{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017463933181473046, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 6.086021505376344, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Empirical Application of a Cognitive Framework to Rigidity, Aspects of Creativity, Anxiety, and Adjustment

Philosophically it is argued psychology should be based on constructs independent of objective environmental meaning. Four such constructs are introduced and related to various measures of personality variables. Subjective anxiety and adjustment, as measured by the Maudsley Personality Inventory and Repression-Sensitization scale, are associated with a type of consistency which is based on the number of choices an individual has for finding relationships with respect to available subjective information. Personality rigidity, as measured by the Dogmatism and Authoritarianism scales, is negatively associated with the amount of subjective information available as well as how the information is grouped; in particular, both overly synthetic and overly analytic groupings were associated with high rigidity. Creativity, as measured by the Remote Associates Test, is positively associated with the amount of subjective information. The defense mechanisms, repression and sensitization, are associated with synthetic and analytic groupings of information, respectively. Contrary to past studies, evidence is given that high dogmatism may be systematically associated with either repression or sensitization.