PSYCHOMETRIC PROPERTIES OF THE UKRAINIAN VERSION OF THE VIENNA ART INTEREST AND ART KNOWLEDGE QUESTIONNAIRE
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32689/maup.psych.2025.3.16Keywords:
art interest, art knowledge, questionnaire, personality traits, psychology of art, psychometricsAbstract
Purpose. The aim of this study was to adapt the Vienna Art Interest and Art Knowledge Questionnaire (VAIAK) into Ukrainian and to evaluate its psychometric properties in a Ukrainian-speaking sample. Methodology. The study involved 230 participants aged 18 to 55 years with varying degrees of engagement in art. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were conducted to assess construct validity, confirming the two-factor structure of the interest scale. Internal consistency (α = .829–.946) and test–retest reliability (R = .866–.921) indicated high reliability. Discriminant validity was tested by comparing groups with and without artistic experience. Convergent validity was assessed through correlations with personality traits (openness to experience, extraversion, neuroticism) and intolerance of uncertainty. Scientific novelty. This study provides the first Ukrainian adaptation of the VAIAK, offering a validated tool for assessing interest in and knowledge of art within a Ukrainian cultural context. The results replicate international findings and confirm the relevance of this instrument for Ukrainian psychological research. Conclusions. The adapted questionnaire demonstrated strong psychometric qualities. Findings highlight the role of personality factors – especially openness to experience – in shaping artistic interests and expertise. The validated Ukrainian version of the VAIAK opens new avenues for empirical studies in the psychology of art. Limitations identified in the study indicate the need for further research with broader samples and additional assessment tools.
References
Бурлачук Л. Ф., Корольов Д. К. Адаптація опитувальника для діагностики п’яти факторів особистості. Питання психології. 2000. № 1. С. 126–134.
Громова Г. М. Інструменти вимірювання толерантності до невизначеності. Адаптація тесту «Шкала інтолерантності до невизначеності» Н. Карлетона. Наукові студії із соціальної та політичної психології. 2021. Т. 47, № 50. С. 115–130. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33120/ssj.vi47(50).217.
Кечур Р. В., Яскевич О. І., Турецька Х. І. Естетична спрямованість особистості та її зв’язок з емпатією. Психологічний журнал. 2020. Т. 6, № 5. С. 239–248. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31108/1.2020.6.5.22.
Кечур Р. В., Яскевич О. І., Турецька Х. І. Психоаналітичний стиль та його відношення до літератури. Психологічний журнал. 2021. Т. 7, № 5. С. 85–96. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31108/1.2021.7.5.8.
Яскевич O. I., Турецька Х. І., Гнилко В. Структура естетичного переживання при дефіциті менталізаційної здатності. Габітус. 2022. Вип. 40. С. 148–154. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32782/2663-5208.2022.40.24.
Afhami R., Mohammadi-Zarghan S. The Big Five, aesthetic judgment styles, and art interest. Europe’s Journal of Psychology. 2018. Vol. 14, No. 4. P. 764–775. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5964/ejop.v14i4.1479.
Bullot N. J., Reber R. The artful mind meets art history: Toward a psycho-historical framework for the science of art appreciation. Behavioral and Brain Sciences. 2013. Vol. 36, No. 2. P. 123–137. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X12000489.
Chamorro-Premuzic T., Furnham A. Art judgment: A measure related to both personality and intelligence? Imagination, Cognition and Personality. 2004. Vol. 24, No. 1. P. 3–24. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2190/U4LW-TH9X-80M3-NJ54.
Chamorro-Premuzic T., Furnham A., Reimers S. The artistic personality. The Psychologist. 2007. Vol. 20, No. 2. P. 84–87.
Costa P. T., McCrae R. R. The Five-Factor model of personality and its relevance to personality disorders. Journal of Personality Disorders. 1992. Vol. 6, No. 4. P. 343–359. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1521/pedi.1992.6.4.343.
Cotter K. N. та ін. Updating the Aesthetic Fluency Scale: Revised long and short forms for research in the psychology of the arts. PLoS ONE. 2023. Vol. 18, No. 2. P. e0281547. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal. pone.0281547.
Dodell-Feder D., Tamir D. I. Fiction reading has a small positive impact on social cognition: A metaanalysis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. 2018. Vol. 147, No. 11. P. 1713–1727. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000395.
Eysenck H. J. The ‘general factor’ in aesthetic judgements. British Journal of Psychology. 1940. Vol. 31. P. 94–102.
Eysenck H. J. Preference judgments for polygons, designs, and drawings. Perceptual and Motor Skills. 1972. Vol. 34, No. 2. P. 396–398. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.1972.34.2.396.
Federn P. Narcissism in the structure of the ego. Basic Books. 1953. P. 38–59. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/10571-002.
Furnham A., Chamorro-Premuzic T. Personality, intelligence, and art. Personality and Individual Differences. 2004. Vol. 36, No. 3. P. 705–715. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(03)00128-4.
Furnham A., Walker J. Personality and judgements of abstract, pop art, and representational paintings. European Journal of Personality. 2001. Vol. 15, No. 1. P. 57–72. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/per.340.
González M., Burin D. I. Adaptación y validación del cuestionario de interés y conocimiento en arte de Viena (VAIAK). Revista de Psicología. 2020. Vol. 16, No. 32. P. 68–78. DOI: https://doi.org/10.46553/rpsi.16.32.2020.p68-78.
Hausberg M. C. та ін. Is a self-rated instrument appropriate to assess mentalization in patients with mental disorders? Development and first validation of the Mentalization Questionnaire (MZQ). Psychotherapy Research. 2012. Vol. 22, No. 6. P. 699–709. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10503307.2012.709325.
Kidd D. C., Castano E. Reading literary fiction improves theory of mind. Science. 2013. Vol. 342, No. 6156. P. 377–380. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1239918.
McCrae R. R., Costa P. T. Personality trait structure as a human universal. American Psychologist. 1997. Vol. 52, No. 5. P. 509–516. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.52.5.509.
McManus I. C., Furnham A. Aesthetic activities and aesthetic attitudes: Influences of education, background and personality on interest and involvement in the arts. British Journal of Psychology. 2006. Vol. 97, No. 4. P. 555–587. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1348/000712606X101088.
Silvia P. J. Knowledge-based assessment of expertise in the arts: Exploring aesthetic fluency. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts. 2007. Vol. 1, No. 4. P. 247–249. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/1931-3896.1.4.247.
Silvia P. J., Barona C. M. Do people prefer curved objects? Angularity, expertise, and aesthetic preference. Empirical Studies of the Arts. 2008. Vol. 27, No. 1. P. 25–42. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2190/EM.27.1.B.
Specker E. Further validating the VAIAK: Defining a psychometric model, configural measurement invariance, reliability, and practical guidelines. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts. 2021. Vol. 18, No. 3. P. 449–462. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000427.
Specker E., Cotter K. N., Kim K. Y. The next step for the VAIAK: An item-focused analysis. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000559.
Specker E. та ін. The Vienna Art Interest and Art Knowledge Questionnaire (VAIAK): A unified and validated measure of art interest and art knowledge. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts. 2018. Vol. 14, No. 2. P. 172–185. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000205.
Turetska H., Kunikevych B. Ukrainian language adaptation of the Mentalization Questionnaire in nonclinical samples. Habitus. 2020. No. 17. P. 131. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32843/2663-5208.2020.17.23.
Zunshine L. Theory of mind and experimental representations of fictional consciousness. Narrative. 2003. Vol. 11, No. 3. P. 270–291. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/nar.2003.0018.
