Personality links to anger: Evidence for trait interaction and differentiation across expression style

Anger is a commonly experienced emotion, although marked individual differences in the expression of anger are observed. Basic dimensions of personality (e.g., Big Five traits) have been shown to predict the experience of trait anger; however, little work has addressed the personality correlates of broader conceptualisations of trait anger (e.g., inward or outward expressions). Additionally, while some recent work has suggested that basic personality traits may show interactive influences on anger expression this work has yet to be independently confirmed. In a large sample of adults we examined, firstly, how Big Five traits associated with several components of anger as measured by the State-Trait Anger Expression Inventory. Secondly, we examined whether these associations were further qualified by interactions between Big Five traits. Results indicated neuroticism and, to a lesser extent, (low) agreeableness, were the traits most associated with components of trait anger. Conscientiousness and extraversion were also noted to show links to more focal components of anger. Moderation was observed: conscientiousness moderated neuroticism’s relationship with anger control, and agreeableness and conscientiousness, in a three-way interaction, moderated neuroticism’s relationship with trait anger. These observations help to further clarify the role of Big Five personality traits as a foundation for the experiences of anger, demonstrating how anger style varies across personality configuration.     

黑暗人格三合一研究述评

如果说大五人格代表了特质论人格心理学对非临床人格的研究成果,近期出现的黑暗人格三合一则代表了对亚临床人格阴暗面的研究成果。黑暗人格三合一由马基雅维利主义、自恋和精神病态三种人格特质构成,这三种人格特质在西方文化中均属于反社会型人格特质。对黑暗人格三合一的研究发现:(1)马基雅维利主义、自恋和精神病态各自独立又相互交织;(2)它们的测量工具均较为成熟;(3)黑暗人格三合一不仅具有反社会性,也具有亲社会性;(4)黑暗人格三合一反映个体的快速生命策略;(5)遗传和环境因素在黑暗人格三合一的形成中发挥不同作用;(6)黑暗人格三合一是不同于大五人格的人格特质群。     

College Student Samples Are Not Always Equivalent: The Magnitude of Personality Differences Across Colleges and Universities

This research examined the magnitude of personality differences across different colleges and universities to understand (a) how much students at different colleges vary from one another and (b) whether there are site‐level variables that can explain observed differences. Nearly 8,600 students at 30 colleges and universities completed a Big Five personality trait measure. Site‐level information was obtained from the Integrated Postsecondary Education System database (U.S. Department of Education). Multilevel models revealed that each of the Big Five traits showed significant between‐site variability, even after accounting for individual‐level demographic differences. Some site‐level variables (e.g., enrollment size, requiring letters of recommendation) explained between‐site differences in traits, but many tests were not statistically significant. Student samples at different universities differed in terms of average levels of Big Five personality domains. This raises the possibility that personality differences may explain differences in research results obtained when studying students at different colleges and universities. Furthermore, results suggest that research that compares findings for only a few sites (e.g., much cross‐cultural research) runs the risk of overgeneralizing differences between specific samples to broader group differences. These results underscore the value of multisite collaborative research efforts to enhance psychological research.     

What laypeople think the Big Five trait labels mean

We asked what laypeople think the commonly used Big Five trait labels mean, and how well their beliefs match the content of standard Big Five scales. Study 1 established participants’ familiarity with the Big Five trait labels. In Studies 2 and 3, participants described persons high on the traits using a free response format. Responses were sorted into categories (facets), each of which earned a centrality index defined as the proportion of responses for the given trait that fell into that category. Studies 2 and 3 converged well. Comparisons with four standard Big Five inventories revealed substantial commonality but also notable areas of non-overlap consisting of content identified by laypeople that was not represented in the standard scales, as well as content in the standard scales that was not mentioned by laypeople.     

Separating method factors and higher order traits of the Big Five: a meta-analytic multitrait-multimethod approach

Though most personality researchers now recognize that ratings of the Big Five are not orthogonal, the field has been divided about whether these trait intercorrelations are substantive (i.e., driven by higher order factors) or artifactual (i.e., driven by correlated measurement error). We used a meta-analytic multitrait-multirater study to estimate trait correlations after common method variance was controlled. Our results indicated that common method variance substantially inflates trait correlations, and, once controlled, correlations among the Big Five became relatively modest. We then evaluated whether two different theories of higher order factors could account for the pattern of Big Five trait correlations. Our results did not support Rushton and colleagues' (Rushton & Irwing, 2008; Rushton et al., 2009) proposed general factor of personality, but Digman's (1997) α and β metatraits (relabeled by DeYoung, Peterson, and Higgins (2002) as Stability and Plasticity, respectively) produced viable fit. However, our models showed considerable overlap between Stability and Emotional Stability and between Plasticity and Extraversion, raising the question of whether these metatraits are redundant with their dominant Big Five traits. This pattern of findings was robust when we included only studies whose observers were intimately acquainted with targets. Our results underscore the importance of using a multirater approach to studying personality and the need to separate the causes and outcomes of higher order metatraits from those of the Big Five. We discussed the implications of these findings for the array of research fields in which personality is studied.     

Has Average Joe Got Inner Conflicts? Positioning the Self and the Meaning of Mid-Range Scores on the Big Five Traits

In this article we explore dilemmas with interpreting mid-range scores on Big Five personality traits. Using dialogical self theory, we hypothesized that mid-trait individuals would report more conflict between I-positions congruent with the trait domain concerned, for example, conflict between I-as-bold and I-as-reserved in the domain of Extraversion. A community sample of 147 participants completed a Big Five trait measure, the NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI-R), and the I-Position Inventory (IPI). The IPI contains 88 I-position statements generated from previous research and clinical assessments. Fifty-two of the statements form 26 opposing pairs (e.g., I-as-optimist vs. I-as-pessimist). To measure the most salient I-position conflicts, respondents were asked to rank these pairs (only the top five pairs were ranked). In support of the conflict hypothesis, for three of the Big Five traits, individuals who scored mid-range reported more conflict between I-positions congruent with the trait than did respondents in the upper and lower quartiles of the distribution (significant for Extraversion, Openness to Experience, and Agreeableness). We argue the findings highlight problems of interpretation for mid-range trait scores that arise from the limitations of aggregation methods, but also from a compromised theoretical foundation. Trait theory masks dynamic processes as well as social contexts.     

Anger and hostility from the perspective of the Big Five personality model

Sanz, J., García‐Vera, M. P. & Magán, I. (2010). Anger and hostility from the perspective of the Big Five personality model. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 51, 262–270. This study was aimed at examining the relationships of the personality dimensions of the five‐factor model or Big Five with trait anger and with two specific traits of hostility (mistrust and confrontational attitude), and identifying the similarities and differences between trait anger and hostility in the framework of the Big Five. In a sample of 353 male and female adults, the Big Five explained a significant percentage of individual differences in trait anger and hostility after controlling the effects due to the relationship between both constructs and content overlapping across scales. In addition, trait anger was primarily associated with neuroticism, whereas mistrust and confrontational attitude were principally related to low agreeableness. These findings are discussed in the context of the anger‐hostility‐aggression syndrome and the capability of the Big Five for organizing and clarifying related personality constructs.     

Employee personality, justice perceptions, and the prediction of workplace deviance

We examined the relative and incremental prediction of workplace deviance (i.e., intentional acts that harm the organization or its employees) offered by personality and organizational justice perceptions in a sample of 464 employees working in a large retail organization. We found that personality - including a sixth factor called Honesty-Humility, and its facet of trait Fairness - accounted for incremental variance in deviance criteria beyond justice perceptions. We found little support for the reverse. From a practical standpoint, these findings suggest that organizations may benefit from personality-related interventions (e.g., screening job applicants for relevant traits) more so than from justice-related interventions (e.g., organizational changes involving policies and procedures) in order to reduce workplace deviance. From a research perspective, our findings highlight the advantages of considering traits beyond the Big Five (e.g., Honesty-Humility) for maximizing the prediction and understanding of deviant behaviors at work.     

Development of big five domains and facets in adulthood: mean-level age trends and broadly versus narrowly acting mechanisms

Data from a cross‐sectional sample (N = 601 men and women) and a longitudinal sample (N = 125 women) were used to test hypotheses about the development of Big Five domains and facets from early adulthood through middle age. Analyses of mean‐level age trends indicated that overall Agreeableness and Conscientiousness increased with age and that several facets showed distinctive trends that replicated across the samples. Cross‐sectional analyses of trait intercorrelations and covariances indicated that interrelations between the Big Five domains, and between their more specific facets, were quite similar at older versus younger ages. Finally, longitudinal analyses of individual‐level changes indicated that (a) different people's personalities changed in markedly different ways; (b) these changes were predominantly independent, rather than correlated, across Big Five domains; and (c) the pattern of change correlations between Big Five facets could be explained by the facets’ interrelations at the first assessment time. Taken together, these results suggest that a complete understanding of personality development requires consideration of facet‐level traits and that adult personality development is predominantly influenced by narrowly acting mechanisms that each affect a single Big Five domain, or a small cluster of related facets, rather than by broadly acting mechanisms that simultaneously affect previously independent traits.     

Personality Traits Beyond the Big Five: Are They Within the HEXACO Space?

Paunonen (2002) recently developed the Supernumerary Personality Inventory (SPI), a measure of 10 traits that have low loadings within the space of the Big Five personality factors. If the SPI personality traits are representative of the domain of non-Big Five personality traits, then the major source of the variance in the SPI traits would be expected to correlate strongly with the sixth factor of personality, Honesty-Humility. We tested this hypothesis using self-report measures (N = 200) of the SPI traits, of the Big Five, and of the new six-dimensional ("HEXACO") structure. Results indicated that the first unrotated factor underlying the 10 SPI traits was heavily saturated with variance from Honesty-Humility (r = .65). Nevertheless, the 10 SPI traits contained substantial amounts of unique variance not accounted for by the HEXACO or the Big Five variables, highlighting the importance of the facet-level assessment of personality traits.     

The happy personality: Mediational role of trait emotional intelligence

This study examined the relationship between the Big Five personality traits (Gosling et al., 2003), trait emotional intelligence (EI) (Petrides & Furnham, 2001) and happiness (Argyle et al., 1989) in a sample of 112 (61 female) student and non-student participants. Strong dispositional determinants of happiness were identified. In line with previous findings, four of the Big Five, namely stability, extraversion, conscientiousness, and agreeableness, were positively correlated with both happiness and trait EI, which explained 18% of unique variance (over and above age and the Big Five) in happiness. Furthermore, a significant amount of shared variance between happiness and the Big Five was explained by trait EI, which partly mediated the paths from stability and conscientiousness to happiness, and fully mediated the link between agreeableness and happiness. Limitations and implications are discussed.     

The Instrumental Role of Personality Traits: Using Mixture Structural Equation Modeling to Investigate Individual Differences in the Relationships Between the Big Five Traits and Life Satisfaction

Adopting a social-cognitive view of personality, this study investigated individual differences in the direct (i.e., temperamental) and indirect (i.e., instrumental) effects of the Big Five traits on life satisfaction. For that purpose, we examined a process model in which domain-based emotional experiences mediated the instrumental effects of personality traits. Using mixture structural equation modeling (n = 2682 adults) we found that the direct effects of neuroticism and extraversion were invariant across individuals, whereas the instrumental effects of the Big Five traits varied across two unobserved subgroups. In one of these subgroups (60 %), conscientiousness, openness, agreeableness, and neuroticism had relatively larger effects on domain-based affect and life satisfaction. In a second subgroup (40 %), extraversion was comparatively more relevant for explaining domain-based affect and life satisfaction. Our findings provide evidence that the instrumental role of personality traits and judgmental processes may act in accord to promote subjective well-being.     

Affect,Behaviour, Cognition and Desire in the Big Five: An Analysis of Item Content and Structure

Personality psychology is concerned with affect (A), behaviour (B), cognition (C) and desire (D), and personality traits have been defined conceptually as abstractions used to either explain or summarise coherent ABC (and sometimes D) patterns over time and space. However, this conceptual definition of traits has not been reflected in their operationalisation, possibly resulting in theoretical and practical limitations to current trait inventories. Thus, the goal of this project was to determine the affective, behavioural, cognitive and desire (ABCD) components of Big‐Five personality traits. The first study assessed the ABCD content of items measuring Big‐Five traits in order to determine the ABCD composition of traits and identify items measuring relatively high amounts of only one ABCD content. The second study examined the correlational structure of scales constructed from items assessing ABCD content via a large, web‐based study. An assessment of Big‐Five traits that delineates ABCD components of each trait is presented, and the discussion focuses on how this assessment builds upon current approaches of assessing personality. Copyright © 2015 European Association of Personality Psychology     

Change driven by nature: A meta-analytic review of the proactive personality literature

This study provides the first comprehensive review of literature examining proactive personality. The authors use career success as a broad organizing framework, meta-analyzing 313 correlations from 107 studies. Results indicate proactive personality is positively related to objective and subjective career success. Further, results indicate proactive personality relates to variables consistent with contest mobility (e.g., job performance) and sponsored mobility (e.g., taking charge/voice behavior) avenues to career success. Proactive personality’s relationship with supervisor-rated overall job performance is particularly noteworthy in that it is stronger than that reported for any of the Big Five factors or the Big Five collectively. Proactive personality is positively related to a variety of employability-related variables (e.g., learning goal orientation, career self-efficacy), four Big Five trait factors (extraversion, openness to experience, conscientiousness, and neuroticism), but is unrelated to social desirability. The authors’ literature review indicates only the original 17-item scale and 10-item scale tend to exhibit good internal consistency.     

A primer on the Dark Triad traits

In this review, we detail three personality traits (i.e., narcissism, psychopathy, and Machiavellianism) that have gained popularity in the last decade as the ‘Dark Triad’. These traits are useful to augment research on personality, like the Big Five traits, as they capture individual differences in ‘darker’ aspects of personality more fully. We briefly review the body of work surrounding these traits, how they are measured, how they can be understood through the exploration of their nomological network, and the role each trait plays in various domains like organisational psychology and interpersonal relationships. We then detail how an evolutionary paradigm can provide a novel and powerful way of understanding these traits. Finally, we explore broad-spectrum concerns about the research and thoughts on how one might think about these issues.     

Change driven by nature: A meta-analytic review of the proactive personality literature

This study provides the first comprehensive review of literature examining proactive personality. The authors use career success as a broad organizing framework, meta-analyzing 313 correlations from 107 studies. Results indicate proactive personality is positively related to objective and subjective career success. Further, results indicate proactive personality relates to variables consistent with contest mobility (e.g., job performance) and sponsored mobility (e.g., taking charge/voice behavior) avenues to career success. Proactive personality’s relationship with supervisor-rated overall job performance is particularly noteworthy in that it is stronger than that reported for any of the Big Five factors or the Big Five collectively. Proactive personality is positively related to a variety of employability-related variables (e.g., learning goal orientation, career self-efficacy), four Big Five trait factors (extraversion, openness to experience, conscientiousness, and neuroticism), but is unrelated to social desirability. The authors’ literature review indicates only the original 17-item scale and 10-item scale tend to exhibit good internal consistency.     

Opening Up Openness: A Theoretical Sort Following Critical Incidents Methodology and a Meta-Analytic Investigation of the Trait Family Measures

Existing taxonomies of Openness's facet structure have produced widely divergent results, and there is limited comprehensive empirical evidence about how Openness-related scales on existing personality inventories align within the 5-factor framework. In Study 1, we used a critical incidents sorting methodology to identify 11 categories of Openness measures; in Study 2, we meta-analyzed the relationships of these categories with global markers of the Big Five traits (utilizing data from 106 samples with a total sample size of N = 35,886). Our results identified 4 true facets of Openness: aestheticism, openness to sensations, nontraditionalism, and introspection. Measures of these facets were unadulterated by variance from other Big Five traits. Many traits frequently conceptualized as facets of Openness (e.g., innovation/creativity, variety-seeking, and tolerance) emerged as trait compounds that, although related to Openness, are also dependent on other Big Five traits. We discuss how Openness should be conceptualized, measured, and studied in light of the empirically based, refined taxonomy emerging from this research.