Everyday Life as an Intelligence/Personality Test

(A) Everyday Life as an Intelligence Test

"Every semantic discrimination, every decision, every choice-point, every challenge, every opportunity for performance in everyday life has some degree of g loading, however slight it may be." Arthur R. Jensen

(B) Everyday Life as a Personality/Willpower Test

~Every decision, every choice-point, every challenge, every opportunity for performance in everyday life has some degree of "p"/"w" loading, however slight it may be.

[Perhaps also the second point makes sense...]

Age Differences in Personality Traits From 10 to 65: Big Five Domains and Facets in a Large Cross-Sectional Sample

Age Differences in Personality Traits From 10 to 65: Big Five Domains and Facets in a Large Cross-Sectional Sample (full download)
C. J. Soto, S. D. Gosling, O. P. John, J. Potter (2011)


Abstract

Hypotheses about mean-level age differences in the Big Five personality domains, as well as 10 more specific facet traits within those domains, were tested in a very large cross-sectional sample (N = 1,267,218) of children, adolescents, and adults (ages 10 – 65) assessed over the World Wide Web. The results supported several conclusions. First, late childhood and adolescence were key periods. Across these years, age trends for some traits (a) were especially pronounced, (b) were in a direction different from the corresponding adult trends, or (c) first indicated the presence of gender differences. Second, there were some negative trends in psychosocial maturity from late childhood into adolescence, whereas adult trends were overwhelmingly in the direction of greater maturity and adjustment. Third, the related but distinguishable facet traits within each broad Big Five domain often showed distinct age trends, highlighting the importance of facet-level research for understanding life span age differences in personality.

[The extraversion graph didn't convince me. Are women really more assertive than men?]

Does self-esteem account for the higher-order factors of the Big Five?

Does self-esteem account for the higher-order factors of the Big Five?
Stephen Erdle , Samuel D. Gosling , Jeff Potter (2009)
https://personality-project.org/revelle/syllabi/454/erdle.09.pdf


Abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine whether higher-order factors of the Big Five personality factors are artifacts of self-esteem. Based on previous research, it was predicted that two higher-order factors, Stability and Plasticity, would emerge from correlations among the Big Five factors. It was also predicted that self-esteem would be related to the higher-order factors but would not account for them. The Big Five and self-esteem were measured in a sample of 628,640 participants using an interactive website on the Internet. Results showed that the two higher-order factors of the Big Five existed and were substantially correlated with self-esteem but remained intact when self-esteem was statistically controlled, indicating that they are not artifacts of self-esteem.

Delay discounting and intelligence: A meta-analysis

Delay discounting and intelligence: A meta-analysis
Noah A. Shamosh, Jeremy R. Gray
Intelligence (July - August 2008)


Abstract

Delay discounting (DD), the tendency to prefer smaller, sooner rewards to larger, later ones, is an important indicator of self-control. Assessments of DD superficially require individuals to make choices based on motivational processes. However, several lines of evidence suggest that DD may be systematically related to cognitive ability. We sought to provide a definitive assessment of the relation between DD and intelligence via quantitative research synthesis. A comprehensive literature search in two electronic databases yielded 24 eligible studies with 26 effect sizes in total. Meta-analysis revealed that, across studies, higher intelligence was associated with lower DD (random effects model weighted mean r = −0.23). Studies using reward schemes in which payoffs were subject to chance (i.e., involving either a chance of receiving one choice or random selection of one choice) showed weaker associations between DD and intelligence than did studies in which payoffs were all hypothetical or all real. Other moderator analyses revealed no influence of DD measure, DD choice paradigm, or intelligence type. There was no evidence of publication bias. Given clear evidence for a negative relation between DD and intelligence, investigating the processes that support or moderate this relation would be worthwhile.

Are acquiescent and extreme response styles related to low intelligence and education?

Are acquiescent and extreme response styles related to low intelligence and education?
Gerhard Meisenberg , Amandy Williams (2008)
Personality and Individual Differences


Abstract

Several lines of evidence suggest that acquiescent and extreme response styles are related to low education or low cognitive ability. Using measures constructed from the World Values Survey, this hypothesis is examined both in comparisons among individuals and comparisons among countries. At the individual level, both acquiescent and extreme responding are positively related to age and negatively to education and income in most world regions. Both response styles are most prevalent in the less developed countries. At the country-level, extremity is best predicted by a low average IQ in the country, and acquiescence by a high level of corruption.

---------------------------------------------------------------

>Response styles are important for the interpretation of personality and attitude measures by self-report. The most commonly observed response styles, also described as response biases, are acquiescent and extreme responding. Acquiescence refers to (unthinking?) agreement with statements, and extremity to a preferential use of the end points of the scale.<

>In the United States, responses of Blacks and Hispanics are more extreme than those of non-Hispanic Whites (Bachman & O’Malley, 1984; Hui & Triandis, 1989; Marin, Gamba, & Marin, 1992).<

>Smith (2004) found that European countries consistently scored lowest on measures of acquiescence derived from six different surveys. The highest-scoring countries were those with lesser levels of economic development, such as Panama, Nigeria, the Philippines, Pakistan and Bangladesh.<

Results:

>Extremity and acquiescence were positively correlated, with r = 0.241 at the individual level (N = 79,053 respondents) and r = 0.601 at the country-level (N = 79 countries).<

>[Differences] between world regions are substantial: up to 1.52 within-country standard deviations for acquiescence and 1.33 standard deviations for extremity.<

>Both response biases are more prominent in economically less developed regions such as Africa, South Asia and the Middle East.<

>Table 4 shows that at the country-level, acquiescence is most closely associated with high corruption and somewhat less with low lgGDP and low education. Extreme response style shows a different pattern, being most strongly associated with IQ, less with education, and even less with lgGDP.<

>The relationships of the response styles with country-level characteristics were explored further. Regression models were started with IQ, education, lgGDP, corruption, the average of political freedom and democracy, and Communist history. Nonlinear effects of the predictors were modeled by the inclusion of quadratic terms. During development of the models, alternative measures of the same construct were explored to improve the fit, and non-predictors were dropped. Tables 5 and 6 show the best-fitting models.<

>Acquiescence is predicted independently by high corruption and to a lesser extent by low education.<

>Table 6 shows that extreme responding is related mainly to low intelligence. This confirms the impression from Table 4, and also the pattern in Table 1 showing that extreme responding is most prevalent in the world region with the lowest average IQ (sub-Saharan Africa, average IQ 67 according to Lynn, 2006), and least prevalent in the region with the highest IQ (East Asia, average IQ 105). The effect of education is curvilinear, reducing extreme responding at low levels of education but raising it among the most educated samples. Among the economic and political indicators, only corruption has a significant effect.<

Discussion:

>[The] negative association between education and acquiescence that had been reported by some investigators (Heaven, 1983; Javeline, 1999; Mirowsky & Ross, 1991; Watson, 1992) is a nearly worldwide phenomenon. Also extreme responding is favored by low education and low income in most countries (Table 3). Therefore, psychological factors related to education, such as intelligence, rationality, self-control or self-confidence, appear to suppress both acquiescent and extreme responses.<

>The observation that extreme responding is most closely related to low IQ at the country-level (Tables 4 and 6) suggests that it expresses a crude ”either-or thinking” that is oblivious to fine distinctions. This is confirmed by the observation that within countries, extreme responding is reduced in persons with higher education and/or higher income.<

>[Acquiescence] appears to be favored by a lack of self-confidence, self-esteem or assertiveness, or a habit of subordination and conformity to others, and only indirectly by low intelligence.<

Personality and occupational markers of ‘solid citizenship’ are associated with having fewer children

Personality and occupational markers of ‘solid citizenship’ are associated with having fewer children
A. M. Perkins , R. Cserjesi, U. Ettinger, V. Kumari, N. G. Martin, R. Arden
Personality and Individual Differences (2013)


Abstract

Investigating associations between personality and reproductive fitness may reveal the adaptive significance of human behavioural traits. What we dub ‘solid-citizenship’ personality characteristics such as self-control, diligence and responsibility may repay study from an evolutionary perspective as they protect against negative life-outcomes. We explored associations between reproductive fitness and personality questionnaire markers of solid citizenship in 4981 women from four Australian samples. We also examined relations between reproductive fitness and army discharge status, an applied measure of solid citizenship, in 15,283 Vietnam War-era military veterans. In two Australian samples there were significant negative associations between reproductive fitness and personality measures of solid citizenship. Similarly, in the US study honourably discharged servicemen on average fathered significantly fewer children than non-honourably discharged servicemen. Since personality is genetically influenced, our results suggest that genetic variants for solid citizenship may be decreasing in frequency in some populations, in line with other modern findings but in contrast to historical analyses. Causes for this change may include relatively more conscientious women using contraception to prioritise their careers over reproduction and the availability of systematic welfare provisioning.

The Distance Between Mars and Venus: Measuring Global Sex Differences in Personality

The Distance Between Mars and Venus: Measuring Global Sex Differences in Personality

Marco Del Giudice, Tom Booth, and Paul Irwing (January 2012)

http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0029265

Abstract

Background

Sex differences in personality are believed to be comparatively small. However, research in this area has suffered from significant methodological limitations. We advance a set of guidelines for overcoming those limitations: (a) measure personality with a higher resolution than that afforded by the Big Five; (b) estimate sex differences on latent factors; and (c) assess global sex differences with multivariate effect sizes. We then apply these guidelines to a large, representative adult sample, and obtain what is presently the best estimate of global sex differences in personality.

Methodology/Principal Findings

Personality measures were obtained from a large US sample (N = 10,261) with the 16PF Questionnaire. Multigroup latent variable modeling was used to estimate sex differences on individual personality dimensions, which were then aggregated to yield a multivariate effect size (Mahalanobis D). We found a global effect size D = 2.71, corresponding to an overlap of only 10% between the male and female distributions. Even excluding the factor showing the largest univariate ES, the global effect size was D = 1.71 (24% overlap). These are extremely large differences by psychological standards.

Significance

The idea that there are only minor differences between the personality profiles of males and females should be rejected as based on inadequate methodology.

Figure 1. The magnitude of global sex differences in personality, estimated with different methods from the same dataset.The effect size (ES) increases dramatically as better methods are employed. The male-female overlap (right-hand axis) is calculated on the joint distribution assuming multivariate normality.

Gender Differences in Five Factor Model Personality Traits in an Elderly Cohort

Gender Differences in Five Factor Model Personality Traits in an Elderly Cohort: Extension of Robust and Surprising Findings to an Older Generation

Benjamin P. Chapman, Paul R. Duberstein, Slivia Sörensen, and Jeffrey M. Lyness;
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2031866/
Personality and Individual Differences (October 2007)


Abstract

In college and adult samples, women score higher then men on the Five Factor Model (FFM) personality traits of Neuroticism and Agreeableness. The present study assessed the extent to which these gender differences held in a sample of 486 older adults, ranging in age from 65-98 (M = 75, SD = 6.5), using the NEO-Five Factor Inventory. Mean and Covariance Structure models testing gender differences at the level of latent traits revealed higher levels of Neuroticism (d = .52) and Agreeableness (d = .35) in older women than older men. The consistency of these findings with prior work in younger samples attests to the stability of gender differentiation on Neuroticism and Agreeableness across the lifespan. Gender differences on these traits should be considered in personality research among older, as well as middle age and younger adults.

Genetic and Environmental Influences on Personality: A Study of Twins Reared Together Using the Self- and Peer Report NEO-FFI Scales

Genetic and Environmental Influences on Personality: A Study of Twins Reared Together Using the Self- and Peer Report NEO-FFI Scales
Rainer Riemann, Alois Angleitner, and Jan Strelau;
Journal of Personality, September 1997 


Abstract

Previous behavior-genetic research on personality has been almost exclusively based on self-report questionnaire measures. The purpose of this research was to measure personality constructs via self- and peer reports on the items of the NEO Five-Factor Inventory (Costa & McCrae, 1989). The sample included 660 monozygotic and 200 same sex and 104 opposite sex dizygotic twin pairs. We collected self- and two independent peer reports for each of the twins. Our analysis of self-report data replicates earlier findings of a substantial genetic influence on the Big Five (h²= .42 to .56). We also found this influence for peer reports. Our results validate findings based solely on self-reports. However, estimates of genetic contributions to phenotypic variance were substantially higher when based on peer reports (h²= .51 to .81) or self- and peer reports (h²= .66 to .79) because these data allowed us to separate error variance from variance due to nonshared environmental in-fluences. Correlations between self- and peer reports reflected the same genetic influences to a much higher extent than identical environmental effects.


[Thanks @ Staffan -> "Studies that have managed to minimize measurement error typically yield heritabilities for personality traits and similar characteristics around 70 percent." ]

The g factor and the "w" factor:

>The distinctness of g from many other valued personal characteristics was clearly recognized within ten years after Spearman discovered it. In 1915, one of Spearman’s doctoral students, E. Webb, published a factor analysis of a ma­trix of correlations including a number of highly g-loaded tests and a number of ratings of character, or personality. The particular personality traits chosen for study and obtained from ratings by students’ teachers and associates were actually selected because they were expected to be related to g, and hence to show significant loadings on the g factor. This expectation, however, was com­pletely contradicted by Webb’s analysis, which yielded two wholly distinct fac­tors— g and a general “character” factor, which Webb labeled w and characterized as “will” and “persistence of motives.” The types of items most highly loaded on the w factor were described as: perseverance, as opposed to willful changeability; perseverance in the face of obstacles; kindness on prin­ciple; trustworthiness; and conscientiousness. It seemed puzzling that this cluster of traits would emerge independent of g. Teachers’ and other people’s subjective impressions of any given person’s level of intelligence create a “halo effect” which biases the observers’ ratings of that person’s personality traits. Despite this bias of the personality ratings by halo effects, Webb’s factor analysis, be­cause it included objective tests of g, gave a clean-cut separation of the two domains. What Webb’s study and subsequent studies seemed to indicate was that g, even as fallibly measured by psychometric tests, is an entirely cognitive variable.

Later studies of the relationship between personality factors and g have fully substantiated this conclusion.<

The g factor, 1998

Arthur Jensen

Metatraits of the Big Five Differentially Predict Engagement and Restraint of Behavior

Metatraits of the Big Five Differentially Predict Engagement and Restraint of Behavior
Jacob B. Hirsh, Colin G. DeYoung,  and Jordan B. Peterson; 2009


Abstract

Although initially believed to contain orthogonal dimensions, the Big Five personality taxonomy appears to have a replicable higher-order structure, with the metatrait of Plasticity reflecting the shared variance between Extraversion and Openness/Intellect, and the meta-trait of Stability reflecting the shared variance among Neuroticism, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness. These higher order traits have been theorized to relate to individual differences in the functioning of the dopamine and serotonin systems, respectively. As dopamine is associated with exploration and incentive-related action, and serotonin with satiety and constraint, this neuropharmacological trait theory has behavioral implications, which we tested in 307 adults by examining the association of a large number of behavioral acts with multi-informant reports of the metatraits. The frequencies of acts were consistently positively correlated with Plasticity and negatively correlated with Stability. At the broadest level of description, variation in human personality appears to reflect engagement and restraint of behavior.

Engagement and Self-Control: Superordinate dimensions of Big Five traits

Engagement and Self-Control: Superordinate dimensions of Big Five traits

Kenneth R Olson; May 2005

Personality and Individual Differences

Abstract

Two separate factor analyses of Big Five traits have independently identified two higher-order factors. These factors have been interpreted quite differently by their respective researchers. This conceptual paper posits the superordinate personality dimensions of Engagement (engaged versus disengaged) and Self-Control as the common elements of these higher-order factors. A review and integration of existing research shows that Engagement traits decline and Self-Control traits increase during adulthood. The Big Five traits of the Engagement dimension are each empirically related to positive affect, academic engagement in the form of classroom participation, benefiting from major life challenges, sensation seeking, and the construct of inspiration. Self-Control traits are negatively related to variables such as problematic work-related behaviors and job performance, personality disorders, negative affect, and attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder.

 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Engagement:

The Engagement dimension (engaged versus disengaged) reflects the degree of individuals' social and experiential engagement. This dimension encompasses Digman's (1997) Beta (personal growth) factor and Carroll's (2002) SF1 (General Social Competence). Based on the Big Five domains loading on Digman's Beta factor and the traits comprising Carroll's SF1, Engagement encompasses positive affective states, openness to a variety of novel and imaginative experiences, and social and interpersonal involvement. It entails active and enthusiastic participation in life activities. In relation to Big Five traits, Engagement entails gregariousness and social assertiveness, vigorous activity, and positive affect (Extraversion) and pursuit of novel intellectual, emotional, behavioral, and aesthetic experiences (Openness to Experience). Openness is highly correlated with a factor labeled Intellectual Engagement (r = .69) which measures individuals' desire to engage and understand their world, and breadth of interest (Goff & Ackerman, 1992).

The Engagement dimension incorporates both vigorous social engagement (Extraversion) and experiential engagement (Openness to Experience). Thus, Engagement encompasses the ‘‘venture-some encounter with life’’ that characterizes Digman's Beta factor, and the social and intellectual engagement evident in Carroll's SF1. In broad terms, it reflects the extent to which individuals actively engage their inner and outer worlds.

Individuals who exhibit high levels of engagement are likely to demonstrate intense and vital involvement in activities. Kytle (2000) described the experience of engagement as involving deep commitment and purposive attention and as being accompanied by elevated mood. He suggested that high levels of engagement are akin to the psychological characteristics associated with optimal states such as Maslow's (1968) peak experiences and self-actualization, Csikszenthmihalyi's (1991) concept of flow, ‘‘the process of total involvement with life,’’ and Langer's (1989) dimension of mindfulness, which involves cognitive engagement. Engagement in events is empirically associated with feelings of commitment (Britt, 1999). Engagement in the classroom is related to the traits of the Engagement dimension. Using a criterion of academic performance that assesses active classroom engagement––classroom participation grades among masters of business administration students––Rothstein, Paunonen, Rush, and King (1994) found significant positive correlations for Extraversion and Openness to Experience.

At the other end of the engaged–disengaged continuum, disengagement is characterized by detachment, disinterest, apathy, low involvement, and a non-participatory orientation to life activities. Thus, for example, a dynamic and charismatic individual would likely be high on Engagement traits whereas an apathetic and passive person would tend to be very low. Natural selection likely equipped humans with traits that optimized their ability to adapt to their environments. If it is indeed a fundamental trait dimension, Engagement would be expected to have significant adaptive benefits. An individual must engage the environment in order to obtain resources for nourishment, shelter, and growth. Engagement would likely increase the chances that the individual would explore and pursue desirable incentives and goals so as to foster evolutionary tasks such as survival and reproduction. Humans have evolved increasingly complex and sophisticated forms of engagement with their environment. However, extreme, constant, or unmitigated engagement may be counterproductive. Therefore, at the other end of this trait continuum, there should also be advantages to disengagement in particular circumstances and environments. Disengagement from goals and incentives has adaptive benefits (Klinger, 1975). For example, Gibson and Sanbonmatsu (2004) found that optimists more so than pessimists maintain positive expectations and continue gambling after negative gaming outcomes. These researchers suggested there are common situations in which the pessimistic tendency to disengage is beneficial.

Self-Control:

Self-Control is the underlying variable that is common to Digman's (1997) Alpha (socialization) factor and Carroll's (2002) SF2. In terms of these higher-order factors, the Self-Control dimension is positively associated with caution, control, and inhibition of antisocial behavior and negatively associated with negative affective states. Self-Control incorporates the impulse restraint and inhibition of aggression of Digman's Alpha (socialization) factor and the self-restraint, carefulness,

and inhibition of antisocial behaviors that are characteristic of the traits loading on Carroll's SF2. With regard to Big Five traits, Self-Control entails restraint of (a) hostile, uncooperative behaviors (Agreeableness); (b) irresponsible, lackadaisical behaviors (Conscientiousness); and (c) negative, distressing emotions (Emotional Stability). Thus this superordinate trait dimension reflects interpersonal self-control (Agreeableness), emotional self-control (Emotional Stability), and task-oriented self-control (Conscientiousness). The idea that Self-Control warrants consideration as a fundamental trait dimension is consistent with the suggestion that self-regulation is a core feature of the self and is vitally important for achieving success and happiness in life; deficiencies in self-control have been linked to a wide spectrum of personal and social problems including addiction, abuse, crime, domestic violence, teen pregnancy, academic failure, bankruptcy, and obesity (Tice, Bratslavsky, & Baumeister, 2001). Regarding the Big Five traits that comprise Self-Control, the notion of emotional control is inherent in the domain of Emotional Stability (versus Neuroticism) which reflects control of distressing emotions. With regard to Agreeableness and Conscientiousness, Ahadi and Rothbart (1994) suggested a developmental connection between these two trait domains and early appearing processes of self-regulation, termed Effortful Control (EC). EC processes that provide the developmental foundation for Agreeableness and Conscientiousness involve self-regulation of frustration. During the course of development, the EC system is posited to differentiate into two separate systems that deal with the frustration coming from people (Agreeableness) and the frustration coming from tasks (Conscientiousness; Jensen-Campbell et al., 2002). Agreeableness and Conscientiousness are empirically related to self-regulatory behaviors as measured by neuropsychological tests and are predictive of healthy EC processes (Jensen-Campbell et al., 2002). Piedmont (1998) described trait Conscientiousness as reflecting the degree of individuals' personal control. Conscientiousness is inversely related to imprudent behaviors (e.g.., school truancy, drug and alcohol use, involvement in accidents) and self-reported criminal intent (O Gorman & Baxter, 2002). Thus, Agreeableness and Conscientiousness appear to be related to self-control and self-regulation both theoretically and empirically.

Why are Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, and Emotional Stability the fundamental traits related to self-control? One answer may be that these three traits encompass self-control of critically important areas of human functioning. Agreeableness and Conscientiousness refer to actions in the external world, with Agreeableness related to self-control in the personal domain of interpersonal relations and Conscientiousness related to self-control of task-oriented behavior. Emotional Stability relates to self-control of the internal world of affective experience in regard to emotional distress.

From an evolutionary perspective, there are numerous benefits to self-control. Survival is enhanced by control of potentially rash and hasty actions and by thorough consideration of consequences. Inhibition of impulsive responses may help avoid exposure to predators, enemies, disease, and other dangers. Careful planning and foresight increase the odds of securing necessary resources such as food and shelter. Control of emotional reactions such as rage and hostility facilitates formation of cooperative and strategic alliances and successful pair-bonding. At the other (low) end of the Self-Control continuum, in some circumstances it is also adaptive to be highly sensitive to external threat, imminent danger, and potential loss and to experience the negative emotions that warn of these aversive events. When directly threatened, individuals' survival may be enhanced by immediate action and vigorous fight or flight reactions.

[Engagement and Self-Control = Plasticity and Stability]

The neuromodulator of exploration: A unifying theory of the role of dopamine in personality

The neuromodulator of exploration: A unifying theory of the role of dopamine in personality
Colin G DeYoung; 2013
http://www.frontiersin.org/Human_Neuroscience/10.3389/fnhum.2013.00762/full

->pdf version


Abstract

The neuromodulator dopamine is centrally involved in reward, approach behavior, exploration, and various aspects of cognition. Variations in dopaminergic function appear to be associated with variations in personality, but exactly which traits are influenced by dopamine remains an open question. This paper proposes a theory of the role of dopamine in personality that organizes and explains the diversity of findings, utilizing the division of the dopaminergic system into value coding and salience coding neurons (Bromberg-Martin et al., 2010). The value coding system is proposed to be related primarily to Extraversion and the salience coding system to Openness/Intellect. Global levels of dopamine influence the higher order personality factor, Plasticity, which comprises the shared variance of Extraversion and Openness/Intellect. All other traits related to dopamine are linked to Plasticity or its subtraits. The general function of dopamine is to promote exploration, by facilitating engagement with cues of specific reward (value) and cues of the reward value of information (salience). This theory constitutes an extension of the entropy model of uncertainty (EMU; Hirsh et al., 2012), enabling EMU to account for the fact that uncertainty is an innate incentive reward as well as an innate threat. The theory accounts for the association of dopamine with traits ranging from sensation and novelty seeking, to impulsivity and aggression, to achievement striving, creativity, and cognitive abilities, to the overinclusive thinking characteristic of schizotypy.

Men’s mate retention varies with men’s personality and their partner’s personality

Men’s mate retention varies with men’s personality and their partner’s personality
William F. McKibbin et al.; 2013


Abstract

Mate retention is the recurrent adaptive problem of retaining a mate in a relationship. Humans may have evolved mechanisms which motivate behavior in response to this problem. We examined the relation- ship between men’s mate retention and men’s and their partner’s personality in studies of 467 men and 565 women in committed relationships. Participants reported on their own or their partner’s mate retention and both their own and their partner’s personality. Results indicate a negative relationship between men’s Emotional Stability and men’s mate retention and a positive relationship between men’s Agreeableness and men’s benefit-provisioning mate retention. Discussion addresses limitations and directions for future research addressing the links between personality and mate retention.

Chimps of a feather sit together: chimpanzee friendships are based on homophily in personality

Chimps of a feather sit together: chimpanzee friendships are based on homophily in personality
Jorg J M Massen and Sonja E Koski
Available online 2 October 2013
Evolution and Human Behavior


Abstract

Several recent studies show that animal friendships, like human friendships, are durable and have fitness benefits by increasing survival, infant survival, or reproductive success. However, the determinants of especially non-kin friendships are unclear. Human non-kin friendships are partly determined by similarity in personality. We investigated personality similarity of friends in 38 captive chimpanzees. Within-subject comparisons revealed that friends are more similar than non-friends in their Sociability and Boldness. Subsequent analyses, including both kin- and non-kin dyads, revealed higher similarity in Sociability among all individuals who sat in contact more often, while in Boldness and Grooming Equity the positive effect of similarity was only found in non-kin individuals’ contact-sitting. Our results show that similar to humans, chimpanzees’ friendships are related to homophily in certain personality characteristics, particularly those relevant for socio-positive and cooperative behaviour. We suggest that having friends similar to self in personality decreases uncertainty in interactions by promoting reliability especially in cooperative contexts, and is consequently adaptive. Further, we suggest that homophily in human friendships dates back at least to our last common ancestor with chimpanzees.

The five factor model of personality and intelligence:

The five factor model of personality and intelligence: A twin study on the relationship between the two constructs
Meike Bartels et al.; September 2012
Personality and Individual Differences


Abstract

We assessed the association and underlying genetic and environmental influences among intelligence (IQ) and personality in adolescent and young adult twins. Data on intelligence were obtained from psychometric IQ tests and personality was assessed with the short form of the NEO five factor inventory (NEO-FFI).

IQ and personality data were available for 646 twins. There were an additional 1307 twins with NEO-FFI data, and 535 with IQ data. Multivariate genetic structural equation modeling was carried out.

Significant positive phenotypic correlations with IQ were seen for agreeableness (r = 0.21) and openness to experience (r = 0.32). A negative correlation emerged for neuroticism and IQ (r = −0.10). Genetic factors explained (nearly) all of the covariance between personality traits and IQ. Genetic correlations were 0.3–0.4 between IQ and agreeableness and openness. The genetic correlation between IQ and neuroticism was around −0.18. Thus, personality and IQ did not appear to be independent dimensions, and low neuroticism, high agreeableness and high scores on openness all contributed to higher IQ scores.

Children’s Behavioral Styles at Age 3 Are Linked to Their Adult Personality Traits at Age 26

Children’s Behavioral Styles at Age 3 Are Linked to Their Adult Personality Traits at Age 26
Avshalom Caspi et al.; 2003


Abstract

We observed 1,000 3-year-old children who exhibited five temperament types: Undercontrolled, Inhibited, Confident, Reserved, and Well-adjusted. Twenty-three years later, we reexamined 96% of the children as adults, using multiple methods of comprehensive personality assessment, including both self- and informant-reports. These longitudinal data provide the longest and strongest evidence to date that children’s early-emerging behavioral styles can foretell their characteristic behaviors,  thoughts, and feelings as adults, pointing to the foundations of  the human personality in the early years of life.

Gender Differences in Personality and Interests: When, Where, and Why?

Gender Differences in Personality and Interests: When, Where, and Why?
Richard A Lippa; November 2010
Social and Personality Psychology Compass


Abstract

How big are gender differences in personality and interests, and how stable are these differences across cultures and over time? To answer these questions, I summarize data from two meta-analyses and three cross-cultural studies on gender differences in personality and interests. Results show that gender differences in Big Five personality traits are ‘small’ to ‘moderate,’ with the largest differences occurring for agreeableness and neuroticism (respective ds = 0.40 and 0.34; women higher than men). In contrast, gender differences on the people–things dimension of interests are ‘very large’ (d = 1.18), with women more people-oriented and less thing-oriented than men. Gender differences in personality tend to be larger in gender-egalitarian societies than in gender-inegalitarian societies, a finding that contradicts social role theory but is consistent with evolutionary, attributional, and social comparison theories. In contrast, gender differences in interests appear to be consistent across cultures and over time, a finding that suggests possible biologic influences.

Sex Differences in Personality:

>Parental investment theory and the rigors of intersexual competition leads to the prediction that males will generally pursue relatively high-risk strategies compared to females and will thus be higher in behaviors typical of behavioral approach systems (BAS; dominance/sensation seeking, risk taking, impulsivity, exhibitionism) and lower on behavioral inhibition systems (BIS; fear, wariness, caution, safety seeking). Based on this predictions ethologists and evolutionary psychologists are interested in studying early gender differentiation in patterns of approach and avoidance behavior.

Developmental research in humans has produced a wealth of evidence that is generally consistent with predictions derived from parental investment theory. Research relevant to the BAS has consistently demonstrated that compared with girls, boys are more physically active from an early age (Eaton & Yu, 1989; Marcus, Maccoby, Jacklin, & Doehring, 1985; Money & Erhardt, 1972; Parke & Slaby, 1983), more assertive (Parke & Slaby, 1983), more aggressive, competitive, and dominant with peers (LaFreniere & Charleswood, 1983; LaFreniere, Dumas, Dubeau, & Capuano, 1992; Maccoby & Jacklin, 1974, 1980; Strayer & Strayer, 1976), and more oppositional with adults (LaFreniere et al., 1992). Boys are also more likely to take physical risks (Cristophersen, 1989; Ginsburg & Miller, 1982), engage in more rough-and-tumble play (DiPietro, 1981; Humphreys & Smith, 1987), and more high-energy socio-dramatic play involving guns and superheroes (Paley, 1984).

In contrast, research on the BIS has shown that preschool girls are more compliant to parents and teachers and rated by them as more socially competent (Cowan & Avants, 1988; LaFreniere et al., 1992, Maccoby, 1988). Girls rate themselves as more fearful, timid, nurturant, and empathic  than boys (Fabes, Eisenberg, & Miller, 1990; Maccoby, 1988), and girls tend to show more interest and are more responsive towards infants than are boys (Blakemore, Berenbaum, & Liben, 2008). Parental ratings indicate that when sex differences are found in fearfulness and timidity, parents rate girls as more fearful than boys (Buss & Plomin, 1975; Maccoby & Jacklin, 1974), and they are more cautious in situations involving risks as noted above. All data derived from indirect sources must be interpreted cautiously and wherever possible validated against direct observation since the gender biases of the raters (parents, teachers, or child) cannot be ruled out. For excample, observational data do not show systematic sex differences in empathy and prosocial behavior, and in some situations boys or men are more likely to offer assistence than girls or women, particularly in situations involving significant risk (Eagly & Crowley, 1986; Fabes, Eisenberg, & Miller, 1990).<

Adaptive Origins - Evolution and Human Development

Peter LaFreniere; 2010

The relationships between behavioral addictions and the five-factor model of personality

The relationships between behavioral addictions and the five-factor model of personality
Cecilie Schou Andreassen et al.; 2013
http://akademiai.com/content/1657rv516897x146/fulltext.pdf


Abstract

Aims: Although relationships between addiction and personality have previously been explored, no study has ever simultaneously investigated the interrelationships between several behavioral addictions, and related these to the main dimensions of the five-factor model of personality. 
Methods: In this study, 218 university students completed questionnaires assessing seven different behavioral addictions (i.e., Facebook addiction, video game addiction, Internet addiction, exercise addiction, mobile phone addiction, compulsive buying, and study addiction) as well as an instrument assessing the main dimensions of the five-factor model of personality.
Results: Of the 21 bivariate intercorrelations between the seven behavioral addictions, all were positive (and nine significantly). The results also showed that (i) Neuroticism was positively associated with Internet addiction, exercise addiction, compulsive buying, and study addiction, (ii) Extroversion was positively associated with Facebook addiction, exercise addiction, mobile phone addiction, and compulsive buying, (iii) Openness to experience was negatively associated with Facebook addiction and mobile phone addiction, (iv) Agreeableness was negatively associated with Internet addiction, exercise addiction, mobile phone addiction, and compulsive buying, and (v) Conscientiousness was negatively associated with Facebook addiction, video game addiction, Internet addiction, and compulsive buying and positively associated with exercise addiction and study addiction.
Conclusions: The positive associations between the seven behavioral addictions suggest one or several underlying pathological factors. Hierarchical multiple regressions showed that personality traits explained between 6% and 17% of the variance in the seven behavioral addictions, suggesting that personality to a varying degree explains scores on measures of addictive behaviors.