FA_Imagination (Imagination)
The fifth factor of the k=5 solution and the cleanest congruence in the whole factor analysis at +0.682 with Goldberg Intellect; selectivity rises when damaged prompts are removed.
FA_Imagination
Fifth factor of the centred k=5 oblimin solution; SS loading = 5.80, the
smallest of the five (qwen35/results/fa_qwen35.md section 7;
qwen35/analysis/fa_summary.json#centred_k5.factors[4].ss). Method on
Factor analysis of the adapter Gram.
Loadings
| rank | trait | loading | factor | keyed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Unsophisticated | -0.534 | I | - |
| 2 | Unimaginative | -0.504 | I | - |
| 3 | Imperceptive | -0.480 | I | - |
| 4 | Imaginative | +0.479 | I | + |
| 5 | Creative | +0.473 | I | + |
| 6 | Simple | -0.473 | I | - |
| 7 | Impractical | +0.466 | C | - |
| 8 | Verbal | +0.456 | E | + |
| 9 | Philosophical | +0.446 | I | + |
| 10 | Uncreative | -0.428 | I | - |
Eight of ten are Intellect markers, and the two that are not are the ones a
reader would predict: Impractical (a negatively-keyed Conscientiousness marker)
and Verbal (an Extraversion marker). This is the tidiest loading pattern in the
solution.
Congruence with the Big Five keying
fa_qwen35.md section 6, centred_k5 oblimin row F5:
| E | A | C | ES | I | Eval | best Goldberg |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| +0.089 | +0.035 | -0.140 | -0.090 | +0.682 | +0.258 | I 0.68 |
+0.682 is the highest Tucker congruence anywhere in the report, across all
four solutions and all three rotations
(fa_qwen35.md section 6, "Which Goldberg factors clear the thresholds?"). It
still does not clear the 0.85 "fair" bar. A recollection of "about 0.6" for this
value is low; the number is 0.682.
Steering
qwen35/analysis/blog_data.json#replication.FA_Imagination: judged as
Intellect, slope2 = +0.8125000000000001,
sel2 = 4.19354838709678, slope4 = +0.550595238095238,
sel4 = 5.211267605633801.
This is the direction that behaves the opposite way to Warmth under damage
correction. The blog page: "Imagination behaves the other way round: restricted
to its fourteen clean prompts its selectivity rises, from 4.2 to 7.8."
(The 4.2 is sel2; the 7.8 is page prose from qual_fa_notes.md's
damage-corrected analysis.)
qwen35/analysis/qual_fa.json#directions[4].axis_label:
Figurative versus literal construal. Delivers its name cleanly - the single most selective factor once damage is removed.
Negative pole: dictionary-literal and procedurally flat ("A toaster is a toaster. It toasts bread."), advice reduced to instructions, hypotheticals refused outright. Positive pole: metaphor, sensory specificity, defamiliarisation, and second-order framing of the question itself. See Steering the base model along weight-space directions.
Status
Current. qwen35/direction_pages/FA_Imagination.html is historical.
Related: Factor analysis of the adapter Gram, axis_Intellect (the named Intellect / Openness axis), PC3 - Theory and Plain Speech, Steering the base model along weight-space directions, Imaginative, Creative.
Sources
qwen35/results/fa_qwen35.mdqwen35/analysis/fa_summary.json#centred_k5.factorsqwen35/analysis/blog_data.json#replication.FA_Imaginationqwen35/analysis/qual_fa.jsonqwen35/analysis/qual_fa_notes.mdqwen35/direction_pages/FA_Imagination.html
Linked from
- Factor analysis of the adapter Gram
- axis_Intellect (the named Intellect / Openness axis)
- PC3 - Theory and Plain Speech
- Goldberg's factor labels and the 100 unipolar markers
- Superseded claims
- Artful
- Artistic
- Complex
- Creative
- Crooked
- Deep
- Imaginative
- Imperceptive
- Impractical
- Inefficient
- Innovative
- Inspired
- Introspective
- Philosophical
- Simple
- Unadventurous
- Uncreative
- Unenlightened
- Unimaginative
- Uninquisitive
- Unsophisticated
- Verbal
- Traits by factor
File
pages/factors/factor-imagination.md