Search

Objective: Various personality traits have longitudinal relations with body mass index (BMI), a measure of body weight and a risk factor for numerous health concerns. We tested these associations' compatibility with causality in either direction. Method: Using three waves of the Wisconsin Longitudinal Study (N = 12,235, Mage = 53.33 at baseline), we tested how accurately the Five‐Factor Model personality domains and their items could collectively predict BMI and change in it with elastic net models. With multilevel models, we tested (a) bidirectional and (b) within‐person associations between BMI and personality traits. Results: The five domains were able to predict concurrent (r = 0.08), but not future BMI. Twenty‐nine personality items predicted concurrent and future BMI at r = 0.21 and r = 0.16 to 0.25, respectively. Neither the domains nor items could collectively predict change in BMI. Similarly, no individual trait predicted change in BMI, but BMI predicted changes in Conscientiousness, Agreeableness, and several items (|b*| = 0.03 to 0.08). BMI had within‐person correlations with these same traits; time‐invariant third factors like genetics or childhood environments therefore could not (fully) account for their relations. Conclusions: Body weight may contribute to adults' personality development, but the reverse appears less likely. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Personality traits change in both mean levels and variance across the life span but the mechanisms underlying these developmental trends remain unclear. Social Investment Principle (SIP) suggests that social expectations drive personality changes in adulthood. Accordingly, we tested whether differences between personality traits in social expectations for them can explain their different change trajectories in young adulthood. Methods: A pool of 257 personality items was used to measure personality traits' means and variances (N = 1096), and levels expected by friends, partners and bosses/supervisors (N = 121). Results: Raters were consistent in their expectations for how young adults should think, feel and behave. Traits under stronger expectations had higher mean levels and lower variances than traits under lower expectations; trait means and variances increased with age, but inconsistently with the SIP, these increases were unrelated to the traits' expected levels. Conclusion: Our results are only partially consistent with the SIP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Personality traits change from childhood through late‐adolescence, however the effects of social expectations and self‐regulatory efforts remain unknown. This study aims to explore mechanisms underlying personality development by assessing mean levels personality traits from childhood to late‐adolescence. Method: We used Common‐Language California Child Q‐Set to measure youths' (N = 11,000) mean personality trait levels; social expectations for these traits as perceived by parents (N = 47), teachers (N = 42) and students (N = 120); and self‐regulatory efforts required for achieving the desired levels in these traits as perceived by parents (N = 27), teachers (N = 26), and students (N = 54). Results: Expectations for youths' traits were consistent, regardless of raters' or youths' age. In our unique between‐trait study design, traits' mean levels were positively associated with expectations for them, but age differences minimally tracked these expectations. Traits' required self‐regulatory efforts were not associated with their developmental trends. Conclusions: Results were only partially consistent with existing developmental theories of personality development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Associations between personality traits and life outcomes are usually studied using the Big Five domains and, occasionally, their facets. But recent research suggests these associations may be driven by the items (reflecting personality nuances) chosen to measure these traits. Using a large dataset (N = 6126), we examined associations with 53 self‐reported outcomes using domains, facets and items (markers for nuances), training and validating models in different sample partitions. Facets better predicted outcomes than domains (on average, 18.0% versus 16.6% of variance explained), but items provided the most accurate predictions (on average 20.9%). Removing domain and facet variance from items had no effect on their predictive validity, suggesting that outcome‐related information was often in items' unique variances (i.e., nuance‐specific). Item‐based prediction also showed the highest discriminant validity. These observations, replicating previous findings, suggest that personality traits' valid associations with outcomes are often driven by narrow personality nuances. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Climate change mandates us to understand why individuals do (not) behave pro‐environmentally and personality traits are well suited for this purpose. Past research has mostly focused on how broad domain‐level personality traits were associated with pro‐environmental attitudes and behaviors. In two datasets (N = 501 and 287), we examined whether personality facets provided a more detailed picture of how personality traits were associated with pro‐environmental attitudes and behaviors. It was found that some facets were the main drivers of domain‐level associations. Furthermore, it was found that facets, collectively, predicted pro‐environmental attitudes (r =.50 to.52) and behaviors (r =.29 to.42) in holdout datasets. This predictive ability was on par with the predictive ability of domains. Therefore, facets provided a greater understanding of how personality traits were associated with pro‐environmental attitudes and behaviors. Furthermore, facets provided a similar predictive ability of pro‐environmental attitudes and behaviors to that of domains. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Associations between markers of ostensible psychological characteristics and social and health inequalities are pervasive but difficult to explain. In some cases, there may be causal influence flowing from social and health inequalities to psychological differences, whereas sometimes it may be the other way around. Here, we focus on the possibility that some markers that we often consider as indexing different domains of individual differences may in fact reflect at least partially overlapping genetic and/or phenotypic bases. For example, individual differences in cognitive abilities and educational attainment appear to reflect largely overlapping genetic influences, whereas cognitive abilities and health literacy may be almost identical phenomena at the phenotypic, never mind genetic, level. We make the case for employing molecular genetic data and quantitative genetic techniques to better understand the associations of psychological individual differences with social and health inequalities. We illustrate these arguments by using published findings from the Lothian Birth Cohort and the Generation Scotland studies. We also present novel findings pertaining to longitudinal stability and change in older age personality traits and some correlates of the change, molecular genetic data-based heritability estimates of Neuroticism and Extraversion, and the genetic correlations of these personality traits with markers of social and health inequalities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: We tested predictions about the structure and magnitude of method biases in single-source personality trait assessments. We expected a large number of distinct biases that would parallel the observed structure of traits, at both facet and item levels.Method: We analyzed multimethod ratings on the Estonian NEO Personality Inventory-3 in a sample of 3,214 adults. By subtracting informant ratings from self-reports, we eliminated true score variance and analyzed the size and structure of the residual method biases. We replicated analyses using data (N = 709) from the Czech Revised NEO Personality Inventory.Results: The magnitude of method biases was consistent with predictions by McCrae (2018, Psychological Assessment). Factor analyses at the facet level showed a clear replication of the normative Five-Factor Model structure in both samples. Item factor analyses within domains showed that facet-level method biases mimicked the facet structure of the instrument.Conclusions: Method biases apparently reflect implicit personality theory (IPT)-beliefs about how traits and trait indicators covary. We discuss the (collective) accuracy and possible origins of IPT. Because method biases limit the accuracy of single-source assessments, we recommend assessments that combine information from two or more informants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]