 60 s in random order (i.e., 240 s total). Personality measures
button response during transitions between left and right arrow were identical to study 1(alpha values provided Table 2). All other
presses). The calculated duration was then expressed as a percent- apparatus, instructions and stimuli characteristics were identical
age of the trial duration (% Mixed). to the first experiment in study 1.

2.2. Results 3.2. Results

As reports of mixed percept were severely skewed, Spearman’s As expected, when using larger stimuli there was no relation
rank-order correlation was used to examine the association between mixed percept and any BFAS personality traits, including
between mixed percept (M = 0.11; SD = 0.09) and personality. near-zero correlations with I/O and its two subscales. Conversely,
Mixed percept was positively correlated with O/I and extraversion, when using the smaller stimuli, identical to that used in study
and negatively correlated with neuroticism (see Table 1; for full 1a, the previously observed correlation with O/I was replicated
correlation matrix see Supplementary material Table 1). These cor- (see Table 1, the full correlation matrix for this analysis is available
relations are unlikely to be independent, and are consistent with in Supplementary material Table 2). With respect to the impact of
the existence of higher order traits located ‘above’ the Big Five stimulus size on mixed percept, an increase in mixed percept was
(DeYoung et al., 2007). Indeed, after accounting for the relation observed only when comparing study 1 (M = 0.11, SD = 0.12) to the
between O/I and mixed percept within a hierarchical regression, bigger stimuli used in study 1b (bigger stimuli M = 0.28, SD = 0.16).

Table 2
Summary of hierarchical regression analysis for variables predicting mixed percept.

Variable Model 1 Model 2

B SE B b B SE B b
Constant "0.85 3.31
Openness/intellect 2.07 0.91 0.20*
Constant 3.66 6.54
Openness/intellect 1.20 0.97 0.12
Neuroticism "1.25 0.81 "0.15
Extraversion 2.03 1.01 0.20
Agreeableness "0.29 1.06 "0.02
Conscientiousness "1.19 0.89 "0.13
R2 0.04 0.11
F for change in R2 5.15* 2.13

Note. N = 123.
*
p < 0.05.
18 A. Antinori et al. / Journal of Research in Personality 68 (2017) 15–22

On the other hand, no significant effect of stimulus size on mixed 4.1.4. State affect
percept was seen within study 1 (M = 0.27; SD = 0.12). To test the impact of the guided imagery procedure on mood,
To probe these results further, we ran a further analysis to participants were asked to rate on a 4-point Likert scale ranging
investigate whether open people not only perceive a greater dura- from ‘Not at all’ to ‘Very well’ how much their current feelings
tion of mixed percept, but also perceive it more frequently. How- (‘‘right now”) matched a list of four items drawn from the 12-
ever, in neither study 1 nor study 1b did openness, or its two Point Affect Circumplex Questionnaire (12-PAC; Yik, Russell, &
lower-order aspects correlate with the number of mixed percept Steiger, 2011). It was expected that the Pleasant condition would
responses. With respect to the relation of the number of mixed elicit positive pleasant mood (items: relaxed, content) while the
percept responses and other personality traits, in study 1 the there Appetitive condition would elicit activated positive mood (items:
was a (negative) correlation only with neuroticism r(128) = "18, excited, lively).
p = 0.04, while in study 1b no traits were correlated with the num-
ber of mixed percept responses (p > 0.05). 4.2. Procedure
In summary, the relation between O/I and mixed percept was
successfully replicated in a new sample of participants when using Participants firstly completed a baseline measure of state affect.
the original stimulus size. However, when a larger stimulus is used They then underwent the mood induction procedure they were
(increasing the relative contribution of neurophysiological proper- assigned to. At the end of the mood induction participants filled
ties of early visual cortex) the relation with personality was no the post-mood induction state affect, before then performing the
longer maintained. This finding is important as it gives us confi- binocular rivalry task. While performing the binocular rivalry task,
dence that the effect is a true impact of personality on perception participants continued to listen to the music that had accompanied
rather than an artefact reflecting a response bias of open individu- the mood induction procedure. Finally, participants completed the
als having a lower criteria threshold for reporting mixed percept. BFAS questionnaire.
This is because any influence of response bias should be insensitive
to stimulus size. 4.3. Results

4.3.1. Preliminary statistics

4. Study 2 A One-Way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) for independent
groups confirmed that experimental groups did not differ signifi-
4.1. Method cantly in any of the personality traits or baseline affect measures
(see Table 3).
4.1.1. Participants
A third sample was recruited consisting of 91 University of Mel- 4.3.2. Mood induction
bourne undergraduates who participated in exchange for course To confirm that the mood induction procedure had its intended
credit (28% Male, aged M = 19.06, SD = 2.50). The number of partic- effect, we conducted a mixed ANOVA 2 (pre/post) # 2 (activated/
ipants was informed by previous research using this paradigm pleasant positive) # 3 (mood condition). This resulted in a signifi-
(e.g., Smillie, Cooper, Wilt, & Revelle, 2012). Each subject was ran- cant three-way interaction, F(2, 88) = 39.47, p < 0.001, g2p = 0.47,
domly assigned to either one of the three experimental conditions: indicating that the pre-post change in affect was influenced both
Neutral (n = 33), Pleasant (n = 29), and Appetitive (n = 29), by mood conditions and affect type. As expected, pleasant positive
described below. affect significantly increased in the Pleasant condition t(28)
= "4.22, p < 0.001, g2 = 0.40 and decreased in the Appetitive condi-
tion t(28) = 3.58, p < 0.001, g2 = 0.32 but did not change in the
4.1.2. Apparatus and stimuli
Neutral condition t(32) = "1.79, p = 0.08. Moreover, activated pos-
All rivalry stimuli/instructions and personality scales were
itive affect significantly increased in the Appetitive condition, t
described in study 1a (alpha values provided in Table 3).
(28) = "4.40, p < 0.001, g2 = 0.42, and decreased in the Pleasant
condition t(28) = 3.92, p < 0.001, g2 = 0.36, but did not change in
4.1.3. Guided imagination procedure the Neutral condition t(32) = 1.49, p = 0.15.
Participants were tested individually in a dimly lit testing
booth. The guided imagination task presents short vignettes via a 4.3.3. Pleasant, aesthetic imagery and mixed percept
computerized slideshow and accompanying music via headphones, We then examined whether the vivid aesthetic imagery in the
and has been used previously for inducing mood states (see Smillie Pleasant condition resulted in increased mixed percept, compared
et al., 2012). Each vignette (3 per condition) described a different to the two control conditions. As the homogeneity of variance
scenario and remained on the screen for 2 min. Scenarios in the assumption was violated (p = 0.001), Brown-Forsythe F tests was
Pleasant condition involved vivid descriptions of aesthetically performed, revealing a significant effect of mood condition on per-
pleasing imagery (e.g., ‘‘You are walking peacefully through a quiet centage of mixed percept, F(2, 66.101) = 3.78, p = 0.03, g2 = 0.80.
and picturesque forest”). As a control condition, three neutral sce- Moreover, planned contrasts confirmed that those in the Pleasant
narios described daily mundane situations, Neutral condition condition reported a marginally greater duration of mixed percept
(e.g., ‘‘You are putting a few things away in the kitchen on a weekend (M = 0.17, SD = 0.12) compared to those in the other two conditions
afternoon”). As a second control condition, three appetitive scenar- (Neutral M = 0.14, SD = 0.09; Appetitive M = 0.10, SD = 0.06), t
ios described positive, rewarding events that had no salient aes- (38.162) = 2.01, p = 0.05 Cohen’s d = 0.65 (see Fig. 1). Unexpectedly,
thetic or perceptual features (e.g., You buy a lottery ticket and win however, this difference was significant relative only to the appet-
$10,000 instantly). Participants were instructed to imagine how itive (p = 0.02) but not the neutral condition (p = 0.40).
they would feel and what they would think in each different sce- We then used moderated regression to examine whether the
nario. The music used for each mood condition was: Venus from effect of our pleasant mood induction on mixed percept was more
‘‘The Planets” by Holst for the Pleasant condition; Waltz of the pronounced for open individuals. This showed that the relation
Flowers from the ‘‘Nutcracker Suite” by Tchaikovsky for the Appet- between openness and mixed percept differed between the neutral
itive condition; the Largo movement from ‘‘The New World Sym- and pleasant conditions, b = 0.11, 95% CI [0.014, 0.204], t = 2.31,
phony” by Dvorak for the Neutral condition. p = 0.02, and between the pleasant and appetitive conditions,
 A. Antinori et al. / Journal of Research in Personality 68 (2017) 15–22 19

Table 3
Descriptive statistics for all experimental groups for all experiments.

Study personality Study mood

Variable Study 1 Study 1b Pleasant Neutral Appetitive
Openness/intellect 3.59a 3.58a 3.58a 3.63a 3.65a
0.52 0.47 0.39 0.52 0.72
(.86) (.85) (.72) (.79) (.90)
Openness 3.68a 3.71a 3.74a 3.85a 3.66a
0.64 0.61 0.61 0.64 0.77
(.79) (.80) (.72) (.78) (.82)
Intellect 3.49a 3.45a 3.42a 3.41a 3.64a
0.62 0.59 0.55 0.72 0.89
(.79) (.85) (76) (.82) (.92)
Conscientiousness 3.15a 3.17a 2.99a 2.98a 3.30a
0.58 0.52 0.54 0.51 0.62
(.82) (.80) (.81) (.88) (.86)
Orderliness 3.25a 3.27a 3.07a 3.11a 3.44a
0.68 0.69 0.65 0.68 0.76
(.81) (.77) (.72) (.86) (.81)
Industriousness 3.06a 3.07a 2.90a 2.84a 3.17a
0.68 0.56 0.64 0.53 0.63
(.87) (.82) (.79) (.79) (.77)
Extraversion 3.46a 3.48a 3.50a 3.53a 3.35a
0.54 0.49 0.55 0.59 0.61
(.91) (.90) (.89) (.91) (.89)
Enthusiasm 3.67a 3.71a 3.79a 3.80a 3.53a
0.61 0.66 0.67 0.60 0.74
(.86) (.87) (.87) (.85) (.90)
Assertiveness 3.24a 3.24a 3.22a 3.26a 3.16a
0.66 0.57 0.56 0.72 0.66
(.89) (.87) (.81) (.89) (.86)
Agreeableness 3.96a 3.95a 3.97a 3.96a 3.85a
0.44 0.44 0.45 0.42 0.67
(.84) (.80) (.85) (.70) (.74)
Politeness 3.84a 3.83a 3.83a 3.81a 3.72a
0.50 0.50 0.55 0.52 0.75
(.72) (.78) (.82) (.84) (.82)
Compassion 4.06a 4.06a 4.10a 3.82a 3.98a
0.61 0.57 0.55 0.52 0.69
(.87) (.82) (.81) (.89) (.85)
Neuroticism 2.84a 2.96a 2.75a 2.95a 2.92a
0.65 0.62 0.54 0.59 0.60
(.90) (.87) (.86) (.89) (.79)
Withdrawal 3.09a 3.09a 2.94a 3.00a 3.06a
1.53 0.61 0.58 0.59 0.67
(.81) (.80) (.76) (.77) (.77)
Volatility 2.73a 2.85a 2.55a 2.90a 2.77a
0.76 0.75 0.66 0.81 0.68
(.88) (.82) (.81) (.90) (.82)
Pre-pleasant positive 6.03a 6.17a 6.00a
1.23 0.80 1.28
(.72) (.79) (.77)
Post-pleasant positive 7.07a 6.39a 5.17b
0.96 1.30 1.95
(.70) (.78) (.75)
Pre-active positive 4.96a 4.39a 5.03a
0.98 1.17 1.15
(.71) (.77) (.78)
Post-active positive
4.27a 4.15a 6.10b
1.25 1.17 1.14
(.77) (.72) (.74)

Note. Mean = upper row, standard deviations = middle row, cronbach’s alpha = lower row. Between each study/experiment mean in the same row with different subscripts
differ significantly, p < 0.05.

b = 0.10, 95% CI [0.028, 0.171], t = 2.79, p = 0.01. This interaction is 5. Discussion

depicted in Fig. 2. In contrast to these findings, the relation
between intellect (i.e., the other aspect of O/I) and mixed percept Openness to experience has long been associated with flexible
did not differ between the neutral and pleasant condition and inclusive cognition, as shown by its links with liberal values
b = 0.05, 95% CI ["0.045, 0.147], t = 1.06, p = 0.29, nor between (Xu, Mar, & Peterson, 2013) and creativity (Kaufman et al., 2016;
the pleasant and appetitive conditions b = 0.05, 95% CI ["0.039, Silvia et al., 2008). Studies also demonstrated that open people
0.142], t = 1.14, p = 0.26. The full correlation matrix of BFAS and flexibly engage with the environment by processing stimuli that
Mixed percept for each mood condition is available in Supplemen- others tend to ignore (Peterson et al., 2002). Building on this liter-
tary material (See Supplement material Tables 3–5). ature, our three studies show this flexibility extends to basic, low-
20 A. Antinori et al. / Journal of Research in Personality 68 (2017) 15–22

and other traits of the Big Five (e.g., with extraversion in study 1,
and agreeableness in study 1b). However these associations disap-
peared after controlling for O/I, and were not replicated across our
studies. In contrast, the relation between O/I and mixed percept
was robust across our three samples. Our follow-up study 1b was
jointly motivated to assess the reproducibility of the results
obtained in study 1 while also ruling out response bias toward
reporting mixed percept. Our data showed that under identical
stimulus conditions, the relation between openness and mixed
percept was replicated in an independent sample. Critically, how-
ever, this association disappeared with larger rivalry stimuli. If the
increased reports of mixed percept resulted from an increased ten-
dency for open individuals to simply report their percept as mixed,
then this pattern should have been seen with both sets of stimuli.
However, as the contribution of low-level cortical properties on
mixed percept is thought to be greater when using larger stimuli
(Blake, O’Shea, & Mueller, 1992), we predicted and found that the
Fig. 1. Mix% for different mood manipulation. *p < 0.05. Error bars represent SEM.
impact of personality was reduced. Thus, providing strong evi-
dence of genuine differences in the visual experience of open
people.
The lack of relationship found in the current paper between
mixed percept and any personality traits, when using bigger stim-
uli, is interesting in its own right. To date, relatively few studies
have specifically investigated mixed percept. Although it is well
accepted that the competition between rivalrous images occur at
multiple stages in the visual hierarchy, where mixed percept
occurs remains unclear. However, when using larger stimuli our
data together with Blake et al.’s study (1992), suggests that mixed
percept may be influenced more by low-level visual processes,
rather than higher factors.
In study 2 we explored the effect of guided imagination of per-
ceptual and aesthetic stimuli on mixed percept. In line with the
activation theory (Tett & Guterman, 2000, see also DeYoung,
2015), which states that trait-relevant cues and stimuli activate
trait-relevant processes, we predicted that the aesthetic stimuli
in our guided imagination procedure would increase the suscepti-
Fig. 2. Relation between openness and mix percept following different mood
manipulations (Pleasant, Neutral, Appetitive). To note the increase of mix in the
bility of open people to experiencing the mixed percept. Results
pleasant condition characterised by perceptual-aesthetic elements for participants provided support for this hypothesis with open people reporting
high in openness (1 SD above the mean trait). more mixed percept following imagination of pleasant aesthetic
imagery. This finding is consistent with the idea that particularly
the openness subfactor is characterised by the engagement with
level visual perceptual experience: Just as open people are often the perceptual/aesthetic information. This also shows that a ‘tran-
described as being able to ‘see’ more opportunities when presented sient’ manipulation of an internal state can have a clear effect on
with familiar objects (Silvia et al., 2008), we provide the first evi- one’s visual experience and that rivalry is sensitive not only to
dence that they may literally also ‘see’ more possibilities, in that ‘stable’ variables, such as personality, but also to ‘transitory’ ones,
they identify more flexible ways of combining information within such as mood.
basic visual stimuli. Results from our guided imagination procedure were only
Our findings used the classic binocular rivalry paradigm, during partly in line with our predictions, with mixed percept increasing
which perceptual experience typically alternates between two in the Pleasant condition only compared to one control condition
stimuli presented to each eye, but occasionally comprises a percep- (Appetitive), but not the other one (Neutral). This may suggest
tual solution encompassing aspects of each stimulus (i.e., mixed Neutral vignettes were more perceptually salient than we antici-
percept). Our first study confirmed our hypothesis that open peo- pated. For instance, one vignette describes driving along a long
ple are more susceptible to this inclusive perceptual experience straight road, which may have triggered imagination of expansive
than their less open counterparts—a result replicated in the control (if affectively muted) landscapes. Despite this, our primary predic-
experiment of study 1b. In line with current theory and research tion was supported, as the impact of the Pleasant condition on
linking openness with perceptual processing and intellect with mixed percept was indeed strongest for people high in openness.
semantic processing (DeYoung, 2013, 2014), we predicted mixed With respect to the potential underlying mechanisms that may
percept would be related only to the openness aspect of O/I. How- connect mixed percept and O/I, we speculate a common or over-
ever, this pattern of divergence did not emerge, with the intellect lapping neurochemical basis. For instance, Openness/Intellect has
aspect of the scale (vs. openness) contributing more strongly to been linked with both dopamine (DeYoung, 2013) and serotonin
the relation with mixed percept in both samples. This suggests that (Kalbitzer et al., 2009). Similarly, rivalry alternations have been
the roles of openness and intellect in perceptual processing may be linked with a number of neurotransmitters, including serotonin
less distinct than first thought. A similar interpretation might be (Carter et al., 2005, 2007), noradrenaline (Einhäuser, Stout, Koch,
reached from the observation by Fayn et al. (2015) that both open- & Carter, 2008), and GABA (van Loon et al., 2013).
ness and intellect predicted reactivity to novelty in visual art stim- Little research has specifically investigated the mixed percept
uli. Also unexpected were the correlations between mixed percept state, however, one recent study (Cao, Zhuang, Kang, & Hong,
 A. Antinori et al. / Journal of Research in Personality 68 (2017) 15–22 21

2016) found that acute alcohol administration lead to an increase Acknowledgment

of mixed percept. Interestingly psylocibin— an hallucinogenic
compound structurally similar to serotonin—has also been shown We thank Sarah Coulton for assistance with data collection for
to increase instances of mixed percept (Carter et al., 2007) and is study 1b.
known to have has selective, long-lasting effects on trait openness
(MacLean, Johnson, & Griffiths, 2011). Out of curiosity we com-
Appendix A. Supplementary material
pared effect sizes reported here with the previously reported
effects of psilocybin on mixed percept (215 mg dose; Carter
Supplementary data associated with this article can be found, in
et al., 2007). The effect of psilocybin was equivalent to a Cohen’s
the online version, at http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2017.03.005.
d of 0.93 and approximately twice as large as the effects reported
in the current study (i.e., a correlation of r = 0.21 equates to a
Cohens’ d of 0.45). Assuming these effect sizes are reliably esti- References
mated, they potentially suggest that the impact of being two stan-
Anderson, E., Siegel, E. H., & Barrett, L. F. (2011). What you feel influences what you
dard deviations above the mean on openness — a normally see: The role of affective feelings in resolving binocular rivalry. Journal of
distributed personality trait — may be comparable to that of a Experimental Social Psychology, 47(4), 856–860. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
direct pharmacological manipulation, with respect to the experi- j.jesp.2011.02.009.
Antinori, A., Smillie, L. D., & Carter, O. L. (2017). Personality measures link slower
ence of mixed percept. binocular rivalry switch rates to higher levels of self-discipline. Frontiers in
Future research investigating such mechanisms may clarify the Psychology. http://dx.doi.org/10.1152/jn.00509.2013.
processes underlying both binocular rivalry and openness to expe- Blake, R., O’Shea, R. P., & Mueller, T. J. (1992). Spatial zones of binocular rivalry in
central and peripheral vision. Visual Neuroscience, 8(5), 469–478.
rience. Furthermore, another way future studies may build upon Brainard, D. H. (1997). The psychophysics toolbox. Spatial Vision, 10, 433–436.
the current findings is to investigate the relation between open- Cao, D., Zhuang, X., Kang, P., & Hong, S. W. (2016). Acute alcohol drinking promotes
ness and mixed percept across multiple rivalry sessions within piecemeal percepts during binocular rivalry. Frontiers in Psychology. http://dx.
doi.org/10.1167/12.11.16.
each participant. Although rivalry is reported to show high test- Carter, O., & Cavanagh, P. (2007). Onset rivalry: Brief presentation isolates an early
retest stability (Miller et al., 2010), using multiple extended independent phase of perceptual competition. PloS One, 2(4), e343. http://dx.
response trials may help to reduce any impact of noise in the data doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0000343.g003.
Carter, O. L., Hasler, F., Pettigrew, J. D., Wallis, G. M., Liu, G. B., & Vollenweider, F. X.
and allow for within-subject replication of the present findings, (2007). Psilocybin links binocular rivalry switch rate to attention and subjective
adding further support to our conclusions. While the primary find- arousal levels in humans. Psychopharmacology, 195(3), 415–424. http://dx.doi.
ings were replicated in a different sample we suspect that the rela- org/10.1007/s00213-007-0930-9.
Carter, O. L., Pettigrew, J. D., Hasler, F., Wallis, G. M., Liu, G. B., Hell, D., &
tions emerged between openness and mixed percept would be
Vollenweider, F. (2005). Modulating the rate and rhythmicity of perceptual
even stronger with rivalry tested in multiple sessions. Future stud- rivalry alternations with the mixed 5-HT2A and 5-HT1A agonist psilocybin.
ies would also benefit from testing more participants, however it is Neuropsychopharmacology, 30(6), 1154–1162. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sj.
important to note that the effect sizes reported in the current npp.1300621.
DeYoung, C. G. (2013). The neuromodulator of exploration: A unifying theory of the
paper were close to the average effect size within personality role of dopamine in personality. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7, 762. http://
research for variables not sharing method variance (Richard, dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2013.00762.
Bond, & Stokes-Zoota, 2003) and within the middle third of effect DeYoung, C. G (2014). Openness/intellect: A dimension of personality reflecting
cognitive exploration. In M. L. Cooper & R. J. Larsen (Eds.). A P A handbook of
sizes in the whole of psychology (Hemphill, 2003). personality and social psychology: Personality processes and individual differences
In conclusion, we provided the first evidence that individuals (Vol. 4, pp. 369–399). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
reporting greater openness to experience may also have character- DeYoung, C. G. (2015). Cybernetic big five theory. Journal of Research in Personality.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2014.07.004.
istically different low-level visual perceptual experiences. Given DeYoung, C. G., Quilty, L. C., & Peterson, J. B. (2007). Between facets and domains: 10
the apparent similarity between the higher cognitive features of aspects of the Big Five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(5),
openness (e.g., divergent thinking) and the lower-level features 880–896. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.93.5.880.
DeYoung, C. G., Shamosh, N. A., Green, A. E., Braver, T. S., & Gray, J. R. (2009). Intellect
revealed in the present research (i.e., mixed percept), it is possible as distinct from openness: Differences revealed by fMRI of working memory.
that common neural processes may be involved. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97(5), 883–892. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1037/a0016615.
Einhäuser, W., Stout, J., Koch, C., & Carter, O. (2008). Pupil dilation reflects
Author contribution perceptual selection and predicts subsequent stability in perceptual rivalry.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105(5), 1704–1709. http://dx.
doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0707727105.
All authors developed the study concept and contributed to the Fayn, K., MacCann, C., Tiliopoulos, N., & Silvia, P. J. (2015). Aesthetic emotions and
study design; A. Antinori collected the data; A. Antinori and L. aesthetic people: Openness predicts sensitivity to novelty in the experiences of
Smillie performed the data analyses; A. Antinori drafted the manu- interest and pleasure. Frontiers in Psychology, 6(247), 305. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.jrp.2012.01.002.
script; L. Smillie and O. Carter provided critical revisions to the
Fraley, R. C., & Marks, M. J. (2007). The null hypothesis significance testing debate
manuscript. All authors approved the final version of the manu- and its implications for personality research. In R. W. Robins, R. C. Fraley, & R. F.
script for submission. Krueger (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in personality psychology
(pp. 149–169). New York: Guilford.
Hemphill, J. F. (2003). Interpreting the magnitudes of correlation coefficients. The
Declaration of conflict interests American Psychologist, 58(1), 78–79. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-
066X.58.1.78.
Kalbitzer, J., Frokjaer, V. G., Erritzoe, D., Svarer, C., Cumming, P., Nielsen, F. Å., et al.
The authors declared that they had no conflict of interest with (2009). The personality trait openness is related to cerebral 5-HTT levels.
respect to their authorship or the publication of this article. NeuroImage, 45(2), 280–285. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
neuroimage.2008.12.001.
Kaufman, S. B., DeYoung, C. G., Gray, J. R., Jiménez, L., Brown, J., & Mackintosh, N.
Funding (2010). Implicit learning as an ability. Cognition, 116(3), 321–340. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1016/j.cognition.2010.05.011.
Kaufman, S. B., Quilty, L. C., Grazioplene, R. G., Hirsh, J. B., Gray, J. R., Peterson, J. B., &
A.A. was supported by an Australian Postgraduate Award and a DeYoung, C. G. (2016). Openness to experience and intellect differentially
Melbourne International Research Scholarship; O.C. was supported predict creative achievement in the arts and sciences. Journal of Personality, 84
by a research fellowship from the Australian National health Med- (2), 248–258. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12156.
Klink, P. C., Brascamp, J. W., Blake, R., & van Wezel, R. J. A. (2010). Experience-driven
ical Research Council #628590 and Australian Research Council plasticity in binocular vision. Current Biology, 20(16), 1464–1469. http://dx.doi.
#FT140100807. org/10.1016/j.cub.2010.06.057.
22 A. Antinori et al. / Journal of Research in Personality 68 (2017) 15–22

MacLean, K. A., Johnson, M. W., & Griffiths, R. R. (2011). Mystical experiences Saucier, G. (1992). Benchmarks: Integrating affective and interpersonal circles with
occasioned by the hallucinogen psilocybin lead to increases in the personality the Big-Five personality factors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.
domain of openness. Journal of Psychopharmacology, 25(11), 1453–1461. http:// Silvia, P. J., & Nusbaum, E. C. (2011). On personality and piloerection: Individual
dx.doi.org/10.1177/0269881111420188. differences in aesthetic chills and other unusual aesthetic experiences.
McCrae, R. R. (2007). Aesthetic chills as a universal marker of openness to Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 5(3), 208–214. http://dx.doi.
experience. Motivation and Emotion, 31(1), 5–11. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/ org/10.1037/a0021914.
s11031-007-9053-1. Silvia, P. J., Winterstein, B. P., Willse, J. T., Barona, C. M., Cram, J. T., Hess, K. I., et al.
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1987). Validation of the five-factor model of personality (2008). Assessing creativity with divergent thinking tasks: Exploring the
across instruments and observers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52 reliability and validity of new subjective scoring methods. Psychology of
(1), 1–10. Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 2(2), 68–85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1931-
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. Jr., (1997). Chapter 31 - conceptions and correlates of 3896.2.2.68.
openness to experience. In R. H. J. Briggs (Ed.), Handbook of personality Smillie, L. D., Cooper, A. J., Wilt, J., & Revelle, W. (2012). Do extraverts get more bang
psychology (pp. 825–847). San Diego: Academic Press. for the buck? Refining the affective-reactivity hypothesis of extraversion.
Miller, S. M., Hansell, N. K., Ngo, T. T., Liu, G. B., Pettigrew, J. D., Martin, N. G., & Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103(2), 306–326. http://dx.doi.org/
Wright, M. J. (2010). Genetic contribution to individual variation in binocular 10.1037/a0028372.
rivalry rate. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107(6), 2664–2668. Stanley, J., Forte, J. D., & Cavanagh, P. (2011). Onset rivalry: The initial dominance
http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0912149107. phase is independent of ongoing perceptual alternations. Frontiers in Human
Passamonti, L., Terracciano, A., Riccelli, R., Donzuso, G., Cerasa, A., Vaccaro, M. G., Neuroscience. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2011.00140.
et al. (2015). Increased functional connectivity within mesocortical networks in Tett, R. P., & Guterman, H. A. (2000). Situation trait relevance, trait expression, and
open people. NeuroImage, 104, 301–309. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. cross-situational consistency: Testing a principle of trait activation. Journal of
neuroimage.2014.09.017. Research in Personality, 34(4), 397–423. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/
Pelli, D. G. (1997). The VideoToolbox software for visual psychophysics: jrpe.2000.2292.
Transforming numbers into movies. Spatial Vision, 10(4), 437–442. Tong, F., Meng, M., & Blake, R. (2006). Neural bases of binocular rivalry. Trends in
Peterson, J. B., & Carson, S. (1999). Latent inhibition and openness to experience in a Cognitive Sciences, 10(11), 502–511. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
high-achieving student population. Personality and Individual Differences, 28(2), tics.2006.09.003.
323–332. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(99)00101-4. van Loon, A. M., Knapen, T., Scholte, H. S., St John-Saaltink, E., Donner, T. H., &
Peterson, J. B., Smith, K. W., & Carson, S. (2002). Openness and extraversion are Lamme, V. A. F. (2013). GABA shapes the dynamics of bistable perception.
associated with reduced latent inhibition: Replication and commentary. Current Biology, 23(9), 823–827. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2013.03.067.
Personality and Individual Differences. Wolfe, J. M. (1983). Influence of spatial frequency, luminance, and duration on
Richard, F. D., Bond, C. F., & Stokes-Zoota, J. J. (2003). One hundred years of social binocular rivalry and abnormal fusion of briefly presented dichoptic stimuli.
psychology quantitatively described. Review of General Psychology, 7(4), Perception, 12(4), 447–456. http://dx.doi.org/10.1068/p120447.
331–363. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.7.4.331. Xu, X., Mar, R. A., & Peterson, J. B. (2013). Does cultural exposure partially explain
Rowe, G., Hirsh, J. B., & Anderson, A. K. (2007). Positive affect increases the breadth the association between personality and political orientation? Personality and
of attentional selection. Pnas, 104(1), 383–388. http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/ Social Psychology Bulletin, 39(11), 1497–1517. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/
pnas.0605198104. 0146167213499235.
Said, C. P., Egan, R. D., Minshew, N. J., Behrmann, M., & Heeger, D. J. (2013). Normal Yang, Y., Rose, D., & Blake, R. (1992). On the variety of percepts associated with
binocular rivalry in autism: Implications for the excitation/inhibition imbalance dichoptic viewing of dissimilar monocular stimuli. Perception, 21(1), 47–62.
hypothesis. Vision Research, 77(C), 59–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. Yik, M., Russell, J. A., & Steiger, J. H. (2011). A 12-point circumplex structure of core
visres.2012.11.002. affect. Emotion, 11(4), 705–731. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0023980.