A meta-analysis of the five-factor model of personality and academic performance.

This article reports a meta-analysis of personality–academic performance relationships, based on the 5-factor model, in which cumulative sample sizes ranged to over 70,000. Most analyzed studies came from the tertiary level of education, but there were similar aggregate samples from secondary and tertiary education. There was a comparatively smaller sample derived from studies at the primary level. Academic performance was found to correlate significantly with Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, and Openness. Where tested, correlations between Conscientiousness and academic performance were largely independent of intelligence. When secondary academic performance was controlled for, Conscientiousness added as much to the prediction of tertiary academic performance as did intelligence. Strong evidence was found for moderators of correlations. Academic level (primary, secondary, or tertiary), average age of participant, and the interaction between academic level and age significantly moderated correlations with academic performance. Possible explanations for these moderator effects are discussed, and recommendations for future research are provided. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Private self-consciousness and the five-factor model of personality: Distinguishing rumination from reflection.

A distinction between ruminative and reflective types of private self-attentiveness is introduced and evaluated with respect to L. R. Goldberg's (1982) list of 1,710 English trait adjectives (Study 1), the five-factor model of personality (FFM) and A. Fenigstein, M. F. Scheier, and A. Buss's (1976) Self-Consciousness Scales (Study 2), and previously reported correlates and effects of private self-consciousness (PrSC; Studies 3 and 4). Results suggest that the PrSC scale confounds two unrelated, motivationally distinct dispositions—rumination and reflection—and that this confounding may account for the "self-absorption paradox" implicit in PrSC research findings: Higher PrSC scores are associated with more accurate and extensive self-knowledge yet higher levels of psychological distress. The potential of the FFM to provide a comprehensive framework for conceptualizing self-attentive dispositions, and to order and integrate research findings within this domain, is discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

DSM-III—R personality disorders and the five-factor model of personality: An empirical comparison.

Examined the relationship between the 5-factor model (FFM) of personality and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-III-Revised (DSM-III-R) personality disorders in a sample of 54 psychiatric outpatients. Correlations between raw scores on the NEO-Personality Inventory (NEO-PI) and the number of DSM-III—R personality disorder symptoms rated present using a semistructured interview were computed. In addition, correlations between NEO-PI scores and scores on 2 self-report personality disorder inventories were also examined to determine which results replicated across instruments. Results indicate that the FFM personality dimensions of Neuroticism, Extraversion, and Agreeableness were most apparent in the DSM-III—R conceptualizations of the personality disorders. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Are indigenous personality dimensions culture specific? Philippine inventories and the five-factor model.

The authors addressed the culture specificity of indigenous personality constructs, the generalizability of the 5-factor model (FFM), and the incremental validity of indigenous measures in a collectivistic culture. Filipino college students (N=508) completed 3 indigenous inventories and the Filipino version of the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R). On the basis of the factor and regression analyses, they concluded that (a) most Philippine dimensions are well encompassed by the FFM and thus may not be very culture specific; (b) a few indigenous constructs are less well accounted for by the FFM; these constructs are not unknown in Western cultures, but they may be particularly salient or composed somewhat differently in the Philippines; (c) the structure of the NEO-PI-R FFM replicates well in the Philippines; and (d) Philippine inventories add modest incremental validity beyond the FFM in predicting selected culture-relevant criteria. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The five-factor model of personality as a framework for personality-health research.

The NEO Personality Inventory and representative personality scales drawn from health psychology were administered to 2 samples of male military recruits (Ns?=?296 and 502). Factor analysis of health-related personality scales revealed 3 conceptually meaningful domains. Examination of these domains and their constituent scales, with reference to the 5-factor model of personality, permits 3 general conclusions. First, most health-relevant dimensions and scales appear to be complex mixtures of broad personality domains. Second, variation in many health-related personality instruments is explained to a significant degree by the 5-factor model. Third, 2 of the 5 personality domains (i.e., conscientiousness and openness) appear to be substantially neglected in health psychology research. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Relating the Tellegen and five-factor models of personality structure.

With 575 college students, the relationship between A. Tellegen's (1985) personality model, assessed with the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire (MPQ), and the Big Five model, operationalized by P. T. Costa and R. R. McCrae's (1985) NEO Personality Inventory, was investigated. Correlations and joint factor analyses indicated that the MPQ constructs could be well-organized under the Big Five model, and the NEO constructs could be well-organized under the Tellegen higher-order dimensions (plus Absorption). Tellegen's higher-order dimensions relate to components of the Big Five hierarchically: Negative Emotionality encompasses Big Five Neuroticism and Agreeableness, Positive Emotionality encompasses Extraversion and the surgent aspect of Conscientiousness, and Constraint encompasses the controlled aspect of Conscientiousness and much of Openness to Experience. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The five-factor model of personality traits and organizational citizenship behaviors: A meta-analysis.

Using meta-analytic tests based on 87 statistically independent samples, we investigated the relationships between the five-factor model (FFM) of personality traits and organizational citizenship behaviors in both the aggregate and specific forms, including individual-directed, organization-directed, and change-oriented citizenship. We found that Emotional Stability, Extraversion, and Openness/Intellect have incremental validity for citizenship over and above Conscientiousness and Agreeableness, 2 well-established FFM predictors of citizenship. In addition, FFM personality traits predict citizenship over and above job satisfaction. Finally, we compared the effect sizes obtained in the current meta-analysis with the comparable effect sizes predicting task performance from previous meta-analyses. As a result, we found that Conscientiousness, Emotional Stability, and Extraversion have similar magnitudes of relationships with citizenship and task performance, whereas Openness and Agreeableness have stronger relationships with citizenship than with task performance. This lends some support to the idea that personality traits are (slightly) more important determinants of citizenship than of task performance. We conclude with proposed directions for future research on the relationships between FFM personality traits and specific forms of citizenship, based on the current findings. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

Validity of observer ratings of the five-factor model of personality traits: A meta-analysis.

Conclusions reached in previous research about the magnitude and nature of personality–performance linkages have been based almost exclusively on self-report measures of personality. The purpose of this study is to address this void in the literature by conducting a meta-analysis of the relationship between observer ratings of the five-factor model (FFM) personality traits and overall job performance. Our results show that the operational validities of FFM traits based on observer ratings are higher than those based on self-report ratings. In addition, the results show that when based on observer ratings, all FFM traits are significant predictors of overall performance. Further, observer ratings of FFM traits show meaningful incremental validity over self-reports of corresponding FFM traits in predicting overall performance, but the reverse is not true. We conclude that the validity of FFM traits in predicting overall performance is higher than previously believed, and our results underscore the importance of disentangling the validity of personality traits from the method of measurement of the traits. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

Shame, guilt, ego development, and the five-factor model of personality

Shame, guilt, and ego development are conceptually interrelated constructs, yet their empirical relations have not yet been examined. Further, these constructs have not yet been mapped onto the widely used Five-Factor Model. In Study 1, relations were examined between these three domains within a sample of Australian university students. Two types of guilt were distinguished, Empathic Guilt (associated with Agreeableness) and Anxious Guilt (associated with Neuroticism). The relationship between Shame and Ego Level was found to be curvilinear, with Shame greatest for persons at intermediate stages of ego development. In Study 2, relations between ego development and the Five-Factor Model were further examined. Across both studies, Ego Level was best predicted from Conscientiousness among men and from Openness among women. Relations between Ego Level, proneness to shame and guilt, and the five factors were typically modest, suggesting that these represent complementary approaches to the study of personality.     

The Estonian Self-Consciousness Scale and its relation to the five-factor model of personality

This article reports on the current state of our efforts to shed light on the origin and evolution of linguistic diversity using synthetic modeling and artificial life techniques. We construct a simple abstract model of a communication system that has been designed with regard to referential signaling in nonhuman animals. We analyze the evolutionary dynamics of vocabulary sharing based on these experiments. The results show that mutation rates, population size, and resource restrictions define the classes of vocabulary sharing. We also see a dynamic equilibrium, where two states, a state with one dominant shared word and a state with several dominant shared words, take turns appearing. We incorporate the idea of the abstract model into a more concrete situation and present an agent-based model to verify the results of the abstract model and to examine the possibility of using linguistic diversity in the field of distributed AI and robotics. It has been shown that the evolution of linguistic diversity in vocabulary sharing will support cooperative behavior in a population of agents.     

Relationship between the five-factor model of personality and Axis I disorders in a nonclinical sample.

The relationship between the 5-factor model (FFM) of personality and Axis I disorders was evaluated in a nonclinical sample of 468 young adults. In general, scores on the 5 personality dimensions of neuroticism, extraversion, openness to experience, agreeableness, and conscientiousness (assessed via the NEO Five-Factor Inventory) distinguished Ss with and without a variety of Axis I diagnoses from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-III-Revised (DSM-III-R). In several instances, results indicate that scores on these dimensions were differentially sensitive to diagnosis. Furthermore, scores on these 5 personality dimensions accounted for unique variance in several Axis I diagnoses above and beyond that accounted for by a general measure of current psychopathological symptoms. These results support the utility of the FFM of personality in Axis I diagnostic assessment. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Rigid and extreme: A geometric representation of personality disorders in five-factor model space.

Personality disorder rigidity and extremity can be geometrically defined and operationalized within the 5-factor model (FFM) of personality. A series of geometric and substantive assumptions were derived and then tested in samples of college students (N?=?1,323) and psychiatric patients (N?=?86). Normal and disordered personalities were found to coexist in a variety of regions of the FFM multivariate space. Within regions, the profiles of normal and disordered personalities were very similar in characteristic configuration but notably different in profile variability. Personality-disordered individuals tended to be located in the perimeters or outer regions of the FFM space, as indicated by their longer vector lengths. These findings generalized across 2 measures of personality disorders and across 2 measures of normal personality traits. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Structure of act-report data: Is the five-factor model of personality recaptured?

We examined the correspondence between the structure of act-report data and 5-factor models emerging from trait-rating data. Twenty categories were selected as markers for the 5-factor model and retrospective act reports were constructed for the target categories. One hundred eighteen men and women comprising 59 dating couples completed self-based and observer-based act reports. Several factor analyses tested different assumptions. Retaining total act performance (TAP) produced a blend of the traditional 5 factors. Removing TAP closely reproduced the 5-factor model in both principal-components and procrustes analyses. Correlations between the derived act factors and trait ratings from 6 data sources support a reinterpretation of the traditional trait labels. Discussion focuses on the implications of different assumptions on the formulation of a basic model of personality structure. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

An alternative to the search for single polymorphisms: Toward molecular personality scales for the five-factor model.

There is growing evidence that personality traits are affected by many genes, all of which have very small effects. As an alternative to the largely unsuccessful search for individual polymorphisms associated with personality traits, the authors identified large sets of potentially related single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and summed them to form molecular personality scales (MPSs) with from 4 to 2,497 SNPs. Scales were derived from two thirds of a large (N = 3,972) sample of individuals from Sardinia who completed the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (P. T. Costa, Jr., & R. R. McCrae, 1992) and were assessed in a genomewide association scan. When MPSs were correlated with the phenotype in the remaining one third of the sample, very small but significant associations were found for 4 of the 5e personality factors when the longest scales were examined. These data suggest that MPSs for Neuroticism, Openness to Experience, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness (but not Extraversion) contain genetic information that can be refined in future studies, and the procedures described here should be applicable to other quantitative traits. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Bridging the gap with the five-factor model.

Comments on the original article Personality traits and the classification of mental Disorders: Toward a more complete integration in DSM–5 and an empirical model of psychopathology by Robert F. Krueger and Nicholas R. Eaton (see record 2010-13810-003). Some researchers had hoped the forthcoming Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) would ask psychiatrists (and the clinical psychologists and researchers who are also tied to the DSM) to leap the gap and embrace a trait-based taxonomy of personality pathology (Widiger & Trull, 2007). Krueger and Eaton (pp. 97–118, this issue) take a more pragmatic stance: They hope to coax psychiatrists across by introducing personality dimensions as an adjunct to familiar PD types; they envision that DSM-5 might serve “as a bridge” (p. 110, this issue) to a fully dimensional Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Sixth Edition (DSM-6). We acknowledge the wisdom of this strategy and suggest ways to strengthen it. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The five-factor model of personality and managerial performance: Validity gains through the use of 360 degree performance ratings.

This study investigated the usefulness of the five-factor model (FFM) of personality in predicting two aspects of managerial performance (task vs. contextual) assessed by utilizing the 360 degree performance rating system. The authors speculated that one reason for the low validity of the FFM might be the failure of single-source (e.g., supervisor) ratings to comprehensively capture the construct of managerial performance. The operational validity of personality was found to increase substantially (50%–74%) across all of the FFM personality traits when both peer and subordinate ratings were added to supervisor ratings according to the multitrait–multimethod approach. Furthermore, the authors responded to the recent calls to validate tests via a multivariate (e.g., multitrait–multimethod) approach by decomposing overall managerial performance into task and contextual performance criteria and by using multiple rating perspectives (sources). Overall, this study contributes to the evidence that personality may be even more useful in predicting managerial performance if the performance criteria are less deficient. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

More reasons to adopt the five-factor model.

The authors (see record 1987-01218-001) respond to comments by M. M. Dachowski (see record 1988-04372-001) and N. G. Waller and Y. S. Ben-Porath (see record 1988-04405-001) on their 5-factor (Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness) model of personality. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)