W11: Personality and Consequential Outcome Flashcards
Can we use measures of personality to make valid inferences or predictions about theoretically relevant or practically useful outcomes?
Different type of effects (3)
Direct effects- from the general to the specific…
e.g., does conscientiousness predict specific instances of conscientious behaviour?
Indirect effects – ‘mediation’
e.g., via trait expressions or situation selection
Interactive/conditional effects – person x environment interactions
e.g., via differential reactivity to events/situations
History of prediction:
Lexical Hypothesis
Important characteristics will, over human history, be coded in language
Impt in the sense of making predictions:
eg: who will help/hurt me.
who fun/attractive
History of prediction:
Formal assessment of personality and abilities
Educational contexts
Educational contexts
Binet and Simon (1905, 1908, 1911): identification of children requiring alternate education
Development of the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) during the 1920
History of prediction:
Formal assessment of personality and abilities
Occupational contexts Robert Yerkes (1915)
Robert Yerkes (1915) Military selection and placement
1950s-1970s: Diversification and mobility of work
Growth of Human Resources Management
Prediction of Achievement
Job Performance
Schmidt & Hunter (1998)
meta-analysis of 85 years of research
Job performance typically measured in terms of supervisory ratings (but other indicators too – e.g., sales records)
Results:
B5 -> C r = .31
integrity test(C/A) r = .41
Personality a weaker predictor than measures of cognitive ability (or ‘intelligence’), but adds to the prediction of cognitive tests
Cognitive alone; r = .48
cognitive ability with C; r = .6o
Combining cognitive ability with an C/A; r = .65
Prediction of Achievement
Job Performance
Barrick & Mount (1991, 1998):
Meta-analyses focussed just on the big five:
Conscientiousness predicts across all occupations: r = .20-.23
will-do criteria r = .42
Extraversion predicted performance well in two specific job arenas:
Management (.18) Sales (.15)
Prediction of Achievement:
Job Performance
Hurtz & Donovan (2000):
Updated meta-analysis to check reliability of first studies…
Key findings:
1) Conscientiousness again predicts broadly in the region of r = .20
2) Agreeableness, Openness/Intellect, and (low) Neuroticism predicts performance in customer service roles
3) Extraversion and (low) Neuroticism predicts in management and sales roles
Prediction of Achievement:
“Occupational success”
what defines:
Predictive validity for:
what defines: Various indices (e.g., Duncan Socioeconomic Index)
Typically reflect wages, education required, popular views of its desirability, worthiness, or ‘prestige’
top scorers: Doctor, Dentist, Lawyer
Predictive validity for
1) Openness/intellect: r = .18 (Sutin et al., 2009)
2) Extraversion: r = .16 (Roberts et al., 2003)
3) Conscientiousness: r = .15 (Roberts et al., 2003)
Prediction of Achievement:
“Occupational success”
Roberts et al., 2007
After accounting for childhood SES, parental income, and IQ, personality predicts various indicators of occupational success (income, promotion etc.) up to 47 years later…
Prediction of Achievement:
Creative achievement
Kaufman et al., 2015
Openness engagement with perceptual information
Openness -> achievement* in the arts (e.g., visual arts, music, dance, architectural design)
Intellect reflects engagement with semantic information
Intellect -> achievement* in the sciences (e.g., scientific discovery, inventions)
Prediction of Achievement::
Educational achievement
Poropat (2009):
Predicting school GPA from… Cognitive ability: r = .25 Conscientiousness: r = .22 Openness/intellect: r = .12 Agreeableness: r = .07
Of personality measures, only conscientiousness adds to prediction above cognitive ability
Prediction of Achievement:
Choice of college major and B5
Extraversion
Economics, Law, Political Science, and Medicine
Neuroticism
Arts, Humanities, and Psychology
Agreeableness
Medicine, Psychology, Sciences, Arts, and Humanities
Conscientiousness
Science, Law, Economics, Engineering, Medicine, and
Psychology
Openness/Intellect
Humanities, Arts, Psychology, and Political Science
er.. so many psychology…
Why does personality predict achievement
direct & indirect & interactive effect
Direct effects?
conscientiousness -> responsible
Conscientiousness predicts most strongly for effort-related criteria
Indirect effects?
choosing educational and career pathways that ‘fit’ ones personality
C-> structure/order
openness/intellect -> flexibility/creativity
Interactive effects?
responding to the demands of work
E respond well to interpersonal challenges of management roles
NB: Many of these pathways may operate simultaneously
Why does personality predict achievement
Interactive effects Example
Extraversion:
Stewart, 1996
Extraverts respond more to rewards (Smillie & Wacker, 2015)
Extraversion should only predict performance in salespeople when performance is linked with rewards:
If new sales are rewarded, Extraversion will predict new sales (but not customer retention)
If customer retention is rewarded, Extraversion will predict customer retention (but not new sales)
Summary 1:
Personality traits predict range of outcomes in achievement contexts
Conscientiousness: Broad predictor of educational and occupational achievement
Indirect effects via state expressions (e.g., study strategies)
Extraversion: achievement and choice for some work areas (management, sales, customer service)
Interactive/conditional effects of incentive structures
Also Openness (educational attainment/engagement, occupational success, creative achievement),
Agreeableness (customer service) and
(low) Neuroticism (performance)
Impact of personality on longevity
conscientious
Martin et al., 2007
Variables examined:
Age of death and cause
Various health/risk behaviours (e.g., smoking)
Conscientiousness assessed over 7 decades (child, 20/30s 30/40s)
prob of death 💀
High C - ~.35
unstable C - between
low C - ~.5
Impact of personality on longevity Replication using peer/informant reports… \+ female/male dif Jackson et, al. 2015
Replication using peer/informant
Males rated as more conscientious in their 20s lived longer
females: lower neuroticism and higher agreeableness
Impact of personality on longevity
Protective effect of conscientiousness
Bogg and Roberts, 2004
conscientiousness predicts better health and living longer
Substantial evidence suggests engagement in health-promoting behaviours
Conscientiousness predicts… Less alcohol use, r = -.25 Less drug use, r = -.28 Less unhealthy eating, r = -.13 Less risky driving, r = -.25 Less risky sexual behaviour, r = -.13
Impact of personality on longevity
Conscientiousness & Health promoting behaviours:
Armon & Toker (2013)
Participation in periodic health checks:
DV: Odds of returning for a 2nd health check within 7 years
Conscientiousness: +ve predictor
Extraversion, openness: -ve predictors
Neuroticism: curvilinear predictor…!
Impact of personality on longevity:
Do changes in conscientiousness predict changes in health?
Takahashi, Edmonds, Jackson, & Roberts, 2012
Conscientiousness was associated with preventative health behaviours and overall health at both time points
Changes in conscientiousness were associated with changes in preventative health behaviours and overall health
Changes in preventative health behaviors mediated the association between changes in conscientiousness and changes in overall health
Predictive of Psychological wellbeing
Measures of wellbeing (incl. positive emotions, optimism, etc) also predict longevity…
These in turn are highly predicted by extraversion and (low) neuroticism
These links are still poorly understood… Healthy behaviour (e.g., exercise)? Social relationships and support? Immune function? Cardiovascular function? Recovery from illness?
Impact of personality on longevity:
Disease risk:
“Type A personality”
Agreeableness
Type A personality”
Risk of heart disease (Friedman & Rosenman, 1974)
Hostility appears to be the ‘active ingredient’ – captured by low agreeableness…
Agreeableness
May protect against biological risk factors for cardiovascular disease,
Reduced sympathetic nervous system response to stress and frustration (Smith & Spiro, 2002)
Personality predicts Relationships
what is actor/partner effect
Actor: self -> high predict self satisfaction
Partner: -> high predict self satisfaction
Personality traits predict various relationship outcomes
Dyrenforth et al. 2010:
A and C -> higher marital satisfaction in (~20,000 participants from Australia, Germany, and the UK)
Both actor and partner effects
Schmitt, 2004:
A and C -> lower rates of infidelity
Kelly & Conley, 1987:
high or low??? N -> decreased marital stability (e.g., divorce)
Both actor and partner effects
Personality predicts Relationships
Divorce
Meta-analysis:
Neuroticism, (lower) conscientiousness, and (lower) agreeableness predicts divorce up to 45 years later…
Divorce. Why?
indirect effects, via relationship dynamics
Solomon & Jackson, 2014
Details and results
2 potential pathways:
enduring dynamics VS Emergent Distress
Clearer support for enduring dynamics:
Personality impacts on relationship dynamics in ways that may ultimately lead to its dissolution
Example:
Low A and C via negative communication patterns
High N via negative emotionality (experiencing negative moods, perceiving situations more negatively)
Assortive mating
birds of a feather flock together
McCrae and colleagues, 2008
Correlations between partners’ personality traits generally positive:
r up to .35 for Big Five domains
Generally highest for openness/intellect…
Criminal and antisocial behaviour
A recurring role for (low) conscientiousness and agreeableness
1) Antisocial behaviour and aggression (Jones et al., 2011)
2) Involvement in criminal gangs (Egan & Beadman, 2011)
3) Delinquency and vandalism in Australian youths (Heaven, 1996; Mak et al., 2003)
However:
conscientiousness positively predicted ‘white collar’ criminal behaviour in a German sample (Blickle et al., 2006)
Criminal and antisocial behaviour
A recurring role for (low) conscientiousness and agreeableness
Explanations…
Direct effects
e.g., aggressive behaviour is simply a state expression of low agreeableness
Indirect effects:
Agreeableness via moral disengagement
e.g., beliefs that fighting can be justified, and teasing is not harmful
Conscientiousness via poor impulse control
Longevity
predicted by
Conscientiousness Extraversion, (low) neuroticism, and agreeablenes
Summary
Conscientiousness:
Indirect effects via state expressions (i.e., health promoting behaviours)
Extraversion, (low) neuroticism, and agreeableness:
Possibly via physical and psychological wellbeing
Only openness/intellect does not seem to have a clear link with longevity or health
Personality on Political orientation
Single ‘self placement’ – liberal vs. conservative…
Multiple dimensional approaches
Right Wing Authoritarianism (RWA)—endorsement of:
1) Respect for traditions and social norms (traditionalism)
2) Deference to authorities and institutions (conservatism)
3) Belief in the need for coercive social control (authoritarianism)
AKA ‘Social Conservatism’
Social Dominance Orientation (SDO)—endorsement of:
hierarchies and social/group inequality
AKA ‘Economic Conservatism’
Personality on Political orientation
Self identified liberals (vs. conservatives)…
Higher on openness/intellect, r ~ .20
(Somewhat) lower on conscientiousness, r ~ -.10
Sibley & Duckitt, 2008, meta-analysis:
O/Intellect -> RWA, r = -.36; SDO, r = -.16
Higher C -> RWA, r = .15
Higher A -> SDO, r = -.29
Explanation in terms of values Valuing change (O), order/structure (C), and harmony/cooperation (A)
Summary of implications:
Personality traits and other life outcomes
Agreeableness:
More positive relationship outcomes
Lower involvement in crime / antisocial behaviour
More tolerant, egalitarian (SDO)
Conscientiousness:
More positive relationship outcomes
Lower involvement in crime / antisocial behaviour
Somewhat socially conservative (e.g., respect for tradition; RWA)
Openness/Intellect:
More progressive / less socially conservative (RWA)
Personality and consequential outcomes – do they replicate?
Soto (2019)
attempted to replicate 78 previously reported associations between personality traits and consequential outcomes
Results:
87% of the previously reported findings were successfully replicated
Effect sizes were approximately 75% as strong as reported in the original studies
Theoretical /practical implications of current findings:
Theoretical implications
Testing theories of personality
e.g., are extraverts sensitive to reward?
Evaluating personality-based explanations
e.g., how can we explain and understand crime?
Predictive Validity
Theoretical /practical implications of current findings:
Potential areas of application (3)
Behaviour change for health…
Should we seek to promote higher levels of agreeableness & conscientiousness?
Job/college selection…
Should we we include measures of conscientiousness in selection protocols?
Dating apps / services…
Matching based on openness/intellect?
