Substance and artifact in the higher-order factors of the Big Five.

[Correction Notice: An erratum for this article was reported in Vol 95(3) of Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (see record 2008-11108-007). In this article, an incorrect DOI was published. The correct DOI for this article is 10.1037/0022-3514.95.2.442.] J. M. Digman (1997) proposed that the Big Five personality traits showed a higher-order structure with 2 factors he labeled α and β. These factors have been alternatively interpreted as heritable components of personality or as artifacts of evaluative bias. Using structural equation modeling, the authors reanalyzed data from a cross-national twin study and from American cross-observer studies and analyzed new multimethod data from a German twin study. In all analyses, artifact models outperformed substance models by root-mean-square error of approximation criteria, but models combining both artifact and substance were slightly better. These findings suggest that the search for the biological basis of personality traits may be more profitably focused on the 5 factors themselves and their specific facets, especially in monomethod studies. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

"Why can't a man be more like a woman? Sex differences in big five personality traits across 55 cultures": Correction to Schmitt et al. (2008).

Reports an error in "Why can't a man be more like a woman? Sex differences in Big Five personality traits across 55 cultures" by David P. Schmitt, Anu Realo, Martin Voracek and Jüri Allik (Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2008[Jan], Vol 94[1], 168-182). Some of the sample sizes presented in Table 1 were incorrectly reported. The correct sample sizes are presented in the erratum. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2007-19165-013.) Previous research suggested that sex differences in personality traits are larger in prosperous, healthy, and egalitarian cultures in which women have more opportunities equal with those of men. In this article, the authors report cross-cultural findings in which this unintuitive result was replicated across samples from 55 nations (N = 17,637). On responses to the Big Five Inventory, women reported higher levels of neuroticism, extraversion, agreeableness, and conscientiousness than did men across most nations. These findings converge with previous studies in which different Big Five measures and more limited samples of nations were used. Overall, higher levels of human development--including long and healthy life, equal access to knowledge and education, and economic wealth--were the main nation-level predictors of larger sex differences in personality. Changes in men's personality traits appeared to be the primary cause of sex difference variation across cultures. It is proposed that heightened levels of sexual dimorphism result from personality traits of men and women being less constrained and more able to naturally diverge in developed nations. In less fortunate social and economic conditions, innate personality differences between men and women may be attenuated. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Reification, "faking," and the Big Five.

Comments on L. R. Goldberg's (see record 1993-17546-001) account of the struggle to identify the structure of personality traits through factor analysis, and the problems of "faking" and reification associated with assessment of the Big Five traits. It is suggested that the Big Five proponents confront the problem of reification and take into account claims of the constructionist conception of personality. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

"The structure of phenoytypic personality traits": Comment.

Comments on L. R. Goldberg's (see record 1993-17546-001) account of the Big Five taxonomy as scientific taxonomy of personality traits. It is argued that the Big Five taxonomy lacks the essential features of scientific theory; there is little concern with personality theory, with making testable deductions, and with demonstrating that the personality factors fit in with the results obtained. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Why can't a man be more like a woman? Sex differences in Big Five personality traits across 55 cultures.

[Correction Notice: An erratum for this article was reported in Vol 96(1) of Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (see record 2008-18683-004). Some of the sample sizes presented in Table 1 were incorrectly reported. The correct sample sizes are presented in the erratum.] Previous research suggested that sex differences in personality traits are larger in prosperous, healthy, and egalitarian cultures in which women have more opportunities equal with those of men. In this article, the authors report cross-cultural findings in which this unintuitive result was replicated across samples from 55 nations (N = 17,637). On responses to the Big Five Inventory, women reported higher levels of neuroticism, extraversion, agreeableness, and conscientiousness than did men across most nations. These findings converge with previous studies in which different Big Five measures and more limited samples of nations were used. Overall, higher levels of human development--including long and healthy life, equal access to knowledge and education, and economic wealth--were the main nation-level predictors of larger sex differences in personality. Changes in men's personality traits appeared to be the primary cause of sex difference variation across cultures. It is proposed that heightened levels of sexual dimorphism result from personality traits of men and women being less constrained and more able to naturally diverge in developed nations. In less fortunate social and economic conditions, innate personality differences between men and women may be attenuated. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Integration of the Big Five and circumplex approaches to trait structure.

To integrate the 5-dimensional simple-structure and circumplex models of personality, the Abridged Big Five Dimensional Circumplex (AB5C) taxonomy of personality traits was developed, consisting of the 10 circumplexes that can be formed by pitting each of the Big Five factors against one another. The model maps facets of the Big Five dimensions as blends of 2 factors. An application to data consisting of 636 self-ratings and peer ratings on 540 personality trait adjectives yielded 34 well-defined facets out of a possible 45. The AB5C solution is compared with simple-structure and lower dimensional circumplex solutions, and its integrative and corrective potential are discussed, as well as its limitations. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Higher-order factors of the Big Five

Estimated factor correlations from 14 studies supporting the 5 factor, Big Five model of personality trait organization--5 studies based on children and adolescents, 9 on adults--were factor analyzed. Two higher-order factors were clearly evident in all studies. One was principally related to the Big Five trait dimensions Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, and Emotional Stability; the other, the dimensions Extraversion and Intellect. Two models, one for children and adolescents, the other for adults, were tested by confirmatory factor analysis with generally excellent results. Many personality theorists appear to have considered one or both of these 2 metatraits, provisionally labeled alpha and beta.     

"Suckers or saviors? Consistent contributors in social dilemmas": Correction to Weber and Murnighan (2008).

Reports an error in "Suckers or saviors? Consistent contributors in social dilemmas" by J. Mark Weber and J. Keith Murnighan (Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2008[Dec], Vol 95[6], 1340-1353). An incorrect DOI was printed. The correct DOI is provided in the erratum. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2008-16429-007.) Groups and organizations face a fundamental problem: They need cooperation but their members have incentives to free ride. Empirical research on this problem has often been discouraging, and economic models suggest that solutions are unlikely or unstable. In contrast, the authors present a model and 4 studies that show that an unwaveringly consistent contributor can effectively catalyze cooperation in social dilemmas. The studies indicate that consistent contributors occur naturally, and their presence in a group causes others to contribute more and cooperate more often, with no apparent cost to the consistent contributor and often gain. These positive effects seem to result from a consistent contributor's impact on group members' cooperative inferences about group norms. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Traits and trade-offs are an important tier.

Replies to comments by K. M. Sheldon et al (see record 2007-18356-014) on the author's original article (see record 2006-11202-005) on evolution and personality variation. Sheldon et al concurred with the thrust of that article that the way natural selection shapes or gives rise to interindividual variation is a worthy topic for evolutionary psychologists to consider, so at a broad level Sheldon et al and Nettle are in agreement. The contention concerns the utility of broad traits such as the Big Five personality factors in undertaking evolutionary personality psychology. Nettle does not concur that traits do not provide a good approach to understanding interindividual variation. They have proved their utility in humans and in other species. Nettle does agree that traits alone are not sufficient for understanding personality functioning, particularly in humans, and hopes that other psychologists, including perhaps Sheldon et al, will add an evolution-informed understanding of those higher tiers of personality to the framework Nettle has suggested for the base tier. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

"Inability to predict cardiovascular disease from hostility scores or MMPI items related to Type A behavior": Correction to Leon et al.

Reports an error in "Inability to predict cardiovascular disease from hostility scores or MMPI items related to Type A behavior" by Gloria R. Leon, Stephen E. Finn, David Murray and John M. Bailey (Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1988[Aug], Vol 56[4], 597-600). In the aforementioned article, the mean Ho scores are incorrect. For Group 1, M = 16.0 (SD = 7.3); Group 2, M = 15.3 (SD = 6.7); Group 3, M = 15.2 (SD = 7.2). Page 600, paragraph 2 is no longer relevant. All other analyses and all conclusions are correct as reported. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 1989-05707-001.) Medical and psychological data collected for 30 years on a group of 280 men (mean age in 1947=45 years) were evaluated to identify the personality characteristics and attitudes that might be predictive of the later development of coronary heart disease (CHD). Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) Hostility scores did not predict CHD in this population. A 35-item scale derived from MMPI items judged to reflect the Type A construct and from other personality scales did not predict the later incidence of myocardial infarctions or other evidence of CHD. It is therefore possible that personality factors may not be strong predictors of CHD in particular samples. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

How shall we speak of children's personalities in middle childhood? A preliminary taxonomy

Developmental researchers have neglected the study of personality traits in middle childhood, thus leaving unanswered many questions about childhood personality structure. This article presents a developmental framework for understanding personality in middle childhood and critically reviews 5 models of temperament and personality structure in this age range: the models of A. Thomas and S. Chess, A. H. Buss and R. Plomin, M. K. Rothbart, J. Block and J. H. Block, and the Big Five. A number of robust personality dimensions common to these models and the broader developmental and adult personality literatures are then discussed: sociability, social inhibition, dominance, negative emotionality, aggressiveness, prosocial disposition, persistence/attention, mastery motivation, inhibitory control, and activity level. These dimensions represent a preliminary taxonomy of personality traits for exploring questions of individual development in childhood.     

"Selective corticostriatal dysfunction in schizophrenia: Examination of motor and cognitive skill learning": Correction to Foerde et al. (2008).

Reports an error in "Selective corticostriatal dysfunction in schizophrenia: Examination of motor and cognitive skill learning" by Karin Foerde, Russell A. Poldrack, Barbara J. Knowlton, Fred W. Sabb, Susan Y. Bookheimer, Robert M. Bilder, Don Guthrie, Eric Granholm, Keith H. Nuechterlein, Stephen R. Marder and Robert F. Asarnow (Neuropsychology, 2008[Jan], Vol 22[1], 100-109). The DOI for the supplemental materials was printed incorrectly. The correct DOI is as follows: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0894-4105.22.1.100.supp. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2008-00382-011.) It has been suggested that patients with schizophrenia have corticostriatal circuit dysfunction (Carlsson & Carlsson, 1990). Skill learning is thought to rely on corticostriatal circuitry and different types of skill learning may be related to separable corticostriatal loops (Grafton, Hazeltine, & Ivry, 1995; Poldrack, Prabhakaran, Seger, & Gabrieli, 1999). The authors examined motor (Serial Reaction Time task, SRT) and cognitive (Probabilistic Classification task, PCT) skill learning in patients with schizophrenia and normal controls. Development of automaticity was examined, using a dual task paradigm, across three training sessions. Patients with schizophrenia were impaired at learning on the PCT compared to controls. Performance gains of controls occurred within the first session, whereas patients only improved gradually and never reached the performance level of controls. In contrast, patients were not impaired at learning on the SRT relative to controls, suggesting that patients with schizophrenia may have dysfunction in a specific corticostriatal subcircuit. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

"The structure of phenotypic personality traits": Comment.

Comments on L. R. Goldberg's (see record 1993-17546-001) historical summary of research into the global traits of personality. It is asserted that he failed to mention R. B. Catell's (1956) original discovery of these dimensions. The Big Five factors discussed by Goldberg are said to line up fairly well with Catell's 2nd-order Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire (16PF) traits. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Hierarchical organization of personality and prediction of behavior.

Two studies evaluated personality trait measures and Big Five factor measures for their accuracy in predicting important behavior criteria. The results of both studies showed that the narrower traits and the broader factors, thought to define 2 levels of a hierarchy of personality variables, separately predicted most criterion variables. However, the incremental validity of the personality trait measures (the degree to which the traits increased the criterion prediction achieved by the factors) was generally much larger than the incremental validity of the Big Five factor measures. It was concluded that aggregating personality traits into their underlying personality factors could result in decreased predictive accuracy due to the loss of trait-specific but criterion-valid variance. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

A periodic table of personality elements? The "Big Five" and trait "psychology" in critical perspective.

Within contemporary personality psychology there is widespread consensus that, at long last, the basic elements of "the" human personality have been empirically discovered, and that the systematic search for the underlying causes and consequences of personality differences can be pursued on this basis. The putatively basic trait dimensions are neuroticism, extraversion, openness, agreeableness, and conscientiousness, and are referred to collectively as "the Big Five." In the present article, this perspective on the psychology of personality is examined critically and found wanting. It is argued that neither the "Big Five" framework in particular nor trait "psychology" more generally is adequate as the basis for a scientific psychology of the human person. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Correction to Emery, Hale, and Myerson (2008).

Reports an error in "Age differences in proactive interference, working memory, and abstract reasoning" by Lisa Emery, Sandra Hale and Joel Myerson (Psychology and Aging, 2008[Sep], Vol 23[3], 634-645). The original article contained an incorrect DOI. The correct DOI is as follows: 10.1037/a0012577. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2008-13050-014.) It has been hypothesized that older adults are especially susceptible to proactive interference (PI) and that this may contribute to age differences in working memory performance. In young adults, individual differences in PI affect both working memory and reasoning ability, but the relations between PI, working memory, and reasoning in older adults have not been examined. In the current study, young, old, and very old adults performed a modified operation span task that induced several cycles of PI buildup and release as well as two tests of abstract reasoning ability. Age differences in working memory scores increased as PI built up, consistent with the hypothesis that older adults are more susceptible to PI, but both young and older adults showed complete release from PI. Young adults' reasoning ability was best predicted by working memory performance under high PI conditions, replicating M. Bunting (2006). In contrast, older adults' reasoning ability was best predicted by their working memory performance under low PI conditions, thereby raising questions regarding the general role of susceptibility to PI in differences in higher cognitive function among older adults. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Representation of personality disorders in circumplex and five-factor space: Explorations with a clinical sample.

Examined the relationship between Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-III-Revised (DSM-III-R) personality disorders and the interpersonal circumplex and Big Five models of personality traits. 102 consecutive referrals for group therapy for personality disorders were evaluated using the Personality Disorder Examination (PDE) and the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory-II (MCMI-II) personality-disorder scales. Their placement in circumplex space was assessed using the Inventory of Interpersonal Problems Circumplex Scales, whereas their standing on the Big Five traits was measured with the 50-Bipolar Self-Rating Scales (50-BSRS). The authors found that many disorders could be meaningfully located in circumplex space, whereas the use of the Big Five model led to even better placement for several disorders. Further examination of the residuals from the PDE, after the 50-BSRS scales were partialed out, indicated that the remaining common variance could also be understood in terms of the Big Five model. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Stepwise transformation of a cholera toxin and a p24 (HIV-1) epitope into D-peptide analogs

BACKGROUND: The evidence suggests that personality traits are hierarchically organized with more specific or lower-order traits combining to form more generalized higher-order traits. Agreement exists across studies regarding the lower-order traits that delineate personality disorder but not the higher-order traits. This study seeks to identify the higher-order structure of personality disorder by examining the phenotypic and genetic structures underlying lower-order traits. METHODS: Eighteen lower-order traits were assessed using the Dimensional Assessment of Personality Disorder-Basic Questionnaire in samples of 656 personality disordered patients, 939 general population subjects, and a volunteer sample of 686 twin pairs. RESULTS: Principal components analysis yielded 4 components, labeled Emotional Dysregulation, Dissocial Behavior, Inhibitedness, and Compulsivity, that were similar across the 3 samples. Multivariate genetic analyses also yielded 4 genetic and environmental factors that were remarkably similar to the phenotypic factors. Analysis of the residual heritability of the lower-order traits when the effects of the higher-order factors were removed revealed a substantial residual heritable component for 12 of the 18 traits. CONCLUSIONS: The results support the following conclusions. First, the stable structure of traits across clinical and nonclinical samples is consistent with dimensional representations of personality disorders. Second, the higher-order traits of personality disorder strongly resemble dimensions of normal personality. This implies that a dimensional classification should be compatible with normative personality. Third, the residual heritability of the lower-order traits suggests that the personality phenotypes are based on a large number of specific genetic components.