Personality and Individual Differences 173 (2021) 110573

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Personality and Individual Differences

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

Musical expertise and personality – differences related to occupational

choice and instrument categories
Karen L. Kuckelkorn *, Örjan de Manzano, Fredrik Ullén
Department of Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, 17177 Stockholm, Sweden

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Several studies have documented personality differences between musicians and non-musicians, and there have
Music also been reports of personality differences between musicians playing different instruments. However, the
Expertise samples have been small and findings are often inconsistent between studies. Here, we investigated Big Five
Individual differences
personality differences between professional musicians, amateur musicians, and non-musicians in more than
Personality
Vocational interest
7000 participants, as well as differences related to instrument categories. We had two specific hypotheses, i.e.
that musicians would have higher openness than non-musicians, and that singers would be more extraverted than
instrumentalists. Indeed, we found large group differences in openness, with professionals scoring higher than
amateurs, who scored higher than non-musicians. Furthermore, singers were, as predicted, higher on extraver­
sion than instrumentalists among both professionals and amateurs. We also found that professionals had higher
neuroticism, lower agreeableness, and lower conscientiousness than amateurs. For professionals and amateurs,
there were personality differences between instruments, but the patterns were inconsistent. This suggests that the
differences were not primarily related to instrument choice per se, but instead possibly moderated by other
factors such as musical genre and the social context of music making in each group.

1. Introduction Hakulinen, 2019).

A large literature shows that occupational choices correlate with
personality (Holland, 1997). The underlying mechanisms are presum­
ably complex, but one important reason for the association is that per­
sonality traits show substantial covariation with vocational interests.
For instance, the personality trait openness to experience correlates with
artistic and investigative interests, while extraversion correlates with
social interests (Holland, 1997; Larson et al., 2002). Moreover, person­
ality traits may correlate with abilities and competences relevant for a
particular occupation. For example, several studies have found extra­
version to predict successful leadership, presumably since the domi­
nance, sociability, and positive affect associated with this personality
trait match the requirements of being a good leader (Do & Minbashian,
2020). One likely general explanation for associations between per­
sonality and occupational choice is thus that people seek out occupa­
tional environments that are congruent with their psychological profile
(Holland, 1997). In line with this, it has been found that job satisfaction
is higher when an individual’s personality is more similar to the average
personality in that individual’s occupation (Törnroos, Jokela, &
Music has become one of the major model domains in studies of
expert performance and underlying brain mechanisms (Ullén et al.,
2016; Ullén et al., 2019). However, the literature on personality in
musicians is still relatively limited. One consistent finding, nonetheless,
is that musicians score higher than the general population on openness
(Butkovic & Dopudj, 2017; Vaag et al., 2018). Indeed, openness predicts
both professional musicianship and active musical engagement among
amateurs (Butkovic et al., 2015; Corrigall et al., 2013). Individuals with
high openness also tend to be aesthetically sensitive and show strong
emotional reactions (‘chills’) to music (McCrae, 2007; Nusbaum & Sil­
via, 2011). Focusing on more domain-specific skills, Greenberg et al.
(2015) found that openness was related to self-reported general musical
sophistication, as well as melodic memory and rhythm perception.
Interestingly, openness is not only a predictor of achievement in music,
but across both artistic and scientific domains, and it moreover corre­
lates with psychometric creativity (de Manzano & Ullen, 2018; Feist,
1999). Thus, openness more generally describes a proclivity for
“cognitive exploration” of abstract and semantic information.
For other personality traits, findings are less consistent. Some studies

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: karen.kuckelkorn@ki.se (K.L. Kuckelkorn), orjan.demanzano@ki.se (Ö. de Manzano), fredrik.ullen@ki.se (F. Ullén).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.110573
Received 1 October 2020; Received in revised form 27 November 2020; Accepted 1 December 2020
Available online 27 January 2021
0191-8869/© 2020 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
K.L. Kuckelkorn et al.
have reported higher neuroticism and anxiety in musicians (Kemp,
1996; Vaag et al., 2016), but other investigations have failed to replicate
these findings (Butkovic & Dopudj, 2017), or even reported lower
neuroticism in musicians (Buttsworth & Smith, 1995). Kemp (1996)
found musicians to be more introverted than non-musicians, while other
studies reported no difference (Vaag et al., 2018), or even the opposite
pattern (Butkovic & Dopudj, 2017).
Intriguingly, personality traits have also been reported to correlate
with specialization within musical expertise, with regard to the choice of
musical instrument. Several researchers found that vocalists are more
extraverted than instrumentalists (Reardon MacLellan, 2011; Sandgren,
2019; Torrance & Bugos, 2017). It has been suggested that vocalists
need to be more extraverted (Sandgren, 2019) due to the eye contact and
personal connection they need to build up with the audience (Coimbra
et al., 2001). Additionally, Vaag et al. (2018) found that vocalists score
higher on openness than instrumentalists. For string players, previous
studies have found higher levels on neuroticism and introversion in
comparison to other instrumentalists (Buttsworth & Smith, 1995; Cribb
& Gregory, 1999; Mihajlovski, 2013; Vaag et al., 2018). This was
replicated by Mihajlovski (2013), who additionally found similar pat­
terns of introversion and anxiety in woodwind players. Apart from these
observations, findings on personality profiles of musicians playing
different types of instruments are mixed and often inconsistent between
studies. For example, Mihajlovski (2013) reported that pianists score
relatively high on traits such as originality, anxiety, self-discipline, and
emotional instability; Buttsworth and Smith (1995), in contrast,
observed that piano players displayed higher levels of emotional sta­
bility than other instrumentalists. Research on other instrument cate­
gories barely found any differences in personality (Cameron et al., 2015;
Vaag et al., 2018).
In summary, there is convincing evidence that musicians have higher
levels of openness than non-musicians. For other traits the picture is
much less consistent. With regard to differences among musicians
playing different instruments, the most replicated finding is that vo­
calists are more extraverted than instrumentalists. As for the in­
consistencies and negative findings, Vaag et al. (2018) noted that many
studies have used relatively small samples, and there has been consid­
erable variation in sample characteristics.
Here, in order to potentially resolve some of the inconsistencies in
the previous literature, we used data from a comparably large sample of
musicians (amateur and professional) and non-musicians, to analyze
personality differences related to musical achievement, and related to
the main instrument played among the musicians. Of particular interest
was to investigate whether there were significant differences between
individuals who had chosen music as their occupation (professionals)
and people who engaged in music for pleasure (amateurs). Given the
previous literature summarized above, we had two a priori expectations,
i.e. that musicians would score higher than non-musicians on openness,
and that vocalists would have a higher mean level of extraversion than
instrumentalists.
2. Methods
2.1. Participants
Data analyses were based on participants from two Swedish samples,
a sample from the Swedish twin registry and a sample of musicians. In
total, 7293 participants (3125 females), aged between 17 and 85 years
(M = 41.86, SD = 8.79) were included in the analyses.
2.1.1. Twin sample
The first sample was recruited from the STAGE cohort of the Swedish
Twin Registry (Lichtenstein et al., 2002; Lichtenstein et al., 2006), as
part of a larger data collection. In total, 11,543 individuals participated
in a web survey on musical experience and expertise (Mosing et al.,
2014). Since the present study had no research question tied to genetic
2
Personality and Individual Differences 173 (2021) 110573
factors, we first constructed a sample of 7943 unrelated participants,
which included all single twins (i.e. without a participating sibling) as
well as one randomly selected twin from each twin pair who provided
responses on all personality items. From this sample, 6837 individuals,
aged 27–54 (M = 40.97, SD = 7.8, 2898 females), had data that allowed
us to determine their occupational status as musicians (see Data anal­
ysis), and were included in analyses of associations between personality
and musician status. In relation to the analyses of associations between
personality and instrument choice, individuals reporting instruments
outside one of the main instrument categories (see Data analysis), e.g.
whistling, were excluded (n = 14), along with those who failed to report
a main instrument (n = 41) or reported several main instruments from
different categories (n = 296). Hence, out of 4541 amateur musicians,
4190 individuals aged 27–54 (M = 40.82, SD = 7.76, 2639 females)
were included. All participants gave informed consent, and the study
was approved by the Regional Ethics Review Board in Stockholm (Dnr
2011/570-31/5, 2012/1107/32).
2.1.2. Musician sample
The second sample, consisting only of musicians, was recruited
through Swedish music institutions (orchestras, music schools) and with
advertisements in various magazines for musicians. Inclusion criteria for
this sample were to have a degree in a higher music education and to be
professionally active, or to be enrolled as students in a college for music
(post-secondary education). The musician sample consisted of 456
participants, aged 17–85 (M = 49.39, SD = 12.17, 227 females). Out of
these, 410 individuals, aged 17–85 (M = 49.14, SD = 12.15, 203 fe­
males) reported one main instrument, or instruments of the same in­
strument category (see Data analysis for definition) and were included in
the analysis of personality and instrument choice. Informed consent was
given by all participants and the study was approved by the Regional
Ethical Review Board in Stockholm (Dnr 2013/1777-32).
2.2. Measures
Personality was measured using a Swedish translation of the 44-item
Big Five Inventory (BFI-44) (Zakrisson, 2010). A good reliability and
validity have been found for the Swedish translation of the BFI-44
(Cronbach alpha 0.73–0.84) (Zakrisson, 2010).
Musical achievement was measured using the Swedish adapted
version of the Creative Achievement Questionnaire (CAQ) (Carson et al.,
2005). This questionnaire measures involvement and attainment in 7
different domains, including music. Participants were asked to rate their
engagement in music on a 7-point scale: (1) no activity; (2) self-taught,
no publicly displayed work; (3) taken lessons, no publicly displayed
work; (4) publicly displayed work, without monetary reward; (5) pub­
licly displayed work, with monetary reward; (6) professionally active;
and (7) professionally active and some work has been recognized na­
tionally/internationally and/or received at least one prize.
Professional stage was determined in the musician sample by having
participants select one of the following responses: (1) still studying at a
college of music, (2) music education and a profession within music and
(3) no profession within music but dedicate much of their free time to
music.
Professional choice was based on a free text response in the twin
sample survey where participants stated their current, or if unemployed,
previous main occupation. The responses were manually coded into
professional groups. In total, 17 participants in the twin sample had
professions within music [professional musicians (n = 1), music teachers
(n = 11), piano/sound technicians (n = 4), and guitar builders (n = 1)].
2.3. Data analysis
For statistical analyses, individuals from the two samples were
assigned to one of three observational groups (non-musicians, amateur
musicians, and professional musicians):
K.L. Kuckelkorn et al. Personality and Individual Differences 173 (2021) 110573

(1) Non-musicians were selected from the twin sample and included 3. Results
individuals who had neither played a musical instrument, nor had
any training in singing. There was a significant overall effect of observational group on
(2) Amateurs were selected from the twin sample and consisted of personality (Pillai’s trace, V = 0.12, F[10, 14,574] = 89.81, p < .001).
individuals that played or had played a musical instrument, Personality scores for professionals, amateurs, and non-musicians are
including voice. Further inclusion criteria were a CAQ score shown in Fig. 1. As hypothesized, a post-hoc Tukey’s HSD test revealed
lower or equal to 5, and no occupation in music. highly significant (p < .005) group differences in openness, with pro­
(3) Professionals were selected from the musician sample and con­ fessionals scoring higher than amateurs, who in turn scored higher than
sisted of individuals with either a CAQ score in music of 6 or non-musicians. The effect size relating to the difference between pro­
higher or a professional stage score of 1, 2 or 3. fessionals and non-musicians was considerable (Cohen’s d = 1.51).
Additional post-hoc Tukey’s HSD tests revealed group differences
All observational groups were included in the analysis of the first (Fig. 1) in extraversion (amateurs > non-musicians, p < .005), agree­
research question. For the second research question, we grouped ableness (amateurs > non-musicians, p < .005; amateurs > pro­
different main instruments into seven instrument categories: bowed, fessionals, p < .05), conscientiousness (amateurs > professionals, p <
woodwind, voice, plucked, keyboard, percussion, and brass instruments. .005), and neuroticism (professionals > non-musicians, p < .005; pro­
The frequency of the different instrument categories, as well as the in­ fessionals > amateurs, p < .05; amateurs > non-musicians, p < .05).
dividual instruments included in each category can be found in Table 1. Secondly, we used MANOVAs to investigate whether personality
For the data analysis of the first research question, we used a traits differed between musicians of different instrument categories.
multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) to compare the mean Among professionals (Fig. 2), there was a significant overall effect of
personality traits between non-musicians, amateur musicians, and pro­ instrument category on personality (Pillai’s trace, V = 0.16, F[30, 2015]
fessional musicians. The different personality traits were used as = 2.18, p < .001). In support of our hypothesis, a post-hoc Tukey’s HSD
dependent variables and the observational groups as the independent test showed that singers scored significantly higher on extraversion than
variable. Separate MANOVAs were also performed in professionals and instrumentalists (bowed, p < .005, woodwind, p < .005, plucked, p <
amateurs, to investigate mean personality differences between instru­ .005, keyboard, p < .005; brass players, p < .05). Additionally, singers
ment categories. Here, the different personality traits were used as scored higher on openness than keyboard players (p < .05).
dependent variables and the instrument category as the independent Lastly, we investigated the effect of instrument category on person­
variable. All significance tests were two-tailed. ality in amateurs. Also in this sample, we found a significant overall
effect of instrument category on personality (Pillai’s trace, V = 0.05, F
[30, 20,915] = 7.34, p < .001). As in the professional musician group,
singers scored significantly higher on extraversion than individuals of
Table 1 several instrument categories (Tukey’s HSD test: plucked, p < .005;
Frequency of instruments per instrument category, for each musician group. woodwind, p < .005; bowed, p < .005; keyboard, p < .05; brass, p < .05).
Individuals reporting multiple main instruments of the same category are Amateur singers also scored higher on openness than keyboard (p <
counted according to their first listed instrument.
.005), bowed (p < .05) and woodwind players (p < .005), and woodwind
Instrument Instrument Professional Amateur players scored lower on openness than plucked (p < .005) and keyboard
category musicians musicians players (p < .05). Additional findings in the amateur musician group
Bowed Cello 15 36 were that singers scored higher on agreeableness than plucked (p <
Viola 8 8 .005), woodwind (p < .005), and keyboard (p < .05) players; Percus­
Keyfiddle 3 3
sionists scored lower on conscientiousness than woodwind (p < .005),
Double Bass 15 7
Violin 33 194 keyboard players (p < .005), and singers (p < .005), and plucked players
Total 74 248 scored lower than woodwind (p < .05), and keyboard players (p < .005).
Woodwind Recorder 7 315 These findings are illustrated in Fig. 3. As an additional control analysis,
Saxophone 11 71
a MANOVA was performed (personality traits as dependent variables) to
Flute 23 264
Clarinet 8 199
assess whether those excluded from the instrument category analyses
Harmonica 0 8 differed in personality from those included (see Twin sample). The re­
Bassoon 7 3 sults showed that the excluded individuals had higher agreeableness,
Oboe 4 6 openness, and extraversion, (p < .05) however the effect sizes were
Total 60 866
extremely small (η2 = 0.001, η2 = 0.001, and η2 = 0.003, respectively).
Voice Total 58 1113
Plucked Guitar 40 697
Electric 12 47 4. Discussion
guitar
Mandolin 0 9 The present study constitutes one of the largest investigations of
Cither 0 2
Ukulele 0 1
personality differences relating to musical engagement performed to
Total 52 756 date. Both our a priori hypotheses were supported by the data. First,
Keyboard Piano 72 818 professional musicians showed higher openness than amateur musi­
Organ 47 54 cians, who in turn scored higher on this dimension than non-musicians.
Accordeon 0 45
Secondly, singers had higher extraversion than instrumentalists among
Total 119 917
Percussion Total 16 116 both professionals and amateurs. In both groups, this effect was signif­
Brass Trumpet 11 100 icant for all instrument categories but one (percussion). Furthermore,
Cornet 0 3 our analyses revealed a number of additional personality differences
Horn 10 24 between the groups, and instrument categories. Interestingly, pro­
Alto horn 0 5
Trombone 6 34
fessionals had higher neuroticism, lower agreeableness, and lower
Euphonium 0 3 conscientiousness than amateurs. Given the origin of the samples, these
Tuba 4 5 findings primarily generalize to musicians in Western cultures.
Total 31 174
Total 410 4190

3
K.L. Kuckelkorn et al. Personality and Individual Differences 173 (2021) 110573

1.2
p < .05
1.0
p < .005
0.8

standardized z-scores 0.6

0.4
0.2
0.0
-0.2
-0.4

Extraversion Agreeableness Conscienousness Neurocism Openness

Non-Musicians Amateurs Musicians Professional Musicians

Fig. 1. Personality of non-musicians, amateur musicians and professional musicians. Significant differences are indicated with grey lines at p < .05 and with black
lines at p < .005. The error bars represent standard errors.

p < .05 p < .005

0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
standardized z-scores

0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
-0.1
-0.2
-0.3
-0.4
-0.5
-0.6
Extraversion Agreeableness Conscienousness Neurocism Openness
Bowed Woodwind Voice Plucked Keyboard Percussion Brass

Fig. 2. The personality of each instrument category in the professional musician group. Significant differences are indicated with grey lines at p < .05 and with black
lines at p < .005. The error bars represent standard errors.

p < .05 p < .005

0.8
0.7
0.6
standardized z-scores

0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
-0.1
-0.2
-0.3
-0.4
-0.5

Extraversion Agreeableness Conscienousness Neurocism Openness

Bowed Woodwind Voice Plucked Keyboard Percussion Brass

Fig. 3. The personality of each instrument category in the amateur musician group. Significant differences are indicated with grey lines at p < .05 and with black
lines at p < .005. The error bars represent standard errors.

4.1. Personality differences between professional musicians, amateurs,
and non-musicians
The finding that professionals scored highest on openness, followed
by amateurs, and then non-musicians, was expected, and in line with the
notion that individuals tend to choose occupations which involve
activities that suit their psychological profile (Holland, 1997). As sum­
marized in the Introduction, openness is related to a whole complex of
traits that are relevant for musicianship. Accordingly, the above finding
fits with multifactorial models of expertise, which emphasize that
achievement and the acquisition of domain-specific skills depend not
just on long-term practice, but on a multitude of other variables,

4
K.L. Kuckelkorn et al.
including interests, personality, motivation, and abilities (Ackerman
et al., 2011; Ullén et al., 2018). Additionally, it has been found that
individuals higher on openness tend to be more empathetic (Costa et al.,
2014; Song & Shi, 2017) and further studies have shown an association
between musical group education and the development of empathy in
children (Rabinowitch et al., 2013). Due to the link between openness,
empathy, and musical engagement in an ensemble, it can be hypothe­
sized that musical interactions with other affects empathy, which in turn
may have some influence on openness. While genetic factors are likely to
be involved in the higher openness in musicians (Butkovic & Dopudj,
2017; de Manzano & Ullen, 2018), it cannot be excluded that effects of
long-term engagement in musical activities with others also play a role.
Interestingly, a similar pattern (i.e. professionals > amateurs > non-
musicians), in this case with a significant difference between pro­
fessionals and non-musicians, was seen for neuroticism. We suggest two
possible explanations for this result. The first possibility is that it reflects
well-known associations between creativity, personality, and mental
health. Artists in general tend to score higher on neuroticism than non-
artists, and studies focusing specifically on professional musicians have
shown higher levels of anxiety in this group than in the general work­
force (Feist, 1998; Vaag et al., 2016). Moreover, creative professions in
general have an overrepresentation of individuals with bipolar disorder,
as well as healthy siblings of people with schizophrenia or bipolar dis­
order (Kyaga et al., 2011) and neuroticism is a risk factor for both bi­
polar disorder and schizophrenia (Gale et al., 2016). Thus, the slightly
higher average level of neuroticism in musicians could involve broad
constitutional factors implied in both psychopathology and creativity.
A second possibility is that neuroticism in professionals are influ­
enced by stressful psychosocial factors, e.g. financial insecurity, irreg­
ular work routines and performance anxiety. Vaag et al. (2016) found
some support for this in a study of Norwegian professional musicians;
trends for higher levels of psychological distress were found in freelance
and solo/lead musicians compared to other groups of musicians, and
other researchers report poorer mental health in orchestra musicians
compared to the general population (Voltmer et al., 2012). However,
such mechanisms seem unlikely to explain the observation that ama­
teurs show a tendency for higher neuroticism than non-musicians, since
amateurs by definition do not have their main occupation within music.
Interestingly, findings for the three other Big Five dimensions –
agreeableness and conscientiousness – followed a different pattern,
where amateurs tended to have higher levels than professionals and
amateurs tended even to have a higher agreeableness than non-
musicians. Thus, the personality profile of professionals is not simply a
more extreme version of that of amateurs there also appears to be
qualitative differences in the personality of individuals engaging in
music as a profession or as a hobby. Specifically, we found professionals
to be, on average, significantly less agreeable and conscientious than
amateurs. There was also a trend (p = .06) for professionals to show
lower conscientiousness than non-musicians. Notably, low agreeable­
ness and conscientiousness are both related to high levels of psychoti­
cism in Eysenck’s personality model (Eysenck, 1995). These findings are
in agreement with general observations of comparably lower agree­
ableness and conscientiousness in creative artists (Feist, 1998).
4.2. Personality and choice of music instrument
As hypothesized, and in line with previous studies, we found that
singers were more extraverted than instrumentalists (Reardon MacLel­
lan, 2011; Sandgren, 2019; Torrance & Bugos, 2017). Interestingly, this
pattern was seen in both professionals and amateurs suggesting a
functionally meaningful relation, where higher levels of extraversion
contribute to successful vocal performance. A reasonable explanation
could be that vocalists are often solo musicians who communicate
directly with the audience using their own voice rather than a musical
instrument. Being at the center of the audience’s attention is likely easier
and more rewarding for individuals with higher extraversion. Similarly,
5
Personality and Individual Differences 173 (2021) 110573
other studies have found high levels of extraversion in actors (Nettle,
2006). The other personality differences related to instrument choice
did not show a high consistency across musician groups. A few earlier
studies have reported relatively high neuroticism and low extraversion
in string players (Buttsworth & Smith, 1995; Cribb & Gregory, 1999;
Mihajlovski, 2013; Vaag et al., 2018). However, these observations were
not replicated here in either musician group. Inconsistent results on
personality differences across studies could be due to relatively small
samples in previous studies, and considerable variation in sample
characteristics. The control comparison comparing personality between
included and excluded individuals showed significant differences,
however since the effect sizes were minimal we conclude that the dif­
ferences were negligible in practice.
All in all, these observations suggest that, apart from the robust as­
sociation between extraversion and singing, associations between other
personality traits and instrument categories may to a large degree be
driven by other factors than instrument choice per se. Three such factors
which appear likely, but were not investigated here, are musical genre,
motivation for engaging in music, and social context of music making.
While the empirical literature is still small, a few published studies
suggest that musicians specializing in different genres may differ in
personality (Benedek et al., 2014; Papageorgi et al., 2013). Similarly,
music is performed in widely differing social contexts and with different
personal goals, not least by amateurs. Notably, there were more signif­
icant personality differences related to instrument choice in amateurs
than in professionals.
4.3. Conclusion
Professionals and amateurs, and to some extent also musicians
specializing in different instruments, have different personality profiles.
Some of these differences, in particular the higher openness of musicians
and the higher extraversion of singers compared to instrumentalists, are
likely related to musical skill, and are thus in line with models empha­
sizing that the acquisition of expertise depends on multiple traits
(Ackerman et al., 2011; Ullén et al., 2016). These are also traits that have
been related to artistic creativity in general. Other personality differ­
ences related to instrument choice were found to be inconsistent be­
tween amateurs and professionals.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Karen L. Kuckelkorn has contributed with the conceptualization,
methodology, formal analysis, visualization and writing of the
manuscript.
Örjan de Manzano has contributed with conceptualization, meth­
odology, writing of the manuscript and project administration.
Fredrik Ullén has contributed with conceptualization, methodology,
writing of the manuscript, project administration and funding
acquisition.
Declaration of competing interest
None.
Acknowledgements
The present work was supported by the Bank of Sweden Tercente­
nary Foundation (M11-0451:1), and the Sven and Dagmar Salén
Foundation.
References
Ackerman, P. L., Chamorro-Premuzic, T., & Furnham, A. (2011). Trait complexes and
academic achievement: Old and new ways of examining personality in educational
contexts. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(1), 27–40.
K.L. Kuckelkorn et al.
Benedek, M., Borovnjak, B., Neubauer, A. C., & Kruse-Weber, S. (2014). Creativity and
personality in classical, jazz and folk musicians. Personality and Individual Differences,
63, 117–121.
Butkovic, A., & Dopudj, D. R. (2017). Personality traits and alcohol consumption of
classical and heavy metal musicians. Psychology of Music, 45(2), 246–256.
Butkovic, A., Ullen, F., & Mosing, M. A. (2015). Personality related traits as predictors of
music practice: Underlying environmental and genetic influences. Personality and
Individual Differences, 74, 133–138.
Buttsworth, L. M., & Smith, G. A. (1995). Personality of Australian performing musicians
by gender and by instrument. Personality and Individual Differences, 18(5), 595–603.
Cameron, J. E., Duffy, M., & Glenwright, B. (2015). Singers take center stage! Personality
traits and stereotypes of popular musicians. Psychology of Music, 43(6), 818–830.
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.
Coimbra, D., Davidson, J., & Kokotsaki, D. (2001). Investigating the assessment of singers
in a music college setting: The students’ perspective. Research Studies in Music
Education, 16(1), 15–32.
Corrigall, K. A., Schellenberg, E. G., & Misura, N. M. (2013). Music training, cognition,
and personality. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 222.
Costa, P., Alves, R., Neto, I., Marvao, P., Portela, M., & Costa, M. J. (2014). Associations
between medical student empathy and personality: A multi-institutional study. PLoS
One, 9(3).
Cribb, C., & Gregory, A. H. (1999). Stereotypes and personalities of musicians. Journal of
Psychology, 133(1), 104–114.
de Manzano, O., & Ullen, F. (2018). Genetic and environmental influences on the
phenotypic associations between intelligence, personality, and creative achievement
in the arts and sciences. Intelligence, 69, 123–133.
Do, M. H., & Minbashian, A. (2020). Higher-order personality factors and leadership
outcomes: A meta-analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 163, 110058.
Eysenck, H. (1995). Genius: The natural history of creativity (Vol. 12). Cambridge, UK:
Cambridge University Press.
Feist, G. J. (1998). A meta-analysis of personality in scientific and artistic creativity.
Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2(4), 290–309.
Feist, G. J. (1999). The influence of personality on artistic and scientific creativity. In
R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 273–296). Cambridge, UK:
Cambridge University Press.
Gale, C. R., Hagenaars, S. P., Davies, G., Hill, W. D., Liewald, D. C. M., Cullen, B., …
GWAS, I. C. B. P. (2016). Pleiotropy between neuroticism and physical and mental
health: Findings from 108038 men and women in UK biobank. Translational
Psychiatry, 6(4), e791.
Greenberg, D. M., Müllensiefen, D., Lamb, M. E., & Rentfrow, P. J. (2015). Personality
predicts musical sophistication. Journal of Research in Personality, 58, 154–158.
Holland, J. L. (1997). Making vocational choices: A theory of vocational personalities and
work environments: Psychological Assessment Resources.
Kemp, A. E. (1996). The musical temperament: Psychology and personality of musicians:
Oxford University Press.
Kyaga, S., Lichtenstein, P., Boman, M., Hultman, C., Långström, N., & Landen, M. (2011).
Creativity and mental disorder: Family study of 300 000 people with severe mental
disorder. British Journal of Psychiatry, 199(5), 373–379.
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),
217–239.
Lichtenstein, P., De Faire, U., Floderus, B., Svartengren, M., Svedberg, P., &
Pedersen, N. L. (2002). The Swedish twin registry: A unique resource for clinical,
epidemiological and genetic studies. Journal of Internal Medicine, 252(3), 184–205.
Personality and Individual Differences 173 (2021) 110573
Lichtenstein, P., Sullivan, P. F., Cnattingius, S., Gatz, M., Johansson, S., Carlstrom, E., …
Pedersen, N. L. (2006). The Swedish twin registry in the third millennium: An
update. Twin Research and Human Genetics, 9(6), 875–882.
McCrae, R. R. (2007). Aesthetic chills as a universal marker of openness to experience.
Motivation and Emotion, 31(1), 5–11.
Mihajlovski, Z. (2013). Personality, intelligence and musical instrument. Croatian Journal
of Education, 15(1), 155–172.
Mosing, M. A., Madison, G., Pedersen, N. L., Kuja-Halkola, R., & Ullén, F. (2014). Practice
does not make perfect: No causal effect of music practice on music ability.
Psychological Science, 25(9), 1795–1803.
Nettle, D. (2006). Psychological profiles of professional actors. Personality and Individual
Differences, 40(2), 375–383.
Nusbaum, E. C., & Silvia, P. J. (2011). Shivers and timbres: Personality and the
experience of chills from music. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 2(2),
199–204.
Papageorgi, I., Creech, A., & Welch, G. (2013). Perceived performance anxiety in
advanced musicians specializing in different musical genres. Psychology of Music, 41
(1), 18–41.
Rabinowitch, T. C., Cross, I., & Burnard, P. (2013). Long-term musical group interaction
has a positive influence on empathy in children. Psychology of Music, 41(4), 484–498.
Reardon MacLellan, C. (2011). Differences in Myers-Briggs personality types among high
school band, orchestra, and choir members. Journal of Research in Music Education,
59(1), 85–100.
Sandgren, M. (2019). Exploring personality and musical self-perceptions among vocalists
and instrumentalists at music colleges. Psychology of Music, 47(4), 465–482.
Song, Y., & Shi, M. (2017). Associations between empathy and big five personality traits
among Chinese undergraduate medical students. PLoS One, 12(2), Article e0171665.
Törnroos, M., Jokela, M., & Hakulinen, C. (2019). The relationship between personality
and job satisfaction across occupations. Personality and Individual Differences, 145,
82–88.
Torrance, T. A., & Bugos, J. A. (2017). Music ensemble participation: Personality traits
and music experience. Update: Applications of Research in Music Education, 36(1),
28–36.
Ullén, F., de Manzano, Ö., & Mosing, M. A. (2019). Neural mechanisms of expertise. In
P. Ward, J. M. Schraagen, J. Gore, & E. Roth (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of expertise:
Research & application. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Ullén, F., Hambrick, D. Z., & Mosing, M. A. (2016). Rethinking expertise: A multifactorial
gene–environment interaction model of expert performance. Psychological Bulletin,
142(4), 427.
Ullén, F., Mosing, M. A., & Hambrick, D. Z. (2018). The multifactorial gene-environment
interaction model (MGIM) of expert performance. In D. Z. Hambrick, G. Campitelli,
& B. Macnamara (Eds.), The science of expertise: Behavioral, neural, and genetic
approaches to complex skill. Routledge.
Vaag, J., Bjørngaard, J. H., & Bjerkeset, O. (2016). Symptoms of anxiety and depression
among Norwegian musicians compared to the general workforce. Psychology of
Music, 44(2), 234–248.
Vaag, J., Sund, E. R., & Bjerkeset, O. (2018). Five-factor personality profiles among
Norwegian musicians compared to the general workforce. Musicae Scientiae, 22(3),
434–445.
Voltmer, E., Zander, M., Fischer, J. E., Kudielka, B. M., Richter, B., & Spahn, C. (2012).
Physical and mental health of different types of orchestra musicians compared to
other professions. Medical Problems of Performing Artists, 27(1), 9–14.
Zakrisson, I. (2010). Big Five Inventory (BFI): Utprövning för svenska förhållanden: Mid
Sweden University.