The essential trait approach - research

Question 1

Fajkowska and Kreitler (2018)

Answer 1

Interestingly, animal personality research did not break from trait theories of personality (Weiss, 2018). On the contrary, personality theorists enriched trait approaches by demonstrating that traits are expressed, with some modifications, across species (Kreitler, 2018). Whereas human personality research for some time neglected trait theories for the sake of scientific progress placed in interactionist and sociocognitive paradigms, eventually it returned to traits with the beginning of the Big Five models (cf. Weiss, 2018). Nonetheless, there are important issues that have not been successfully elucidated by trait theories, including satisfactory answers to our six “burning questions.”

We have focused on six questions connected, in our opinion, to the most important concerns of trait theories. Contributors to this special issue raise other concerns—for example, the inner structure of personality traits (Fajkowska, 2018; Kreitler, 2018), the relation between temperament traits and other personality traits (Fajkowska, 2018), traits and psychopathology (Kreitler, 2018), the relation of traits with attitudes (Kreitler, 2018), traits in animal studies (Kreitler, 2018; Weiss, 2018), and traits and performance (Matthews, 2018).

In closing, it is worth asking how the trait approach can continue to develop into a more mature science. One possible answer, according to Weiss (2018), is retreating from a single paradigm or research tradition. However, another answer is equally compelling: constructing integrative explanatory trait theories (cf. Fajkowska & DeYoung, 2015).

Question 2

Bourke et al. (2004)

Answer 2

A sample of 845 young people between the ages of 13 and 15 years completed both Cattell’s High School Personality Questionnaire (HSPQ) and the short-form Revised Junior Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (JEPQR-S). Building on the pilot study reported by Bourke and Francis (2000), these data demonstrate how the 14 primary scales and the four second order factors proposed by Cattell map onto the three major dimensions of personality proposed by Eysenck.

Question 3

Bourke et al. (2012)

Answer 3

A sample of 106 young people between the ages of 11 and 17 years completed both the High School Personality Questionnaire and the short fonn Revised Junior Eysenck Personality Questionnaire. The data demonstrate how the 14 primary scales and the 4 second order factors proposed by Cattell map onto the 3 major dimensions of personality proposed by Eysenck.

Question 4

Boyle et al. (2016)

Answer 4

The two most prominent individual differences researchers of the twentieth century were Hans J. Eysenck and Raymond B. Cattell. Both were giants of scientific psychology, each publishing scores of books and hundreds of empirical peer-reviewed journal articles. Influenced by Hebb’s distinction between physiological (Intelligence A) and experiential (Intelligence B), Eysenck focused on discovering the underlying biological substrata of intelligence. Analogously, Cattell proposed the Gf–Gc theory which distinguishes between fluid and crystallised intelligence. Cattell’s Culture Fair Intelligence Test (CFIT), a measure primarily of fluid intelligence, was constructed specifically to minimise differences in test bias in IQ scores between different ethnic/racial groups. Within the personality realm, Eysenck adopted a pragmatic three-factor model as measured via the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ-R) and its variants. In contrast, Cattell employed a lexical approach that resulted in a large number of primary and secondary normal and abnormal personality trait dimensions, measured via the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire (16PF), and the corresponding Clinical Analysis Questionnaire (CAQ), respectively. Recent molecular genetics findings provide empirical confirmation of Eysenck and Cattell’s positions on the biological underpinnings of personality and ability traits, allowing an improved understanding of the causes of individual differences.

Question 5

Fajkowska (2017)

Answer 5

Personality science has always been and is still ready for new theorizing on traits. Accordingly, this article presents the recently proposed traits as hierarchical systems (THS) model, where personality traits are not only the emergent properties of the three‐level hierarchy of the personality system, but are also hierarchical per se. As hierarchical systems, they are organized into three levels: mechanisms and processes, structures, and behavioral markers. In this approach, trait denotes the underlying, recurrent mechanisms that pattern its structure and account for the stability/variability of individual characteristics. Here, traits might be described as processes with a slow rate of change that can be substituted for structure. The main function of personality traits, within the personality system, is stimulation processing. Three dominant functions of stimulation processing in traits are proposed: reactive, regulative, and self‐regulative. Some important questions regarding the concept of trait remain, such as those concerning trait stability, determinacy, measurement, their relation to overt behaviors, personality type or state, and differentiation between temperament traits and other‐than‐temperament personality traits. All of these topics are discussed in this article, as well as the compatible and distinctive features of this approach in relation to selected modern trait theories

Question 6

Zinbarg et al. (2016)

Answer 6

Neuroticism and several other traits have been proposed to confer vulnerability for unipolar mood disorders (UMDs) and anxiety disorders (ADs). However, it is unclear whether the associations of these vulnerabilities with these disorders are attributable to a latent variable common to all vulnerabilities, more narrow latent variables, or both. In addition, some researchers have suggested that neuroticism predicts UMDs, ADs, and substance use disorders (SUDs) with comparable strength, whereas other researchers have hypothesized that neuroticism is more strongly related to UMDs and ADs. We tested hypotheses about the factor structure of several vulnerabilities and the prospective associations of these latent variables with initial onsets of UMDs, ADs, and SUDs during a 3-year period in 547 participants recruited as high school juniors. Although a general neuroticism factor predicted SUDs, it predicted UMDs and ADs more strongly and especially predicted comorbid UMDs and ADs. There was also mixed support for specific associations involving more narrow latent vulnerabilities.

Question 7

Eysenck (2013)

Answer 7

screenshot

Question 8

Bowden et al. (2016)

Answer 8

Cross-cultural invariance of personality measurement provides important information regarding the universality of personality traits. With the recent release of historical data from 33 countries on the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ) the opportunity arose to test the invariance of the three personality dimensions measured by the EPQ, together with the response set scale. Although the factor structure of the EPQ has been much studied in previous decades, there was a need to validate the previously reported four-factor structure using modern factor analytic techniques. As anticipated, both exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis provided unsatisfactory models, for different reasons. Instead, exploratory structural equation modeling provided confirmation of the hypothesized oblique, four-factor structure. Results of measurement invariance comparisons across countries, separately by gender, showed striking evidence of the generalizability of the four-factor structure in pairwise comparisons with the English sample as the reference group. In addition, there was evidence of failure of item invariance, for a varying subset of items, in all of the between-country comparisons. However, the pattern of partial measurement invariance does not preclude effective use of the EPQ as a research tool in diverse cultures. The results provide strong theoretical convergence, with other published studies, on the universality of the four-factor structure.

Question 9

Revelle (2016)

Answer 9

Hans Eysenck was the leading personality and individual differences theorist of the 20th century. His goal was tocombine the best theories and practices of experimental psychology with the best measurement techniques ofindividual differences. From his earliest analyses of the dimensions of individual differences, through multiple it-erations at theory building to his lasting achievements in building a paradigm for personality research he left alegacy of broad and rigorous research. He strove to integrate behaviour genetics, psychophysiology, cognitivepsychology, aesthetics, and psychometrics into a unified theory of personality and individual differences. Al-though best known for his biological theory of extraversion, his impact upon thefield was much more thanthat and cannot be summarized in a brief article. I review his major theoretical contributions and relate themto modern personality theory and show how his many contributions continue to shape current personalityresearch

Question 10

Larstone et al. (2002)

Answer 10

Multiple regression and principal components analysis was used to (1) identify the traits of normal personality function represented in personality dysfunction, (2) clarify what aspects of the personality domain are in common and are unique to three and five factor models of personality, and (3) assess the relative predictive validity of the EPQ-R to the NEO-PI-R in the assessment of personality dysfunction. Three hundred and thirty two general population subjects completed the NEO-PI-R, the EPQ-R, and a measure of personality disorder: the Dimensional Assessment of Personality Pathology (DAPP-BQ). Neuroticism defined a factor describing emotional dysregulation, a central feature in the diagnosis of Borderline Personality Disorder. Measures of extraversion defined a factor describing levels of inhibition, a core component to the diagnosis of Schizoid and Avoidant Personality Disorder. NEO-PI-R Conscientiousness was found to reflect key concepts in the diagnosis of Obsessive-Compulsive Personality Disorder and NEO-PI-R Agreeableness defined a factor describing psychopathy. EPQ-R Psychoticism loaded on a separate factor describing conduct problems. Multiple regression analyses showed that the EPQ-R accounts for a significant proportion of the variance in each DAPP-BQ scale, (R2Adjusted range=6–43%; median=21%). Addition of the five NEO-PI-R scales was shown to increase the amount of variance accounted for, in most cases significantly (change in R2Adjusted range: 2–58%, median change=26%).

Question 11

Slipps and Alexander (1987)

Answer 11

The study was designed to test the construct validity of extraversion-introversion and to explore the nature of the concept as measured by the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) and the Eysenck Personality Inventory (EPI). The psychometric properties of the MBTI have been inadequately studied, whereas those of the EPI have been investigated extensively. Responses of 840 subjects to the two measures were submitted in toto to factor analysis. Of the seven factors retained, three measures of extraversion appeared: Factor 2 (a sociability component), Factor 4 (an impulsivity/non-planning component), and Factor 7 (a liveliness/risk-taking/jocularity component). Findings supported the view of extraversion-introversion as a complex construct (Eysenck and Eysenck, 1977; Guilford, 1977; Howarth, 1976). The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator-Extraversion Introversion (MBTI-EI) and the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator-Judging Perceiving (MBTI-JP), scales were found, surprisingly, to be factorially valid measures of impulsivity/non-planning. Implications and suggested research are discussed.

Question 12

Zou et al. (2018)

Answer 12

Extraversion and neuroticism are two main dimensions of Eysenck’s personality. We assessed the relationship between extraversion and neuroticism with brain structure and function by voxel-based morphometry (VBM) and functional connectivity density (FCD). The resting state functional magnetic resonance image and high resolution structural T1 weighted images of 100 young healthy subjects were used in analysis. Our results showed that extraversion was negatively correlated with gray matter volume (GMV) of the bilateral putamen, and it was negatively correlated with FCD in the precuneus. No associations between neuroticism and brain structure and function changes. Overall, our results suggested that several brain regions involved in shaping of extraversion traits among young individuals, which may provide a neurobiological basis of extraversion.

Question 13

Margolis et al. (2019)

Answer 13

Research in personality psychology has remained predominantly correlational. For example, 3 decades of research demonstrate a robust cross-sectional relationship between extraversion and positive affect. A handful of studies, however, have examined this link experimentally, showing that extraversion boosts positive affect over short durations. If this is true, behaving in an extraverted manner should be a reliable method for increasing positive affect and, thus, suitable as a well-being-increasing practice. The current study instructed participants to engage in both extraverted and introverted behavior, each for 1 week. Participants increased in well-being when they were assigned to act extraverted and decreased in well-being when they were assigned to act introverted. These findings suggest that changing behavior associated with personality is possible and can impact well-being. More broadly, this study adds to a growing body of research on the potential of experimental methods in personality psychology

Question 14

Silverman et al. (2019)

Answer 14

Though theory suggests that individual differences in neuroticism (a tendency to experience negative emotions) would be associated with altered functioning of the amygdala (which has been linked with emotionality and emotion dysregulation in childhood, adolescence, and adulthood), results of functional neuroimaging studies have been contradictory and inconclusive. We aimed to clarify the relationship between neuroticism and three hypothesized neural markers derived from functional magnetic resonance imaging during negative emotion face processing: amygdala activation, amygdala habituation, and amygdala-prefrontal connectivity, each of which plays an important role in the experience and regulation of emotions. We used general linear models to examine the relationship between trait neuroticism and the hypothesized neural markers in a large sample of over 500 young adults. Although neuroticism was not significantly associated with magnitude of amygdala activation or amygdala habituation, it was associated with amygdala–ventromedial prefrontal cortex connectivity, which has been implicated in emotion regulation. Results suggest that trait neuroticism may represent a failure in top-down control and regulation of emotional reactions, rather than overactive emotion generation processes, per se. These findings suggest that neuroticism, which has been associated with increased rates of transdiagnostic psychopathology, may represent a failure in the inhibitory neurocircuitry associated with emotion regulation.

Question 15

Fischer et al. (2018)

Answer 15

Cross-national differences in personality have long been recognized in the behavioural sciences. However, the origins of such differences are debated. Building on reinforcement sensitivity theories and gene-by-environment interactions, we predict that personality trait phenotypes linked to dopaminergic brain functions (centrally involved in reward processing) diverge most strongly in climatically stressful environments, due to shifts in perceived rewards vs risks. Individuals from populations with a highly efficient dopamine system are biased towards behavioural approach traits (Extraversion and Emotional Stability) due to higher perceived reward values, whereas individuals from populations with a less efficient dopaminergic system are biased towards risk avoidance. In temperate climates, we predict smaller phenotypic differences due to overall weakened reward and risk ratios. We calculated a population-level index of dopamine functioning using 9 commonly investigated genetic polymorphisms encoding dopamine transporters and receptors, derived from a meta-analysis with data from 805 independent samples involving 127,685 participants across 73 societies or territories. We found strong support for the dopamine gene by climatic stress interaction: Population genetic differences in dopamine predicted personality traits at the population level in demanding climates, but not in temperate, less demanding climates, even when controlling for known correlates of personality including wealth and parasite stress.

Question 16

Widiger and Oltmanns (2017)

Answer 16

In sum, neuroticism is a fundamental domain of personality that has enormous public health implications, impacting a wide array of psychopathological and physical health care concerns. It contributes to the occurrence of many significantly harmful life outcomes, as well as impairing the ability of persons to adequately address them. It has long been recognized as one of the more important and significant domains of personality and is being increasingly recognized as a fundamental domain of personality disorder and psychopathology more generally.

Question 17

Bauermeister and Gallacher (2019)

Answer 17

Conclusions Across 384,183 UK Biobank participants the 12-item EPQ-R neuroticism scale exhibited psychometric inefficiency with poor discrimination at the extremes of the scale-range. High and low scores are relatively poorly represented and uninformative suggesting that high neuroticism scores derived from the EPQ-R are a function of cumulative mid-range values. The scale also shows evidence of gender item bias and future scale development should consider the former and, selective item deletions and validation of new items to increase scale informativeness and reliability.

Question 18

Holvea and Tarrier (2001)

Answer 18

Objectives: To investigate the contribution of personality and peritraumatic dissociation in the development of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Method: Victims of road traffic accidents (RTA) were assessed within 2–4 weeks (Time 1) of the accident and again between 4 and 6 months (Time 2). The Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ) and Peritraumatic Dissociation Experience Questionnaire (PDEQ) were administered at Time 1 and posttraumatic stress symptoms were assessed at Time 2. Results: 265 subjects were assessed at both time points, although neuroticism, psychoticism, and peritraumatic dissociation were significantly correlated with posttraumatic symptoms, only the personality dimensions were independent and significant predictors of subsequent PTSD in a logistic regression. Conclusions: Consistent with the literature personality measures, especially neuroticism, is associated with the development of PTSD. However, peritraumatic dissociation was not found to be an independent predictor of PTSD.

Question 19

Yin et al. (2019)

Answer 19

Methods: We collected a sample of 490 people over 3 years after the Wenchuan earthquake, using questionnaires about demographic information and the traumatic experience in earthquake, the Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R), and the Eysenck Personality Questionnaires (EPQ), to find the consequences of the Wenchuan earthquake on the survivors and the potential factors related to the long-term morbidity of PTSD.

Result: Traumatic experiences, such as witnessing someone being seriously injured, having your house seriously damaged, and having close relatives severely injured, were associated with developing PTSD. Personality measured by EPQ was also closely related to PTSD. Regression analyses indicated that a potential linear model characterized the relationship between PTSD, neuroticism and psychoticism, yet extraversion/introversion were not significant factors. In the multivariate logistic regression, neuroticism (a continuous variable measured by EPQ) was of more significance in predicting the morbidity of long-term PTSD, compared with other variables [odds ratio (OR) = 1.113, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.081-1.146, Wald Value = 50.467, P < 0.001]. The final path diagram built a model indicated the moderating role of personality in the relationship between traumatic experiences and PTSD (CMIN/DF = 2.324, P < 0.001; CFI = 0.879 < 0.8; RMSEA = 0.05 < 0.08).

Conclusion: This study demonstrated the role of personality traits and subjective exposure experiences regarding the vulnerability associated with PTSD after earthquake. Among all personality traits, neuroticism is considered a vulnerability factor of PTSD, and other personality traits also moderate the effects of traumatic experiences associated with PTSD. These findings might be useful for psychologists to develop intervention strategies for people suffered natural disasters, and to help individuals with PTSD to heal fully.

Question 20

Chung and Kaminski (2019)

Answer 20

This study compared the severity of chronic idiopathic urticaria (CIU) and psychiatric symptoms between patients with different levels of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and investigated a model depicting the interrelationship between PTSD from past trauma, personality traits, coping strategies, CIU severity and psychiatric symptom severity. One hundred CIU and 60 allergy patients participated in the study, completing measures on PTSD, psychiatric symptoms, personality traits and coping strategies. The results showed that for CIU patients, 7%, 40 and 34% met the diagnostic criteria for no-PTSD, partial-PTSD and full-PTSD respectively whereas for allergy patients, 15%, 45 and 18% met the same criteria. Apart from CIU, psychiatric symptom severity differed significantly between diagnostic groups. PTSD was associated with coping strategies which were in turn associated with CIU severity and psychiatric symptom severity. PTSD was not significantly associated with personality. Emotion-focused coping mediated PTSD and CIU severity, PTSD and psychiatric symptom severity and neuroticism and CIU severity. To conclude, psychiatric symptom severity varies depending on the level of PTSD among CIU patients. Neurotic patients with a high level of PTSD from past trauma show raised CIU and psychiatric symptom severity when using emotion-focused coping strategies.

Question 21

Ormel and Wohlfarth (1991)

Answer 21

The causal relationships between neuroticism, long-term difficulties (LTDs), life situation change (LSC), and psychological distress (PD) were examined using self-report and interview data from a 7-yr, 3-wave study in a general population sample (N = 296). LTDs were classified as either endogenous (dependent) or exogenous (independent). It was found that earlier neuroticism had a strong direct and a moderate indirect effect (through endogenous LTDs) on PD. The direct effect was strikingly stronger than those of LTDs and LSC. In addition, much correlation between endogenous LTDs, LSC, and PD could be attributed to the confounding effects of earlier neuroticism. High neuroticism tended to strengthen the effect of LSC on PD. These findings suggest that temperamental dispositions are more powerful than environmental factors in predicting PD.

Question 22

Zhou et al. (2019)

Answer 22

Methods: This is a cross-sectional study. Five validated questionnaires were used to measure the psychological outcomes (Childhood Trauma Questionnaire CTQ-SF, Eysenck Personality Questionnaire EPQR-S, Social Support Rating Scale SSRS, Simplified Coping Style Questionnaire SCSQ, and Patient Health Questionnaire-9 PHQ-9) of 312 participants. Multiple regressions and structural equation modeling (SEM) were used to conduct data analysis.

Results: Multiple regression analysis and SEM showed a significant association between childhood emotional abuse and depression symptoms. Neuroticism, use of social support, and active coping style were important mediating variables of this association. The R2 for our model was 0.456, indicating that 45.6% of the variability in depressive symptoms can be explained by the model.

Conclusion: This study suggested that neuroticism, active coping, and use of social support play important role in mediating the effects of childhood abuse on adult depressive symptoms.

Question 23

Jeronimus et al. (2016)

Answer 23

Method
This meta-analysis included 59 longitudinal/prospective studies with 443 313 participants.

Results
The results showed large unadjusted prospective associations between neuroticism and symptoms/diagnosis of anxiety, depression, and non-specific mental distress (d = 0.50–0.70). Adjustment for baseline symptoms and psychiatric history reduced the associations by half (d = 0.10–0.40). Unadjusted prospective associations for substance abuse and thought disorders/symptoms were considerably weaker (d = 0.03–0.20), but were not attenuated by adjustment for baseline problems. Unadjusted prospective associations were four times larger over short (<4 year) than long (⩾4 years) follow-up intervals, suggesting a substantial decay of the association with increasing time intervals. Adjusted effects, however, were only slightly larger over short v. long time intervals. This indicates that confounding by baseline symptoms and psychiatric history masks the long-term stability of the neuroticism vulnerability effect.

Conclusion
High neuroticism indexes a risk constellation that exists prior to the development and onset of any CMD. The adjusted prospective neuroticism effect remains robust and hardly decays with time. Our results underscore the need to focus on the mechanisms underlying this prospective association.

Question 24

Watson and Clark (1984)

Answer 24

A number of apparently diverse personality scales—variously assessing trait anxiety, neuroticism, ego strength, general maladjustment, repression-sensitization, and social desirability—are reviewed and are shown to be in fact measures of the same stable and pervasive trait. An integrative interpretation of the construct as Negative Affectivity (NA) is presented. A review of studies using measures such as the Beck Depression Inventory, Eysenck Personality Inventory, and Multiple Affect Adjective Check List indicate that high-NA Ss are more likely to experience discomfort at all times and across situations, even in the absence of overt stress. They are relatively more introspective and tend differentially to dwell on the negative side of themselves and the world. Further research is needed to explain the origins of NA and to elucidate the characteristics of low-NA individuals.

Question 25

Ng et al. (2019)

Answer 25

Anger, anxiety, depression, and negative affect have been examined frequently as indicators of employees’ subjective well-being. Some researchers have adopted a convergence perspective, assuming these four variables as interchangeable. Others use a divergence perspective, treating each of the four as a distinct emotion. The goal of this study was to directly compare anger, anxiety, depression, and negative affect and examine whether the nomological network of these four emotional variables converges or diverges. We offer theoretical arguments for both the convergence and divergence hypotheses and use meta-analytical data based on 491 studies (N = 235,085) to examine which hypothesis receives stronger support. The results show that (a) anger, anxiety, depression, and negative affect were strongly correlated with one another, (b) the corrected correlations of these variables with workplace stressors and outcomes were similar (although some differences also existed), and (c) these variables, in the presence of one another, did not explain unique variance in some study correlates. These results appear to more strongly support the convergence hypothesis, and call for more work on how negative emotions should be integrated into vocational behavior research.

Question 26

Clark et al. (1994)

Answer 26

Reviews the literature on temperament, personality, and mood and anxiety disorders. The review is organized primarily around L. A. Clark and D. Watson’s (1991) tripartite model for these disorders, but other influential approaches are also examined. Negative affectivity (or neuroticism) appears to be a vulnerability factor for the development of anxiety and depression, indicates poor prognosis, and is itself affected by the experience of disorder. Positive affectivity (or extraversion) is related more specifically to depression, may be a risk factor for its development, suggests poor prognosis, and also may be affected by the experience of disorder. Other personality dimensions (e.g., anxiety sensitivity, attributional style, sociotropy or dependency, autonomy or self-criticism, and constraint) may constitute specific vulnerability factors for particular disorders. It is suggested that more longitudinal and measurement-based research that jointly examines anxiety and depression is needed.

Question 27

Sewart et al. (2019)

Answer 27

Research has demonstrated that stressors play a critical role in the development of generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), social anxiety disorder (SAD), and major depressive disorder (MDD). Separately, deficits in positive affect (PA) have been identified in GAD, SAD, and MDD. Whereas previous research has linked the buffering effects of PA in chronic illness, such effects have yet to be investigated for chronic stressors and emotional disorder–related symptom severity. The purpose of the present study was to examine PA as a moderator of chronic interpersonal and noninterpersonal stress on GAD, SAD, and MDD symptom severity. Using a multilevel statistical approach with a sample of adolescents and young adults (N = 463), PA was found to moderate significantly the relationship between chronic interpersonal stress and symptom severity for MDD and SAD. Findings suggest that in times of chronic interpersonal stress, higher PA may serve as a buffer from development of SAD and MDD symptoms.

Question 28

Khazanov and Ruscio (2016)

Answer 28

Depression is well known to share a negative cross-sectional relationship with personality constructs defined by positive emotion (positive affect, extraversion, behavioral activation). These Positive Emotionality (PE) constructs have been proposed to represent stable temperamental risk factors for depression, not merely current mood state. These constructs have also been proposed to increase risk specifically for depression, relative to anxiety. We performed a meta-analysis of longitudinal studies to examine the relationship of PE to depression (59 effect sizes) and anxiety (26 effect sizes). In cross-sectional analyses, PE constructs were negatively associated with depression (r = −.34) and anxiety (r = −.24). PE constructs also prospectively predicted depression (r = −.26) and anxiety (r = −.19). These relationships remained statistically significant, but were markedly attenuated, when baseline levels of depression (β = −.08) and anxiety (β = −.06) were controlled. Moreover, depression and anxiety were equally strong predictors of subsequent changes in PE (β = −.07 and −.09, respectively). These findings are consistent with theoretical accounts of low PE as a temperamental vulnerability for depression, but suggest that the prospective relationship of PE to depression may be weaker and less specific than previously assumed.

Question 29

Navrady et al. (2018)

Answer 29

BackgroundPolygenic risk scores (PRS) for depression correlate with depression status and chronicity, and provide causal anchors to identify depressive mechanisms. Neuroticism is phenotypically and genetically positively associated with depression, whereas psychological resilience demonstrates negative phenotypic associations. Whether increased neuroticism and reduced resilience are downstream mediators of genetic risk for depression, and whether they contribute independently to risk remains unknown.MethodsModerating and mediating relationships between depression PRS, neuroticism, resilience and both clinical and self-reported depression were examined in a large, population-based cohort, Generation Scotland: Scottish Family Health Study (N = 4166), using linear regression and structural equation modelling. Neuroticism and resilience were measured by the Eysenck Personality Scale Short Form Revised and the Brief Resilience Scale, respectively.ResultsPRS for depression was associated with increased likelihood of self-reported and clinical depression. No interaction was found between PRS and neuroticism, or between PRS and resilience. Neuroticism was associated with increased likelihood of self-reported and clinical depression, whereas resilience was associated with reduced risk. Structural equation modelling suggested the association between PRS and self-reported and clinical depression was mediated by neuroticism (43-57%), while resilience mediated the association in the opposite direction (37-40%). For both self-reported and clinical diagnoses, the genetic risk for depression was independently mediated by neuroticism and resilience.ConclusionsFindings suggest polygenic risk for depression increases vulnerability for self-reported and clinical depression through independent effects on increased neuroticism and reduced psychological resilience. In addition, two partially independent mechanisms - neuroticism and resilience - may form part of the pathway of vulnerability to depression.

Question 30

Pedersen et al. (2014)

Answer 30

Former studies have repeatedly found the psychoticism (PSY) scale of Symptom Checklist‐90‐Revised to be a heterogeneous construct. The aim of this study was to confirm and further explore the nature of this heterogeneity within a large sample of patients with mainly personality disorders.

Within a total sample of 3 794 patients, one‐half was randomly selected for explorative factor analysis in order to assess the internal structure of the PSY scale and the other half to cross‐validate the findings by a confirmatory factor analysis. The total sample was then used to assess associations between the components from the factor analyses and several clinical measures and diagnoses.

A one‐factor solution of the PSY scale yielded poor fit to the data, but a proposed structure of three latent constructs was confirmed by good model fit. The three subsets of the PSY scale, labelled metacognitive dysfunction, self‐accusation and detachment, shared variance with different personality disorders and different aspects of psychopathology, e.g. previous psychotic episodes.

The heterogeneous PSY scale of SCL‐90‐R can be divided into three meaningful clinical concepts, reflecting different aspects of psychosis‐near experiences. The factors warrant confirmation in other populations

Question 31

Blain et al. (2019)

Answer 31

Psychosis proneness has been linked to heightened Openness to Experience and to cognitive deficits. Openness and psychotic disorders are associated with the default and frontoparietal networks, and the latter network is also robustly associated with intelligence. We tested the hypothesis that functional connectivity of the default and frontoparietal networks is a neural correlate of the openness-psychoticism dimension. Participants in the Human Connectome Project (N = 1003) completed measures of psychoticism, openness, and intelligence. Resting state functional magnetic resonance imaging was used to identify intrinsic connectivity networks. Structural equation modeling revealed relations among personality, intelligence, and network coherence. Psychoticism, openness, and especially their shared variance were related positively to default network coherence and negatively to frontoparietal coherence. These associations remained after controlling for intelligence. Intelligence was positively related to frontoparietal coherence. Research suggests that psychoticism and openness are linked in part through their association with connectivity in networks involving experiential simulation and cognitive control. We propose a model of psychosis risk that highlights roles of the default and frontoparietal networks. Findings echo research on functional connectivity in psychosis patients, suggesting shared mechanisms across the personality–psychopathology continuum.

Question 32

Knezevic et al. (2019)

Answer 32

Eysenck’s model of personality (PEN) was one of the most influential personality models in the 20th century. A unique characteristic of this model is the claim of psychosis-proneness being incorporated into it as one of its three basic traits - Psychoticism. The main goal of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to find out the associations between PEN traits and a diverse set of operationalizations of psychosis-proneness (PP). We set the benchmark for assuming their distinctness to a correlation coefficient amounting to 0.40. A systematic review has been conducted, yielding 350 correlations of interest. By computing inverse sampling variance weighted mean correlation coefficients, we found the following associations between psychosis-proneness and Psychoticism, Extraversion, and Neuroticism, respectively: 0.21, −0.09, and 0.30. All prediction intervals around the three mean effect sizes do include zero, suggesting that psychosis-proneness is only marginally captured by the PEN model. Moderator analyses further demonstrated this distinctness and the lack of phenotypic validity of the Psychoticism scale/construct.

Question 33

Eysenck (1977)

Answer 33

Three questionnaire studies are reported in which sets of items traditionally used to measure impulsiveness were intercorrelated and the resulting matrices factor analysed; the factors extracted were correlated with measures of the major personality dimensions E (extraversion), N (neuroticism) and P (psychoticism), and also with the L (lie; dissimulation) scale. It was found that impulsiveness in the broad sense (ImpB) breaks down into four factors (narrow impulsiveness or ImpN, risk‐taking, non‐planning and liveliness) which are replicable from sample to sample and from males to females. These factors are positively correlated with each other and also with sociability to varying degrees. ImpB correlates quite well with extraversion, but even better with psychoticism; ImpN correlates positively with N and P, suggesting that this trait is somewhat pathological. It is suggested that the distinction between ImpB and ImpN is crucial for the discussion of the nature and measurement of extraversion and also for future experimental work on the causal background and experimental testing of impulsive behaviour patterns.

Question 34

Reynolds et al. (2019)

Answer 34

Objective: Among patients with brain damage, executive function deficits and impulsivity correspond with propensity to engage in risky behaviors. Less research has addressed this issue in healthy adults, and fewer still have simultaneously evaluated the importance of executive function and impulsive personality. Additionally, most research has focused exclusively on substance use while ignoring other domains of risky behavior such as sexual activity and antisocial practices. Toward this end, we examined the association of risky behaviors with executive function and self-reported impulsivity. Method: Healthy undergraduates (n = 56) were administered the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT), Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST), and UPPS-P impulsivity questionnaire. A self-report questionnaire assessed risky sexual activities, drug use, and antisocial behaviors over a 2-month interval. Results: After accounting for social desirability and performance effort, multiple regression analyses revealed a robust relationship between executive function and risk-taking. Specifically, WCST performance correlated with risky sexual and substance use behavior, whereas the IGT was uniquely linked with antisocial acts. Trait impulsivity was positively associated with sexual behavior. Conclusions: Extending previous research, executive function accounted for more variance in risky behaviors than self-reported impulsivity, but this was mediated by facet of executive function. Decision-making under risk seemed to better account for antisocial acts, whereas perseveration was more strongly linked to sexual activity and substance misuse. These data imply that poor executive function increases the likelihood that healthy young adults will engage in risky and potentially dangerous acts, extending the ecological validity of the WCST and IGT.

Question 35

Colledani et al. (2019)

Answer 35

The present work consists of two studies. In the first study, a new abbreviated form of the EPQ-R (six items per scale) was developed from the 100 items of the full-length version of the questionnaire. Methods and procedures developed within the framework of multidimensional IRT were used for this purpose. In the second study, the abbreviated questionnaire was validated on a new data sample. In addition, latent profile analysis was used to identify groups of individuals characterized by similar patterns of the four PEN-L traits. These patterns were also compared with respect to indicators of psychosocial functioning. Results indicated that the new abbreviated form of the questionnaire outperforms the old abbreviated form with respect to reliability and approximation of measures obtained with the full-length test. Moreover, the four-factor structure of the instrument and its convergent validity have been confirmed. Three PEN-L patterns have been identified that differ for anxiety and depression, satisfaction for social relations, frequency of substance use and sexual risk behaviors.

Question 36

McCrae and Costa (1987)

Answer 36

Two data sources—self reports and peer ratings—and two instruments—adjective factors and questionnaire scales—were used to assess the five-factor model of personality. As in a previous study of self-reports (McCrae & Costa, 1985b), adjective factors of neuroticism, extraversion, openness to experience, agreeableness–antagonism, and conscientiousness–undirectedness were identified in an analysis of 738 peer ratings of 275 adult subjects. Intraclass correlations among raters, ranging from .30 to .65, and correlations between mean peer ratings and self-reports, from .25 to .62, showed substantial cross-observer agreement on all five adjective factors. Similar results were seen in analyses of scales from the NEO Personality Inventory. Items from the adjective factors were used as guides in a discussion of the nature of the five factors. These data reinforce recent appeals for the adoption of the five-factor model in personality research and assessment.

Question 37

McCrae and Costa (1997)

Answer 37

Patterns of covariation among personality traits in English-speaking populations can be summarized by the five-factor model (FFM). To assess the cross-cultural generalizability of the FFM, data from studies using 6 translations of the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (P. T. Costa & R. R. McCrae, 1992) were compared with the American factor structure. German, Portuguese, Hebrew, Chinese, Korean, and Japanese samples (N = 7,134) showed similar structures after varimax rotation of 5 factors. When targeted rotations were used, the American factor structure was closely reproduced, even at the level of secondary loadings. Because the samples studied represented highly diverse cultures with languages from 5 distinct language families, these data strongly suggest that personality trait structure is universal

Question 38

Smith et al. (2019)

Answer 38

Over 25 years of research suggests an important link between perfectionism and personality traits included in the five-factor model (FFM). However, inconsistent findings, underpowered studies, and a plethora of perfectionism scales have obscured understanding of how perfectionism fits within the FFM. We addressed these limitations by conducting the first meta-analytic review of the relationships between perfectionism dimensions and FFM traits (k = 77, N = 24,789). Meta-analysis with random effects revealed perfectionistic concerns (socially prescribed perfectionism, concern over mistakes, doubts about actions, and discrepancy) were characterized by neuroticism (𝑟+𝑐 = .50), low agreeableness (𝑟+𝑐 = −.26), and low extraversion (𝑟+𝑐 = −.24); perfectionistic strivings (self-oriented perfectionism, personal standards, and high standards) were characterized by conscientiousness (𝑟+𝑐 = .44). Additionally, several perfectionism–FFM relationships were moderated by gender, age, and the perfectionism subscale used. Findings complement theory suggesting that perfectionism has neurotic and non-neurotic dimensions. Results also underscore that the (mal)adaptiveness of perfectionistic strivings hinges on instrumentation.

Question 39

Judge and Zapata (2014)

Answer 39

Derived from two theoretical concepts—situation strength and trait activation—we develop and test an interactionist model governing the degree to which five-factor model personality traits are related to job performance. One concept—situation strength—was hypothesized to predict the validities of all of the “Big Five” traits, while the effects of the other—trait activation—were hypothesized to be specific to each trait. Based on this interactionist model, personality–performance correlations were located in the literature, and occupationally homogeneous jobs were coded according to their theoretically relevant contextual properties. Results revealed that all five traits were more predictive of performance for jobs in which the process by which the work was done represented weak situations (e.g., work was unstructured, employee had discretion to make decisions). Many of the traits also predicted performance in job contexts that activated specific traits (e.g., extraversion better predicted performance in jobs requiring social skills, agreeableness was less positively related to performance in competitive contexts, openness was more strongly related to performance in jobs with strong innovation/creativity requirements). Overall, the study’s findings supported our interactionist model in which the situation exerts both general and specific effects on the degree to which personality predicts job performance.

Question 40

Vize et al. (2019)

Answer 40

The Five Factor Model (FFM) of personality is the dominant hierarchical model of personality. Previous work has demonstrated the importance of the FFM domains and facets in understanding a variety of antisocial behaviors ranging from non-violent antisocial behavior to a variety of aggression outcomes. The aim of the present meta-analysis was to quantitatively summarize the empirical work that has examined these relations, as well as update and expand previous work in this area using Bayesian meta-analytic methods. A comprehensive search of available literature on the FFM and antisocial behavior was conducted and posterior distributions of effect sizes were computed for the FFM domains (across 12 antisocial outcomes). The meta-analytic results supported the primary importance of (low) Agreeableness and (low) Conscientiousness in predicting antisocial behavior across antisocial outcomes, with the exception of the outcome related to child molestation. The importance of Neuroticism was more dependent on the specific antisocial outcome under examination. The results are discussed in the context of the descriptive research on the FFM and antisocial behavior, and how Bayesian methods provide additional utility in estimation and prediction compared to more common frequentist methods. Furthermore, we recommend that future work on the FFM and antisocial behavior move towards process-level analyses to further examine how traits are implicated in different forms of antisocial behavior.

Question 41

Goldberg (1990)

Answer 41

In the 45 years since R. B. Cattell (1943, 1945) used English trait terms to begin the formulation of his “description of personality,” a number of investigators have proposed an alternative structure based on 5 orthogonal factors. The generality of this 5-factor model is here demonstrated across unusually comprehensive sets of trait terms. In the 1st of 3 studies, 1,431 trait adjectives grouped into 75 clusters were analyzed; virtually identical structures emerged in 10 replications, each based on a different factor-analytic procedure. A 2nd study of 479 common terms grouped into 133 synonym clusters revealed the same structure in 2 samples of self-ratings and in 2 samples of peer ratings. None of the factors beyond the 5th generalized across the samples. In the 3rd study, analyses of 100 clusters derived from 339 trait terms suggest their potential utility as Big-Five markers in future studies.

Question 42

Roberts and Woodman (2016)

Answer 42

The purpose of this chapter is to consider a more central role for personality and individual differences in the context of performance. Understanding the aspects of personality that might be associated with better/worse performance is not only of considerable theoretical importance, but it is of substantial applied importance; developing a better understanding of the sort of person who might be more (or less) likely to perform well would allow directors, managers, mentors, coaches, and practitioners to better tailor the strategies that are used to optimize individuals’ performance. Much of the existing personality work in sport has utilized the Five-Factor Model of Personality, the so-called ‘Big 5’, and so we provide only a brief review of this work in this chapter. We aim to present a review of personality that considers people beyond how they might fit into the Big 5. We adopt such an approach because we believe that personality and performance will be best understood by ensuring that the research is underpinned by two interrelated and overarching principles. First, researchers should consider performers beyond their relative fit into five largely measurement-derived broad traits (e.g., the Big 5). Instead, researchers should consider specific personality traits that have a specifically strong performance-focused theoretical basis. Second, people are complex and so the relationship between the person and his/her performance is also complex. As such, research questions that are formed on the basis of main effects (e.g., is extraversion a positive trait for performance?) have very limited value. Specifically, the relationship between personality and performance is best viewed through an interaction lens: the interaction between different aspects of personality and/or between the person and his/her environment.

Question 43

Sharpe et al. (2011)

Answer 43

The purpose of the present study was to investigate the relationship between the Big Five factors of personality and dispositional optimism. Data from five samples were collected (Total N = 4332) using three different measures of optimism and five different measures of the Big Five. Results indicated strong positive relationships between optimism and four of the Big Five factors: Emotional Stability, Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness. Agreeableness and Conscientiousness explained additional variance in dispositional optimism over and above Neuroticism and Extraversion, providing evidence for the complexity of optimism. The position of optimism in the larger web of human personality constructs is discussed.

Question 44

Costa and McCrae (1985)

Answer 44

Examined the correspondence between 2 systems for personality trait classification—W. T. Norman’s (1963) 5-factor model and P. T. Costa and R. R. McCrae’s (1980) NEO (Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness) inventory—to evaluate their comprehensiveness as models of personality. 498 24–86 yr old participants in the Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging completed an instrument containing 80 adjective pairs, which included 40 pairs proposed to measure the 5 dimensions. Neuroticism and extraversion factors from these items showed substantial correlations with corresponding NEO inventory scales; however, analyses that included psychometric measures of intelligence suggested that the 5th factor in the Norman structure should be reconceptualized as openness to experience. Convergent correlations above .50 with spouse ratings on the NEO inventory that were made 3 yrs earlier confirmed these relations across time, instrument, and source of data. The relations among culture, conscientiousness, openness, and intelligence are discussed, and it is concluded that mental ability is a separate factor, though related to openness to experience

Question 45

Costa and McCrae (2008)

Answer 45

In some respects, the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) (Costa and McCrae, 1985b, 1989a, 1992b) is a cutting-edge instrument. In other respects, the NEO-PI-R is profoundly conservative, deeply rooted in the research of generations of personality psychologists. This chapter discusses the evolution of the NEO-PI-R; item selection and scale development; approaches to validation; and applications of the NEO-PI-R.

Question 46

Avinun et al. (2019)

Answer 46

Attempts to link the Big Five personality traits of Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Neuroticism with variability in trait-like features of brain structure have produced inconsistent results. Small sample sizes and heterogeneous methodology have been suspected in driving these inconsistencies. Here, we tested for associations between the Big Five personality traits and multiple measures of brain structure using data from 1,107 university students (636 women, mean age 19.69±1.24 years) representing the largest attempt to date. In addition to replication analyses based on a prior study, we conducted exploratory whole-brain analyses. Three supplementary analyses were also conducted to examine 1) possible associations with lower-order facets of personality; 2) modulatory effects of sex; and 3) effect of controlling for non-target personality traits. The analyses failed to identify any significant associations between the Big Five personality traits and variability in measures of cortical thickness, surface area, subcortical volume, or white matter microstructural integrity. The supplementary analyses supported these primary null findings, suggesting they were not substantively biased by our choice of analytic model. These results collectively indicate that if there are direct associations between the Big Five personality traits and variability in brain structure they are of likely very small effect sizes requiring very large samples for reliable detection.

Question 47

Solds and Vaillant (1999)

Answer 47

One hundred sixty-three men who have been followed prospectively for over 45 years were rated on a set of 25 personality traits at the end of their college careers and took the NEO-PI at approximately ages 67–68. The college traits were transformed, via a rating procedure, to scales assessing each of the Big Five dimensions and related to the NEO-PI. Three traits—Neuroticism, Extraversion, and Openness—exhibited significant correlations across the 45-year interval. Furthermore, the trait profiles remained relatively stable over that interval. Both sets of personality traits were related to a wide variety of life course variables representing the domains of global adult adjustment, career functioning/success, creativity, social relations, mental health, substance abuse, childhood characteristics, familial history of pathology, maturity of defenses, and political attitudes. Conscientiousness in college was the best predictor of what happened to the men in the future, whereas Neuroticism in late midlife was the best correlate of life course functioning across a variety of domains.

Question 48

Harris et al. (2016)

Answer 48

There is evidence for differential stability in personality trait differences, even over decades. The authors used data from a sample of the Scottish Mental Survey, 1947 to study personality stability from childhood to older age. The 6-Day Sample (N = 1,208) were rated on six personality characteristics by their teachers at around age 14. In 2012, the authors traced as many of these participants as possible and invited them to take part in a follow-up study. Those who agreed (N = 174) completed a questionnaire booklet at age 77 years, which included rating themselves and asking someone who knew them well to rate them on the same 6 characteristics on which they were rated in adolescence. Each set of 6 ratings was reduced to the same single underlying factor, denoted dependability, a trait comparable to conscientiousness. Participants’ and others’ older-age personality characteristic ratings were moderately correlated with each other, and with other measures of personality and wellbeing, but correlations suggested no significant stability of any of the 6 characteristics or their underlying factor, dependability, over the 63-year interval. However, a more complex model, controlling rater effects, indicated significant 63-year stability of 1 personality characteristic, Stability of Moods, and near-significant stability of another, Conscientiousness. Results suggest that lifelong differential stability of personality is generally quite low, but that some aspects of personality in older age may relate to personality in childhood.

Question 49

Roberts and DelVecchio (2000)

Answer 49

The present study used meta-analytic techniques to test whether trait consistency maximizes and stabilizes at a specific period in the life course. From 152 longitudinal studies, 3,217 test–retest correlation coefficients were compiled. Meta-analytic estimates of mean population test–retest correlation coefficients showed that trait consistency increased from .31 in childhood to .54 during the college years, to .64 at age 30, and then reached a plateau around .74 between ages 50 and 70 when time interval was held constant at 6.7 years. Analysis of moderators of consistency showed that the longitudinal time interval had a negative relation to trait consistency and that temperament dimensions were less consistent than adult personality traits.

Question 50

Paunonen (2003)

Answer 50

Measures of the Big Five factors of personality were used to predict a variety of criterion variables thought to represent behaviors of some social and cultural significance (e.g., alcohol consumption, grade point average). Analyses focused on replicated predictions across 2 independent samples of participants (Ns=276 and 142) with 3 different measures of the Big Five (the NEO Five-Factor Inventory, the Revised NEO Personality Inventory, and the Five-Factor Nonverbal Personality Questionnaire, the latter an experimental nonverbal personality inventory). The results indicated substantial consistency in behavior predictions across the different Big Five assessments. The data are interpreted as supporting both the construct validity of the personality measures used and the role of the Big Five factors as determinants of certain complex behaviors.

Question 51

Hong et al. (2008)

Answer 51

We investigated the construct validities of three, quite diverse, Big Five personality questionnaires using confirmatory factor analysis applied to multitrait–multimethod data. Participants (N = 295) completed three different personality questionnaires: the NEO Five-Factor Inventory (Costa & McCrae, 1992), the Five-Factor Nonverbal Personality Questionnaire (Paunonen, Jackson, & Ashton, 2004), and a 50-item bipolar adjective rating form (Goldberg, 1992). They also completed a behavior report form as a separate criterion measure. The multitrait–multimethod analyses provided evidence for the convergent validity and, to a lesser extent, the discriminant validity of the Big Five personality measures. Criterion-related validities of the Big Five measures were also supported.

Question 52

Paunonen (2003) - culture

Answer 52

Measures of several personality variables, from both within and beyond the domain of the Big Five personality factors, were used to predict a variety of complex behaviour outcomes of some social and cultural significance (e.g. alcohol consumption and grade point average). Analyses focused on replicated predictions across participants in four countries (Canada, England, Germany, and Finland) and on the relative predictive accuracies of narrow trait predictors versus broad factor predictors. The results indicated substantial consistency in those predictions across cultures for several of the criteria. Furthermore, the narrow traits were able to account for more criterion variance than were the broad factors underlying those traits. Our data contraindicate the increasingly common practice of using only a few personality factor measures to predict complex human behaviours

Question 53

Watson et al. (2017)

Answer 53

The Faceted Inventory of the Five-Factor Model (FI-FFM) is a comprehensive hierarchical measure of personality. The FI-FFM was created across five phases of scale development. It includes five facets apiece for neuroticism, extraversion, and conscientiousness; four facets within agreeableness; and three facets for openness. We present reliability and validity data obtained from three samples. The FI-FFM scales are internally consistent and highly stable over 2 weeks (retest rs ranged from .64 to .82, median r = .77). They show strong convergent and discriminant validity vis-à-vis the NEO, the Big Five Inventory, and the Personality Inventory for DSM-5. Moreover, self-ratings on the scales show moderate to strong agreement with corresponding ratings made by informants (rs ranged from .26 to .66, median r = .42). Finally, in joint analyses with the NEO Personality Inventory–3, the FI-FFM neuroticism facet scales display significant incremental validity in predicting indicators of internalizing psychopathology.

Question 54

Ozer and Benet-Martinez (2006)

Answer 54

Personality has consequences. Measures of personality have contemporaneous and predictive relations to a variety of important outcomes. Using the Big Five factors as heuristics for organizing the research literature, numerous consequential relations are identified. Personality dispositions are associated with happiness, physical and psychological health, spirituality, and identity at an individual level; associated with the quality of relationships with peers, family, and romantic others at an interpersonal level; and associated with occupational choice, satisfaction, and performance, as well as community involvement, criminal activity, and political ideology at a social institutional level.

Question 55

Back et al. (2009)

Answer 55

The authors present a behavioral process model of personality that specifies explicit and implicit aspects of the self-concept of personality as predictors of actual behavior. An extensive behavioral study (N = 130) including a variety of relevant social situations was conducted. This approach allowed reliable measurement of more than 50 behavioral indicators. A priori assignment of indicators to the Big Five dimensions was conducted on the basis of theory and expert ratings. In line with the authors’ model, 3 main findings were revealed: First, direct measures (questionnaires) of personality predicted actual behavior for all Big Five dimensions. Second, indirect measures (implicit association tests) of neuroticism and extraversion also predicted actual behavior. Third, the predictive validity of these indirect measures was incremental. The authors were additionally able to show that controlling for valence did not affect any of these results. Implications and future prospects for the study of personality and actual behavior are discussed.

Question 56

Bartlett and Anderson (2012)

Answer 56

Relations between the Big 5 personality traits and aggressive behavior have been studied frequently. However, no work has tested whether that relation is direct or indirect through aggressive attitudes and aggressive emotions. Data from two large samples that used different Big 5 measures examined these effects. Overall, results showed that the paths from Big 5 traits to aggressive behavior depends on both the specific type of aggressive behavior and the Big 5 traits measured. For example, Openness and Agreeableness were both directly and indirectly related to physical aggression, but were only indirectly related (through aggressive attitudes) to violent behavior. Similarly, Neuroticism was both directly and indirectly (through aggressive emotions) related to physical aggression, but not to violent behavior. Theoretical implications and future work are discussed

Question 57

Barrick and Mount (1991)

Answer 57

This study investigated the relation of the “Big Five” personality dimensions (Extraversion, Emotional Stability, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, and Openness to Experience) to three job performance criteria (job proficiency, training proficiency, and personnel data) for five occupational groups (professionals, police, managers, sales, and skilled/semi‐skilled). Results indicated that one dimension of personality, Conscientiousness, showed consistent relations with all job performance criteria for all occupational groups. For the remaining personality dimensions, the estimated true score correlations varied by occupational group and criterion type. Extraversion was a valid predictor for two occupations involving social interaction, managers and sales (across criterion types). Also, both Openness to Experience and Extraversion were valid predictors of the training proficiency criterion (across occupations). Other personality dimensions were also found to be valid predictors for some occupations and some criterion types, but the magnitude of the estimated true score correlations was small (ρ < .10). Overall, the results illustrate the benefits of using the 5‐factor model of personality to accumulate and communicate empirical findings. The findings have numerous implications for research and practice in personnel psychology, especially in the subfields of personnel selection, training and development, and performance appraisal.

Question 58

Rothmann and Coetzer (2003)

Answer 58

The objective of this research was to determine the relationship between personality dimensions and job performance. A cross-sectional survey design was used. The study population consisted of 159 employees of a pharmaceutical company. The NEO-Personality Inventory - Revised and Performance Appraisal Questionnaire were used as measuring instruments. The results showed that Emotional Stability, Extraversion, Openness to Experience and Conscientiousness were related to task performance and creativity. Three personality dimensions, namely Emotional Stability, Openness to Experience and Agreeableness, explained 28% of the variance in participants’ management performance.

Question 59

Stajkovic et al. (2018)

Answer 59

The Big Five personality traits and self-efficacy independently relate to a multitude of outcomes across domains of functioning. Yet, only a small number of studies examined these variables together as part of the same conceptual model, and findings are mixed. We revisit their joint relationships, and test three conceptual models of influence on academic performance of college students over a semester. Because of the key role college graduates will play in society, many have a stake in better understanding their performance. The trait model specifies that the Big Five traits influence performance directly and indirectly through partial mediation of self-efficacy. In the independent model, the Big Five traits influence self-efficacy and performance independently, without mediation of self-efficacy. In the intrapersonal model, the effects of the Big Five traits on performance are fully mediated by self-efficacy. We collected data in five samples, three Universities, and two countries, N = 875, and conducted a meta-analytic path-analysis. Self-efficacy positively related to academic performance across the models, conscientiousness and emotional stability were predictive of self-efficacy and performance in some analyses, and the significance of the other three traits was fleeting.

Question 60

Wilmot et al. (2019)

Answer 60

How and to what extent does extraversion relate to work relevant variables across the lifespan? In the most extensive quantitative review to date, we summarize results from 97 published meta-analyses reporting relations of extraversion to 165 distinct work relevant variables, as well as relations of extraversion’s lower order traits to 58 variables. We first update all effects using a common set of statistical corrections and, when possible, combine independent estimates using second-order meta-analysis (Schmidt & Oh, 2013). We then organize effects within a framework of four career domains—education, job application, on the job, and career/lifespan—and five conceptual categories: motivations, values, and interests; attitudes and well-being; interpersonal; performance; and counterproductivity. Overall, extraversion shows effects in a desirable direction for 90% of variables (grand mean ρ̄ = .14), indicative of a small, persistent advantage at work. Findings also show areas with more substantial effects (ρ̄ ≥ .20), which we synthesize into four extraversion advantages. These motivational, emotional, interpersonal, and performance advantages offer a concise account of extraversion’s relations and a new lens for understanding its effects at work. Our review of the lower order trait evidence reveals diverse relations (e.g., the positive emotions facet has consistently advantageous effects, the sociability facet confers few benefits, the sensation-seeking facet is largely disadvantageous), and extends knowledge about the functioning of extraversion and its advantages. We conclude by discussing potential boundary conditions of findings, contributions and limitations of our review, and new research directions for extraversion at work.

Question 61

Judge et al. (2002)

Answer 61

This study reports results of a meta-analysis linking traits from the 5-factor model of personality to overall job satisfaction. Using the model as an organizing framework, 334 correlations from 163 independent samples were classified according to the model. The estimated true score correlations with job satisfaction were -.29 for Neuroticism, .25 for Extraversion, .02 for Openness to Experience, .17 for Agreeableness, and .26 for Conscientiousness. Results further indicated that only the relations of Neuroticism and Extraversion with job satisfaction generalized across studies. As a set, the Big Five traits had a multiple correlation of .41 with job satisfaction, indicating support for the validity of the dispositional source of job satisfaction when traits are organized according to the 5-factor model.

Question 62

Steel et al. (2018)

Answer 62

To what extent do employees’ personality traits shape their perceptions of job and life satisfaction? To answer this question, we conducted the largest meta-analysis on the topic to date, summarizing a total of 12,682 correlations among combinations of personality, job satisfaction and life satisfaction. We also sought to refine previous meta-analytic estimates by comparing the effects of personality facets to broad trait domains, while controlling for commensurability of personality measures. The results showed that the Big Five personality traits accounted for about 10% of the variance in job satisfaction, which in turn accounted for 13% of the variance in life satisfaction. Compared with the broad trait domains, personality facets typically accounted for twice as much variance in life satisfaction, with only a minor increase for job satisfaction, which contradicts the typical bandwidth–fidelity heuristic. The results also provided support for a trickle-down or top-down effect, where dispositions affect perceptions of life satisfaction, which then influenced the more specific subdomain of job satisfaction. The results have important implications for researchers and practitioners, suggesting that information is lost when personality facets are overlooked, and that educational and workplace interventions could enhance perceptions of satisfaction for those prone to lower levels of subjective well-being.

Question 63

Rubenstein et al. (2019)

Answer 63

Research has provided considerable support for the dispositional basis of job attitudes. However, the theoretical mechanisms that mediate such personality trait-job attitude relationships have been less forthcoming. Drawing from five-factor theory and self-verification theory, in the present study we developed and tested a meta-analytic path model linking the five-factor model (FFM) of personality to overall job attitudes (i.e., job satisfaction and affective organizational commitment) through employees’ perceptions of task and social job characteristics. In doing so, we reveal important work features through which each FFM trait is expressed to shape employee job attitudes. We discuss the implications of our results for both theory and practice and highlight future research directions for both personality trait and job attitudes inquiry.

Question 64

Templer (2012)

Answer 64

Results from predominantly US-based research have shown that personality can partly explain job satisfaction. As the issue of globalisation grows in importance for organisations, I researched in this study whether meta-analytic findings on the relationships between job satisfaction and the Big Five personality traits extraversion, conscientiousness, and neuroticism would hold in a tight and collectivistic Asian society. Additionally, I expected that in a tight and collectivistic society the personality trait agreeableness would have a strong positive relationship with job satisfaction. Study participants were 354 employees from organisations in Singapore. Results confirmed that extraversion, conscientiousness, non-neuroticism (emotional stability), and also agreeableness were related to job satisfaction. The study advises scholars and practitioners that even in a tight and collectivistic Asian societydespite situations that demand abiding by norms and fulfilling obligationsjob satisfaction is related to stable personality traits.

Question 65

Budaev (1999)

Answer 65

Sex differences in the Big Five personality structure, as assessed by combined JPI and PRF scales, were examined in a student population (N=528) using factor analytic and covariance structure analysis techniques. An evolutionary hypothesis was tested, that the factor which lies between classical Agreeableness vs. Hostility and Neuroticism vs. Emotional Stability is the basic dimension of dominance-related aggressiveness maintained by frequency-dependent selection. The hypothesis predicts that this factor should explain more variance in males than in females. It was found that females were characterized by higher scores on the factor of Agreeableness and low Emotional Stability vs. Hostility and high Emotional Stability. As predicted, the factor of Agreeableness and low Emotional Stability explained significantly more variance in males than in females, both absolutely and in relation to other personality factors. The between-sex differences in personality factors are discussed in relation to studies of temperament, dominance and aggressiveness in non-human animals.

Question 66

McCrae et al. (1998)

Answer 66

The five-factor model (FFM) is a representation of the patterns of covariation of personality traits in terms of five broad factors. The Revised NEO Personality Inventory, a questionnaire measure of the FFM, has recently been translated into a number of different languages, permitting tests of its cross-cultural replicability. Data from Filipino and French translations are presented, showing clear and detailed replication of the American normative factor structure when targeted rotation is used. Results from these and other cross-cultural and behavior genetic studies suggest that the FFM is a biologically based human universal. Applications of trait psychology in clinical, educational, and organizational settings may prove generalizable across cultures, and cross-cultural psychologists can profitably explore the expression of the same personality traits in different cultural contexts.

Question 67

Lui et al. (2019)

Answer 67

Relative to broad Big Five domains, personality facets provide incremental value in predicting life outcomes. Valid between-group comparisons of means and correlates of facet scores are contingent upon measurement invariance of personality measures. Research on culture and Big Five personality has been largely limited to cross-national comparisons of domains, without assessing measurement invariance across ethnoracial groups within the same country. Using the NEO Inventories, we tested facet-level measurement invariance between Euro (N = 418, 63.2% women, Mage = 18.43) and Asian Americans (N = 429, 56.6% women, Mage = 18.00). Multigroup exploratory factor analysis within a confirmatory factor analysis framework showed partial strong invariance. Assertiveness and activity did not load onto extraversion as strongly for Asian Americans. Self-consciousness showed a stronger cross-loading onto extraversion among Asian Americans than Euro Americans. Achievement striving, competence, warmth, tender-mindedness, and excitement seeking showed noninvariant intercepts across groups. Collectivistic values emphasizing interpersonal harmony and modesty should be considered when examining narrow and broad traits among Asian Americans.

Question 68

Eysenck (1991)

Answer 68

This is a reply to the Costa and McCrae article entitled: “Four ways five factors are basic” [(1992) Personality and Individual Differences, 13(6), 653–665]. This article takes up the challenge and discusses four major criticisms of the 5-factor model. The first criticism relates to the level of the hierarchical model of personality at which different factors arise, suggesting that 3 of the 5 factors in the Costa and McCrae model are essentially primaries, often highly intercorrelated, and linked closely with psychoticism. The second criticism is directed at the failure of Costa and McCrae to discuss the overwhelming evidence from meta-analyses of factorial studies that 3, and not 5 factors emerged at the highest level. The third criticism is directed at the lack of a nomological network or theoretical underpinning for the 5 factors, and the fourth is directed at the failure of providing a biological link between genetic causation and behavioural organization. All four criticisms suggested that the postulation of the 5-factor model is a premature crystallization of spurious orthodoxy.

Question 69

Draycott and Kline (1995)

Answer 69

A study sought to address the issue of personality dimensionality by comparing two influential personality questionnaires which differ in their theoretical underpinnings; the EPQ-R (three-factor model) and the NEO-PI (five-factor model). Both instruments were found to have a good deal of variance in common, the majority of which was identified along the dimensions of extraversion and neuroticism. On factoring, there was little evidence of a five-factor model emerging; clearly there was variance unaccounted for by the three-factor measure, but this failed to form appropriately-sized additional factors. There is evidence for the interpretation of the NEO-PI ‘conscientiousness’ measure as a facet of Eysenck’s ‘psychoticism’ (P) factor.

Question 70

Willmot et al. (2017)

Answer 70

Over time, the concept of personality has stimulated considerable theorising and debate amongst researchers. Thought to be characteristics within an individual that account for consistent patterns of thought, feelings and behaviours, the quest to understand individual differences between human beings has led to the increased uptake of psychological measurement tools, known as psychometric tests. Many variations of psychometric tests that have been devised to date attempt to operationalise the theoretical principles of Trait theory and the dimensions therein. Typically, these are applied within occupational, educational and clinical settings, where such personality measures are considered increasingly useful in the evaluation of individuals either being assessed, or due to begin working within an organisation. However, despite researchers implementing psychometric tests such as the NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R; Costa and McCrae, 1992a) reporting high levels of construct validity for the measure (Widiger and Trull, 1997), criticism surrounding the reliability of findings obtained from applications of the tool, resulting from the general lack of agreement around the trait dimensions that underpin psychometric testing, remain important. Another highly contented issue surrounding the basis of such tests are the stability and situationalist arguments, which criticise such methods as inaccurately representing a true picture of the individual due to failing to take the full environmental influences upon people into account. Such issues are undoubtedly more complex than such a summarisation can accredit, and upon paying systematic and critical consideration to the related assessments, a greater depth of analysis may be drawn.