Big Five personality traits

The Big Five model originated from the lexical hypothesis, which suggests that the most important personality traits are encoded in language. Raymond Cattell built upon earlier lexical work by reducing thousands of descriptors to 16 personality factors, later clustered into five global traits, which some consider the "original Big Five". Ernest Tupes and Raymond Christal then analyzed peer ratings of U.S. Air Force officers and derived five core dimensions: Surgency, Agreeableness, Dependability, Emotional Stability, and Culture—an approach later popularized by Warren Norman. In the 1980s, John M. Digman and colleagues consolidated evidence from previous studies and reaffirmed five major traits, while Paul Costa Jr and Robert R. McCrae developed the NEO model, starting with three factors and expanding it into the widely accepted Five Factor Model (FFM). These four sets of researchers used somewhat different methods in finding the five traits, making the sets of five factors have varying names and meanings. However, all have been found to be strongly correlated with their corresponding factors. In 1884, British scientist Sir Francis Galton became the first person known to consider deriving a comprehensive taxonomy of human personality traits by sampling language. In 1932, these "five distinguishable but inseparable factors" were listed as "intellect, character, temperament, disposition and temper", and have been seen as "anticipating" the adoption of the Big Five model in subsequent years. Swiss psychologist Franziska Baumgarten of the University of Bern implemented the lexical hypothesis, publishing the first psycholexical classification of personality-descriptive terms in 1933. Using dictionaries and characterology publications, she identified 1093 separate terms in the German language used for the description of personality and mental states. In 1936, American psychologists Gordon Allport of Harvard University and Henry Odbert of Dartmouth College implemented the lexical hypothesis using the English language. They organised for three anonymous people to categorise adjectives from Webster's New International Dictionary and a list of common slang words. The result was a list of 4504 adjectives they believed were descriptive of observable and relatively permanent traits. In 1943, British-American psychologist Raymond Cattell of Harvard University took Allport and Odbert's list and reduced this to a list of roughly 160 terms by eliminating words with very similar meanings. To these, he added terms from 22 other psychological categories, and additional "interest" and "abilities" terms. This resulted in a list of 171 traits. From this he used factor analysis to derive 60 "personality clusters or syndromes" and an additional 7 minor clusters. Cattell then narrowed this down to 35 terms, and later added a 36th factor in the form of an IQ measure. Through factor analysis from 1945 to 1948, he created 11 or 12 factor solutions. In 1947, German-British psychologist Hans Eysenck of University College London published his book Dimensions of Personality. He posited that the two most important personality dimensions were "Extraversion" and "Neuroticism", a term that he coined. In July 1949, American psychologist Donald Fiske of the University of Chicago used 22 terms either directly taken or adapted from Cattell's 1947 study, and through surveys of male university students and statistics derived five factors: "Social Adaptability", "Emotional Control", "Conformity", "Inquiring Intellect", and "Confident Self-expression". In the same year, Cattell, (with Maurice Tatsuoka and Herbert Eber), found 4 factors in addition to those they had found before, which they believed consisted of information that could only be provided through self-rating. With this understanding, they created and published the sixteen factor 16PF Questionnaire. In 1953, John W French of Educational Testing Service published an extensive meta-analysis of personality trait factor studies. In 1957, Ernest Tupes and Raymond Christal, research psychologists at the Lackland Air Force Base, undertook a personality trait study of US Air Force officers. Each was rated by their peers using Cattell's 35 terms (or in some cases, the 30 most reliable terms). In 1958, Tupes and Christal began a US Air Force study by taking 37 personality factors and other data found in Cattell's 1947 paper, Fiske's 1949 paper, and Tupes' 1957 paper. Through statistical analysis, they derived five factors they labeled "Surgency", "Agreeableness", "Dependability", "Emotional Stability", and "Culture". In addition to the influence of Cattell and Fiske's work, they strongly noted the influence of French's 1953 study. of the University of Michigan replicated Tupes and Christal's work in 1963. He relabeled "Surgency" as "Extroversion or Surgency", and "Dependability" as "Conscientiousness". He also found four subordinate scales for each factor. In the 4th edition of the 16PF Questionnaire released in 1968, 5 "global factors" derived from the 16 factors were identified: "Extraversion", "Independence", "Anxiety", "Self-control" and "Tough-mindedness". 16PF advocates have since called these "the original big five". In 1978, Paul Costa and Robert McCrae of the National Institutes of Health published a book chapter describing their Neuroticism-Extraversion-Openness (NEO) model. The model was based on the three factors in its name. They used Eysenck's concept of "Extraversion" rather than Carl Jung's. Each factor had six facets. The authors expanded their explanation of the model in subsequent papers. Also in 1978, British psychologist Peter Saville of Brunel University applied statistical analysis to 16PF results, and determined that the model could be reduced to five factors, "Anxiety", "Extraversion", "Warmth", "Imagination" and "Conscientiousness". At a 1980 symposium in Honolulu, Lewis Goldberg, Naomi Takemoto-Chock, Andrew Comrey, and John M. Digman, reviewed the available personality instruments of the day. In 1981, Digman and Takemoto-Chock of the University of Hawaiʻi reanalysed data from Cattell, Tupes, Norman, Fiske and Digman. They re-affirmed the validity of the five factors, naming them "Friendly Compliance vs. Hostile Non-compliance", "Extraversion vs. Introversion", "Ego Strength vs. Emotional Disorganization", "Will to Achieve" and "Intellect". They also found weak evidence for the existence of a sixth factor, "Culture". 1981 also saw Lewis Goldberg coin the term "Big Five" for the factors. Its factors are "Extroversion", "Vigorous", "Methodical", "Emotional Stability", and "Abstract". This was closely followed by another commercial test, the NEO PI three-factor personality inventory, published by Costa and McCrae in 1985. It used the three NEO factors. The methodology employed in constructing the NEO instruments has since been subject to critical scrutiny. In 1990, J.M. Digman of the University of Hawaii further advanced his five-factor model of personality, In 1992, the NEO PI evolved into the NEO PI-R, adding the factors "Agreeableness" and "Conscientiousness", Kibeom Lee and Michael Ashton released a book describing their HEXACO model in 2004. It adds a sixth factor, "Honesty-Humility" to the five (which it calls "Emotionality", "Extraversion", "Agreeableness", "Conscientiousness", and "Openness to Experience"). Each of these factors has four facets. In 2007, Colin DeYoung, Lena C. Quilty and Jordan Peterson concluded that the 10 aspects of the Big Five may have distinct biological substrates. By 2009, personality and social psychologists generally agreed that both personal and situational variables are needed to account for human behavior. An FFM-associated test was used by Cambridge Analytica, and was part of the "psychographic profiling" controversy during the 2016 US presidential election. ==Descriptions of the particular personality traits==

When factor analysis is applied to personality survey data, semantic associations between aspects of personality and specific terms are often applied to the same person. For example, someone described as conscientious is more likely to be described as "always prepared" rather than "messy". These associations use terms from common language to describe the human personality, temperament, and psyche. Openness to experience Openness to experience is a general appreciation for art, emotion, adventure, unusual ideas, imagination, curiosity, and variety of experience. People who are open to experience are intellectually curious, open to emotion, sensitive to beauty, and willing to try new things. They tend to be, when compared to closed people, more creative and more aware of their feelings. They are also more likely to hold unconventional beliefs. Open people can be perceived as unpredictable or lacking focus, and more likely to engage in risky behaviour or drug-taking. Moreover, individuals with high openness are said to pursue self-actualisation specifically by seeking out intense, euphoric experiences. Conversely, those with low openness want to be fulfilled by persevering and are characterised as pragmatic and data-drivensometimes even perceived to be dogmatic and closed-minded. Some disagreement remains about how to interpret and contextualise the openness factor as there is a lack of biological support for this particular trait. Openness has not shown a significant association with any brain regions as opposed to the other four traits which did when using brain imaging to detect changes in volume associated with each trait. Sample items • I have a rich vocabulary. • I have a vivid imagination. • I have excellent ideas. • I am quick to understand things. • I use difficult words. • I spend time reflecting on things. • I am full of ideas. • I have difficulty understanding abstract ideas. (Reversed) • I am not interested in abstract ideas. (Reversed) • I do not have a good imagination. (Reversed) Conscientiousness Conscientiousness is a tendency to be self-disciplined, act dutifully, and strive for achievement against measures or outside expectations. It is related to people's level of impulse control, regulation, and direction. High conscientiousness is often perceived as being stubborn and focused. Low conscientiousness is associated with flexibility and spontaneity, but can also appear as sloppiness and lack of reliability. High conscientiousness indicates a preference for planned rather than spontaneous behaviour. Sample items • I am always prepared. • I pay attention to details. • I get chores done right away. • I like order. • I follow a schedule. • I am exacting in my work. • I leave my belongings around. (Reversed) • I make a mess of things. (Reversed) • I often forget to put things back in their proper place. (Reversed) • I shirk my duties. (Reversed) The trait is marked by pronounced engagement with the external world. Extraverts enjoy interacting with people, and are often perceived as energetic. They tend to be enthusiastic and action-oriented. They possess high group visibility, like to talk, and assert themselves. Extraverts may appear more dominant in social settings, as opposed to introverts in that setting. Introverts have lower social engagement and energy levels than extraverts. They tend to seem quiet, low-key, deliberate, and less involved in the social world. Their lack of social involvement should not be interpreted as shyness or depression, but as greater independence of their social world than extraverts. Introverts need less stimulation and more time alone than extraverts. This does not mean that they are unfriendly or antisocial; rather, they are aloof and reserved in social situations. Generally, people are a combination of extraversion and introversion, with personality psychologist Hans Eysenck suggesting a model by which differences in their brains produce these traits. Disagreeable individuals place self-interest above getting along with others. They are generally unconcerned with others' well-being and are less likely to extend themselves for other people. Sometimes their skepticism about others' motives causes them to be suspicious, unfriendly, and uncooperative. Disagreeable people are often competitive or challenging, which can be seen as argumentative or untrustworthy. Conversely, agreeableness has been found to be negatively related to transactional leadership in the military. A study of Asian military units showed that agreeable people are more likely to be poor transactional leaders. Therefore, with further research, organisations may be able to determine an individual's potential for performance based on their personality traits. For instance, in their journal article "Which Personality Attributes Are Most Important in the Workplace?" Paul Sackett and Philip Walmsley claim that conscientiousness and agreeableness are "important to success across many different jobs." Sample items • I am interested in people. • I sympathise with others' feelings. • I have a soft heart. • I take time out for others. • I feel others' emotions. • I make people feel at ease. • I am not really interested in others. (Reversed) • I insult people. (Reversed) • I am not interested in other people's problems. (Reversed) • I feel little concern for others. (Reversed) It is sometimes called emotional instability, or is reversed and referred to as emotional stability. Neuroticism is a classic temperament trait that has been studied in temperament research for decades, even before it was adapted by the Five Factor Model. For example, in Hans Eysenck's (1967) theory of personality, neuroticism is associated with low tolerance for stress (N+ in the FFM) or a strong dislike of change (O- in the FFM). Neuroticism in the FFM is similar but not identical to being neurotic in the Freudian sense (i.e., neurosis). Some psychologists prefer to call neuroticism by the term emotional instability to differentiate it from the term neurotic in a career test. Neurotic people are emotionally volatile, emotionally reactive and vulnerable to stress. They are more likely to spontaneously experience negative emotions (see sample items below) and their negative emotional reactions tend to stay for longer periods of time, which means they are more often in a bad mood. They are more likely to interpret ordinary situations as threatening. They can perceive minor frustrations as hopelessly difficult. For instance, neuroticism is connected to pessimism toward work, to certainty that work hinders personal relationships, and to higher levels of anxiety from the pressures at work. Furthermore, highly neurotic people may display more skin-conductance reactivity than less neurotic people. These problems in emotional regulation can make a highly neurotic person think less clearly, make worse decisions, and cope less effectively with stress. Being disappointed with one's life achievements can make one more neurotic and increase one's chances of falling into clinical depression. Moreover, neurotic individuals tend to experience more negative life events, but neuroticism also changes in response to positive and negative life experiences. At the other end of the scale, less neurotic individuals are less easily upset and are less emotionally reactive. They tend to be calm, emotionally stable, and free from persistent negative feelings. Freedom from negative feelings does not mean that low scorers experience a lot of positive feelings; that is related to extraversion instead. Sample items • I get stressed out easily. • I worry about things. • I am easily disturbed. • I get upset easily. • I change my mood a lot. • I have frequent mood swings. • I get irritated easily. • I often feel blue. • I am relaxed most of the time. (Reversed) • I seldom feel blue. (Reversed) == Measurement and methodology ==

Versions Several measures of the Big Five exist: • International Personality Item Pool (IPIP) • NEO-PI-R • The Ten-Item Personality Inventory (TIPI) and the Five Item Personality Inventory (FIPI) are very abbreviated rating forms of the Big Five personality traits. • Self-descriptive sentence questionnaires • Self-report questionnaires • Relative-scored big five measure The most frequently used measures of the Big Five comprise either items that are self-descriptive sentences The five factor structure has been replicated in peer reports. However, many of the substantive findings rely on self-reports. Limitations of self-report Much of the evidence on the measures of the big five relies on self-report questionnaires, which makes self-report bias and falsification of responses difficult to deal with and account for. For example, questionnaires are answered by potential employees who might choose answers that paint them in the best light. Research suggests that a relative-scored Big Five measure in which respondents had to make repeated choices between equally desirable personality descriptors may be a potential alternative to traditional Big Five measures in accurately assessing personality traits, especially when lying or biased responding is present. Research into personality inventories found five broad dimensions could explain most variation in human personality and temperament, Other models, like HEXACO, supplement the big five traits with additional variables. Factor analysis, the statistical method used to identify the dimensional structure of observed variables, lacks a universally recognized basis for choosing among solutions with different numbers of factors. A five factor solution depends on some degree of interpretation by the analyst. A larger number of factors may underlie these five factors. This has led to disputes about the "true" number of factors. Big Five proponents have responded that although other solutions may be viable in a single data set, only the five-factor structure consistently replicates across different studies. Block argues that the use of factor analysis as the exclusive paradigm for conceptualizing personality is too limited. Some research suggests that the Big Five should not be conceived of as dichotomies (such as extraversion vs. introversion) but as continua. Each individual has the capacity to move along each dimension as circumstances (social or temporal) change. Someone is therefore not simply on one end of each trait dichotomy but is a blend of both, exhibiting some characteristics more often than others: DeYoung proposed a model where each of the Big Five personality traits contains two separate, but correlated, aspects reflecting a level of personality below the broad domains but above the many facet scales also making up part of the Big Five. The aspects are labelled as follows: Volatility and Withdrawal for Neuroticism; Enthusiasm and Assertiveness for Extraversion; Intellect and Openness for Openness to Experience; Industriousness and Orderliness for Conscientiousness; and Compassion and Politeness for Agreeableness. Orthogonality is viewed as desirable by some researchers because it minimizes redundancy between the dimensions. This is particularly important when the goal of a study is to provide a comprehensive description of personality with as few variables as possible. Cheung, van de Vijver, and Leong (2011) suggest that the Openness factor is particularly unsupported in Asian countries and that a different fifth factor is identified. Attempts to replicate the Big Five have succeeded in some countries but not in others. Some research suggests, for instance, that Hungarians do not have a single agreeableness factor. Other researchers have found evidence for agreeableness but not for other factors. There may be debate as to what counts as personality and what does not and the nature of the questions in the survey greatly influence outcome. Multiple particularly broad question databases have failed to produce the Big Five as the top five traits. The structure, manifestations, and development of the Big Five in childhood and adolescence have been studied using a variety of methods, including parent- and teacher-ratings, preadolescent and adolescent self- and peer-ratings, More specifically, research suggests that four of the Big Five – namely Extraversion, Neuroticism, Conscientiousness, and Agreeableness – reliably describe personality differences in childhood, adolescence, and adulthood. many researchers have failed to find distinct individual differences in Openness in childhood and early adolescence. Despite these specific differences, the majority of findings suggest that personality traits – particularly Extraversion, Neuroticism, Conscientiousness, and Agreeableness – are evident in childhood and adolescence and are associated with distinct social-emotional patterns of behavior that are largely consistent with adult manifestations of those same personality traits. Despite some preliminary evidence for this "Little Six" model, For example, women consistently report higher Neuroticism, Agreeableness, warmth (an extraversion facet) and openness to feelings, and men often report higher assertiveness (a facet of extraversion) and openness to ideas as assessed by the NEO-PI-R. A study of gender differences in 55 nations using the Big Five Inventory found that women tended to be somewhat higher than men in neuroticism, extraversion, agreeableness, and conscientiousness. The difference in neuroticism was the most prominent and consistent, with significant differences found in 49 of the 55 nations surveyed. Gender differences in personality traits are largest in prosperous, healthy, and more gender-egalitarian nations. The explanation for this, as stated by the researchers of a 2001 paper, is that actions by women in individualistic, egalitarian countries are more likely to be attributed to their personality, rather than being attributed to ascribed gender roles within collectivist, traditional countries. A study using the Project Talent data, which is a large-scale representative survey of American high school students, with 272,003 eligible participants, found statistically significant but very small effects (the average absolute correlation between birth order and personality was .02) of birth order on personality, such that firstborns were slightly more conscientious, dominant, and agreeable, while also being less neurotic and less sociable. Parental socioeconomic status and participant gender had much larger correlations with personality. In 2002, the Journal of Psychology posted a Big Five Personality Trait Difference; where researchers explored the relationship between the five-factor model and the Universal-Diverse Orientation (UDO) in counselor trainees. (Thompson, R., Brossart, D., and Mivielle, A., 2002). UDO is known as one social attitude that produces a strong awareness and/or acceptance towards the similarities and differences among individuals. (Miville, M., Romas, J., Johnson, J., and Lon, R. 2002) The study found that the counselor trainees that are more open to the idea of creative expression (a facet of Openness to Experience, Openness to Aesthetics) among individuals are more likely to work with a diverse group of clients, and feel comfortable in their role. Heritability to determine how much heritable and environmental factors contribute to the Big Five personality traits. A 1996 behavioural genetics study of twins suggested that heritability (the degree of variation in a trait within a population that is due to genetic variation in that population) and environmental factors both influence all five factors to the same degree. Among four twin studies examined in 2003, the mean percentage for heritability was calculated for each personality and it was concluded that heritability influenced the five factors broadly. The self-report measures were as follows: openness to experience was estimated to have a 57% genetic influence, extraversion 54%, conscientiousness 49%, neuroticism 48%, and agreeableness 42%. Non-humans The Big Five personality traits have been assessed in some non-human species but methodology is debatable. In one series of studies, human ratings of chimpanzees using a scale designed for non-human apes, revealed factors of extraversion, conscientiousness and agreeableness– as well as an additional factor of dominance–across hundreds of chimpanzees in zoological parks, a large naturalistic sanctuary, and a research laboratory. Neuroticism and openness factors were found in an original zoo sample, but were not replicated in a new zoo sample or in other settings (perhaps reflecting the design of the assessment scale). A study review found that markers for the three dimensions extraversion, neuroticism, and agreeableness were found most consistently across different species, followed by openness; only chimpanzees showed markers for conscientious behavior. A study completed in 2020 concluded that dolphins have some similar personality traits to humans. Both are large brained intelligent animals but have evolved separately for millions of years. == Applications and uses ==

The Big Five model has become a dominant framework in contemporary personality psychology. Its wide acceptance stems from strong empirical support and its practical utility in both research and applied settings. However, its applicability is not universal, and several methodological and conceptual criticisms limit its effectiveness in certain contexts. Clinical psychology and psychopathology Dementia Some diseases cause changes in personality. For example, although gradual memory impairment is the hallmark feature of Alzheimer's disease, a systematic review of personality changes in Alzheimer's disease by Robins Wahlin and Byrne, published in 2011, found systematic and consistent trait changes mapped to the Big Five. The largest change observed was a decrease in conscientiousness. The next most significant changes were an increase in Neuroticism and decrease in Extraversion, but Openness and Agreeableness were also decreased. These changes in personality could assist with early diagnosis. A study published in 2023 found that the Big Five personality traits may also influence the quality of life experienced by people with Alzheimer's disease and other dementias, post diagnosis. In this study people with dementia with lower levels of Neuroticism self-reported higher quality of life than those with higher levels of Neuroticism while those with higher levels of the other four traits self-reported higher quality of life than those with lower levels of these traits. This suggests that as well as assisting with early diagnosis, the Big Five personality traits could help identify people with dementia potentially more vulnerable to adverse outcomes and inform personalized care planning and interventions. Personality disorders , there were over fifty published studies relating the FFM to personality disorders. Since that time, quite a number of additional studies have expanded on this research base and provided further empirical support for understanding the DSM personality disorders in terms of the FFM domains. Beyond simply predicting symptoms, the Five-Factor Model has been formally proposed as a foundational framework for the classification of personality disorders within the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5), offering a dimensional approach to diagnosis alongside traditional categorical models. This proposal underscores its growing acceptance and utility in clinical psychology for understanding and assessing personality pathology. In her review of the personality disorder literature published in 2007, Lee Anna Clark asserted that "the five-factor model of personality is widely accepted as representing the higher-order structure of both normal and abnormal personality traits". However, other researchers disagree that this model is widely accepted (see the section Critique below) and suggest that it simply replicates early temperament research. Noticeably, FFM publications never compare their findings to temperament models even though temperament and mental disorders (especially personality disorders) are thought to be based on the same neurotransmitter imbalances, just to varying degrees. The five-factor model was claimed to significantly predict all ten personality disorder symptoms and outperform the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) in the prediction of borderline, avoidant, and dependent personality disorder symptoms. However, most predictions related to an increase in Neuroticism and a decrease in Agreeableness, and therefore did not differentiate between the disorders very well. Common mental disorders Converging evidence from several nationally representative studies has established three classes of mental disorders which are especially common in the general population: Depressive disorders (e.g., major depressive disorder (MDD), dysthymic disorder), anxiety disorders (e.g., generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), panic disorder, agoraphobia, specific phobia, and social phobia), The Five Factor personality profiles of users of different drugs may be different. For example, the typical profile for heroin users is {\rm N}\Uparrow, {\rm O}\Uparrow, {\rm A}\Downarrow, {\rm C}\Downarrow, whereas for ecstasy users the high level of N is not expected but E is higher: {\rm E}\Uparrow, {\rm O}\Uparrow, {\rm A}\Downarrow, {\rm C}\Downarrow. A large-scale meta-analysis (n > 75,000) examining the relationship between all of the Big Five personality traits and common mental disorders found that low conscientiousness yielded consistently strong effects for each common mental disorder examined (i.e., MDD, dysthymic disorder, GAD, PTSD, panic disorder, agoraphobia, social phobia, specific phobia, and SUD). This finding parallels research on physical health, which has established that conscientiousness is the strongest personality predictor of reduced mortality, and is highly negatively correlated with making poor health choices. In regards to the other personality domains, the meta-analysis found that all common mental disorders examined were defined by high neuroticism, most exhibited low extraversion, only SUD was linked to agreeableness (negatively), and no disorders were associated with Openness. Five major models have been posed to explain the nature of the relationship between personality and mental illness. There is currently no single "best model", as each of them has received at least some empirical support. These models are not mutually exclusive – more than one may be operating for a particular individual and various mental disorders may be explained by different models. • The Vulnerability/Risk Model: According to this model, personality contributes to the onset or etiology of various common mental disorders. In other words, pre-existing personality traits either cause the development of CMDs directly or enhance the impact of causal risk factors. There is strong support for neuroticism being a robust vulnerability factor. An example of this relationship would be a heightened likelihood of committing suicide in a depressed individual who also has low levels of constraint. The dimensional trait models of the ICD‐11 and DSM‐5 Section III were explicitly made consistent with the FFM. The FFM is also the personality and temperament foundation for the Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology. Career, education, and life transitions Personality can sometimes be flexible and measuring the big five personality for individuals as they enter certain stages of life may predict their educational identity. Recent studies have suggested the likelihood of an individual's personality affecting their educational identity. Academic achievement Personality plays an important role in academic achievement. A study of Israeli high-school students found that those in the gifted program systematically scored higher on openness and lower on neuroticism than those not in the gifted program. While not a measure of the Big Five, gifted students also reported less state anxiety than students not in the gifted program. Another study found that GPA and exam performance are both predicted by conscientiousness while neuroticism is negatively related to academic success. Learning styles Learning styles have been described as "enduring ways of thinking and processing information". Thus it is premature, at best, to conclude that the evidence links the Big Five to "learning styles", or "learning styles" to learning itself. However, the APS report also suggested that all existing learning styles have not been exhausted and that there could exist learning styles worthy of being included in educational practices. There are studies that conclude that personality and thinking styles may be intertwined in ways that link thinking styles to the Big Five personality traits. There is no general consensus on the number or specifications of particular learning styles, but there have been many different proposals. As one example, Schmeck, Ribich, and Ramanaiah (1997) defined four types of learning styles: • synthesis analysis • methodical study • fact retention • elaborative processing When all four facets are implicated within the classroom, they will each likely improve academic achievement. A study of 308 undergraduates who completed the Five Factor Inventory Processes and reported their GPA suggested that conscientiousness and agreeableness have a positive relationship with all types of learning styles (synthesis-analysis, methodical study, fact retention, and elaborative processing), whereas neuroticism shows an inverse relationship. Moreover, extraversion and openness were proportional to elaborative processing. The Big Five personality traits accounted for 14% of the variance in GPA, suggesting that personality traits make some contributions to academic performance. Furthermore, reflective learning styles (synthesis-analysis and elaborative processing) were able to mediate the relationship between openness and GPA. These results indicate that intellectual curiosity significantly enhances academic performance if students combine their scholarly interest with thoughtful information processing. By identifying learning strategies in individuals, learning and academic achievement can be improved, and a deeper understanding of information processing can be gained. This model asserts that students develop either agentic/shallow processing or reflective/deep processing. Deep processors are more often found to be more conscientious, intellectually open, and extraverted than shallow processors. Deep processing is associated with appropriate study methods (methodical study) and a stronger ability to analyze information (synthesis analysis), whereas shallow processors prefer structured fact retention learning styles and are better suited for elaborative processing. Conscientiousness and neuroticism also influence individuals to perform well in front of others for a sense of credit and reward, while agreeableness forces individuals to avoid this strategy of learning. Some authors suggested that Big Five personality traits combined with learning styles can help predict some variations in the academic performance and the academic motivation of an individual which can then influence their academic achievements. This may be seen because individual differences in personality represent stable approaches to information processing. For instance, conscientiousness has consistently emerged as a stable predictor of success in exam performance, largely because conscientious students experience fewer study delays. Occupation and personality fit Researchers have long suggested that work is more likely to be fulfilling to the individual and beneficial to society when there is alignment between the person and their occupation. For instance, software programmers and scientists often rank high on Openness to experience and tend to be intellectually curious, think in symbols and abstractions, and find repetition boring. Psychologists and sociologists rank higher on Agreeableness and Openness than economists and jurists. Work success Research has demonstrated that the big five personality traits correlate with important work outcomes such as job performance, training proficiency, and turnover. For example, an early meta-analysis found an estimated population correlation of 0.26 between conscientiousness and supervisory ratings of job performance. These results are consistent with research suggesting that personality traits predict a broad range of important life outcomes. Subsequent literature has suggested that correlations obtained by psychometric personality researchers were actually very respectable by comparative standards, and that the economic value of even incremental increases in prediction accuracy was exceptionally large, given the vast difference in performance by those who occupy complex job positions. One way to explain this controversy is that there is little doubt that personality predicts a broad array of important outcomes Research has suggested that individuals who are considered leaders typically exhibit lower amounts of neurotic traits, maintain higher levels of openness, balanced levels of conscientiousness, and balanced levels of extraversion. Further studies have linked professional burnout to neuroticism, and extraversion to enduring positive work experience. Studies have linked national innovation, leadership, and ideation to openness to experience and conscientiousness. Occupational self-efficacy has also been shown to be positively correlated with conscientiousness and negatively correlated with neuroticism. Others have suggested that low agreeableness and high neuroticism are traits more related to abusive supervision. Openness is positively related to proactivity at the individual and the organizational levels and is negatively related to team and organizational proficiency. These effects were found to be completely independent of one another. This is also counter-conscientious and has a negative correlation to Conscientiousness. Agreeableness is negatively related to individual task proactivity. Typically this is associated with lower career success and being less able to cope with conflict. However there are benefits to the Agreeableness personality trait including higher subjective well-being; more positive interpersonal interactions and helping behavior; lower conflict; lower deviance and turnover. Extraversion results in greater leadership emergence and effectiveness; as well as higher job and life satisfaction. However extraversion can lead to more impulsive behaviors, more accidents and lower performance in certain jobs. Neuroticism is negatively related to all forms of work role performance. This increases the chance of engaging in risky behaviors. Similarly, Wright investigated the influence of Big Five on the soft skills in the remote workplace, such as effort and cooperation. She delineated soft skills into two different groups, Task Performance and Contextual Performance, with each having three subgroups. Task Performance was more aligned with specific job responsibilities and handling cognitive tasks associated with their job, and the three subgroups were Job Knowledge, Organizational Skills, and Efficiency. Wright found that Job Knowledge did not correlate with any Big Five traits, Organizational Skill is only significantly correlated with Conscientiousness (T=7.952, P=.001), and Efficiency is significantly correlated with Conscientiousness (T=3.8, P=.001), and Neuroticism(T=-2.6, P=.008), which it is a negative correlation. Contextual Performance is concerned with non-job core requirements, such as perceived effort and job cooperation, with the subgroups being Persistent Effort, Cooperation, and Organizational Conscientiousness. Wright found that Persistent Effort is positively correlated with Openness(t=2.4, P=.014) and Conscientiousness (T=3.1, P=.002), and negatively correlated with Neuroticism (T=-3.2, P=.001). Cooperation was positively correlated with Extraversion (t=2.6, P=.009) and Conscientiousness (t=2.82, P=.005), as well as Organizational Conscientiousness was positively correlated with Agreeableness (t=4.059, P<.001) and Conscientiousness (t=4.511, P<.001) On another tack, scientists wanted to discover if the Big Five has any effect on remote worker burnout, and the effect that different Big Five traits have on worker health and engagement. Olsen et al found that when remote work days are increased, individuals high in extraversion start to struggle with work engagement (β=-.094, P<.03), and individuals with higher neuroticism are more likely to have poorer health (p=-.23), work engagement (p=-.18), and an increase in sick leaves(p=.38). However, Olsen found that conscientiousness, coupled with an increase in remote work days, can lead to a decrease in general health, contrary to all of the benefits it has listed above. Similarly, Para et al. found that individuals with higher Neuroticism (β=.138, p<.05) also tend to have higher Remote Work Exhaustion (RWE). They also found that conscientiousness(β=-.336, p<.001) and agreeableness (β=-.267, p<.001) were negatively correlated with RWE, meaning that they were more resilient against RWE over large spans of remote work days. The author attributed conscientious individuals to being hard workers and dependable, while agreeableness was attributed to the situation the study was completed under, which was the at-home quarantine due to COVID-19, stating individuals with high agreeableness did well with the forced contact due to quarantine, which transferred over to their work. Cross-cultural and international research Research into the Big Five has been pursued in a variety of languages and cultures, such as German, Chinese, and South Asian. For example, Thompson has claimed to find the Big Five structure across several cultures using an international English language scale. Studies of the Revised NEO Personality Inventory, which has been translated into more than forty languages and dialects, have found an approximation to the five-factor structure in more than thirty cultures examined. These findings do not rule out additional personality traits specific to individual cultures, and the factors may not be equally important in every culture. For example, Openness to Experience might be less important in traditional cultures. However, while genotypic temperament trait dimensions might appear across different cultures, the phenotypic expression of personality traits differs profoundly across different cultures as a function of the different socio-cultural conditioning and experiential learning that takes place within different cultural settings. Surveys in studies are often online surveys of college students (compare WEIRD bias). Results do not always replicate when run on other populations or in other languages. Different surveys do not always measure the same 5 factors. Benet-Martínez and Karakitapoglu-Aygün (2003) arrived at similar results. Recent work has found relationships between Geert Hofstede's cultural factors, Individualism, Power Distance, Masculinity, and Uncertainty Avoidance, with the average Big Five scores in a country. For instance, the degree to which a country values individualism correlates with its average extraversion, whereas people living in cultures which are accepting of large inequalities in their power structures tend to score somewhat higher on conscientiousness. A 2017 study has found that countries' average personality trait levels are correlated with their political systems. Countries with higher average trait Openness tended to have more democratic institutions, an association that held even after factoring out other relevant influences such as economic development. One limitation highlighted by cross-cultural research is that studies supporting the universality of the Five-Factor Model are often from 2002 or older, which can influence current results. Methodological concerns may also arise from the reliance on Western-Developed instruments in some cross-cultural studies, affecting the validity of findings in diverse cultural contexts. On the opposite end of the spectrum, a strong correlation was identified between high scores in Openness to Experience and a left-leaning ideology. While the traits of agreeableness, extraversion, and neuroticism have not been consistently linked to either conservative or liberal ideology, with studies producing mixed results, such traits are promising when analyzing the strength of an individual's party identification. Though the effect sizes are small: Of the Big Five personality traits high Agreeableness, Conscientiousness and Extraversion relate to general religiosity, while Openness relate negatively to religious fundamentalism and positively to spirituality. High Neuroticism may be related to extrinsic religiosity, whereas intrinsic religiosity and spirituality reflect Emotional Stability. Andrew H. Schwartz analyzed 700 million words, phrases, and topic instances collected from the Facebook messages of 75,000 volunteers, who also took standard personality tests, and found striking variations in language with personality, gender, and age. China A 2021 analysis by Princeton University academic Rory Truex of survey results showed that in China, high neuroticism and low conscientiousness, agreeableness and openness to experience correlated with discontent with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), while CCP members on average had very high levels of extraversion, agreeableness, and conscientiousness. Russia According to a 2017 research, higher agreeableness and conscientiousness and lower neuroticism in Russia is correlated with higher support for President Vladimir Putin, while lower agreeableness and conscientiousness and higher neuroticism is correlated with discontent with him; the study did not find major differences in openness to experience and extraversion. Lifespan development Temperament and personality in children Some consider the big five model as inappropriate for studying early childhood, as language is not yet developed. Some believe that early childhood temperaments may become adolescent and adult personality traits as individuals' basic genetic characteristics interact with their changing environments to various degrees. Therefore, it is suggested that temperament (neurochemically based individual differences) should be kept as an independent concept for further studies and not be confused with personality (culturally based individual differences, reflected in the origin of the word "persona" (Lat) as a "social mask"). Moreover, temperament refers to dynamic features of behaviour (energetic, tempo, sensitivity, and emotionality-related), whereas personality is to be considered a psycho-social construct comprising the content characteristics of human behaviour (such as values, attitudes, habits, preferences, personal history, self-image). Child extraversion/positive emotionality In Big Five studies, extraversion has been associated with surgency. These differences in turn predict social and physical activity during later childhood and may represent, or be associated with, the behavioral activation system. Salient differences in activity reliably manifest in infancy, persist through adolescence, and fade as motor activity decreases in adulthood or potentially develops into talkativeness. • Dominance: Children with high dominance tend to influence the behavior of others, particularly their peers, to obtain desirable rewards or outcomes. Such children are generally skilled at organizing activities and games and deceiving others by controlling their nonverbal behavior. • Shyness: Children with high shyness are generally socially withdrawn, nervous, and inhibited around strangers. Similar pattern was described in temperament longitudinal studies of shyness During middle childhood, the distinction between low sociability and high shyness becomes more pronounced, particularly as children gain greater control over how and where they spend their time. Development during childhood and adolescence Research on the Big Five, and personality in general, has focused primarily on individual differences in adulthood, rather than in childhood and adolescence, and often include temperament traits. Recently, there has been growing recognition of the need to study child and adolescent personality trait development in order to understand how traits develop and change throughout the lifespan. Temperament often refers to early behavioral and affective characteristics that are thought to be driven primarily by genes. most researchers contend that there are significant psychological differences between children that are associated with relatively stable, distinct, and salient behavior patterns. similarly to longitudinal research in temperament for the same traits. More recent research and meta-analyses of previous studies, however, indicate that change occurs in all five traits at various points in the lifespan. The new research shows evidence for a maturation effect. On average, levels of agreeableness and conscientiousness typically increase with time, whereas extraversion, neuroticism, and openness tend to decrease. Research has also demonstrated that changes in Big Five personality traits depend on the individual's current stage of development. For example, levels of agreeableness and conscientiousness demonstrate a negative trend during childhood and early adolescence before trending upwards during late adolescence and into adulthood. In addition to these group effects, there are individual differences: different people demonstrate unique patterns of change at all stages of life. Previous research has found evidence that most adults become more agreeable and conscientious and less neurotic as they age. This has been referred to as the maturation effect. Mean-level consistency indicates whether groups increase or decrease on certain traits throughout the lifetime. Well-being Physical health To examine how the Big Five personality traits are related to subjective health outcomes (positive and negative mood, physical symptoms, and general health concern) and objective health conditions (chronic illness, serious illness, and physical injuries), Jasna Hudek-Knezevic and Igor Kardum conducted a study from a sample of 822 healthy volunteers (438 women and 384 men). Out of the Big Five personality traits, they found neuroticism most related to worse subjective health outcomes and optimistic control to better subjective health outcomes. When relating to objective health conditions, connections drawn were presented weak, except that neuroticism significantly predicted chronic illness, whereas optimistic control was more closely related to physical injuries caused by accident. In an elderly Japanese sample, conscientiousness, extraversion, and openness were related to lower risk of mortality. Higher conscientiousness is associated with lower obesity risk. In already obese individuals, higher conscientiousness is associated with a higher likelihood of becoming non-obese over a five-year period. Hope Studies conducted on college students have concluded that hope, which is linked to agreeableness, conscientiousness, neuroticism, and openness, Romantic relationships Various researchers have explored the association of Big Five and romantic relationships in terms of relationship satisfaction. A meta-analysis showed that there was a higher level of marital satisfaction if their spouse showed lower levels in neuroticism (.22), but higher levels in agreeableness (.15) and conscientiousness(.12). There was only a weak correlation, but it was the same level of satisfaction for both genders. Much like the previous meta-analysis, a study on self-reported big five traits showed that those with higher levels of agreeableness, emotional stability, conscientiousness, and extraversion had higher levels of marital satisfaction(.20). That same study found that there was little to no difference in marital satisfaction if the two partners had similar or different levels of trait personality. O'Brien and colleagues examined the association of Big Five and romantic relationships by investigating participants' commitment levels. The three levels of commitment are affective commitment (emotional attachment), continuance commitment (financial considerations), and normative commitment (the ethical and moral responsibilities). The commitment levels were based on the taxonomy of organizational commitment and the conceptual model of marital commitment of Johnson and Johnson et al. 122 Individuals currently in a committed relationship responded to a 50-item personality questionnaire from the International Personality Item Pool (IPIP, 2006), and a questionnaire on commitment modified from Allen. examined the association of Big Five (BFI-S) and romantic relationships through major life events across years in 2005, 2009, 2013, and 2017 with a sample of 49,932 participants in Germany. Those major life events are (1) moving in with a partner, (2) getting married, (3) getting separated, and (4) getting divorced. Researchers also examined whether the Big Five personality traits play a significant role in romantic relationships. Along the spectrum of a person's life satisfaction, marital satisfaction (one of romantic relationships) is shown to be stronger than job satisfaction, health satisfaction, and social satisfaction. The key findings from Asselmann and Sprecht showed that more extraverted individuals were more likely to move in with a partner. Less agreeable and less emotionally stable women were more likely to move in with a partner. Men were more extraverted in the years before moving in and became gradually more open and more conscientious after moving in. Less agreeable men were more likely to get married. Individuals who got married became less open in the first three years after the marriage. Women became more extraverted after being separated. Men with lower emotional stability and women who were both less emotionally stable and more extraverted were more prone to experiencing relationship breakups. Individuals who got divorced were less agreeable in the years before the divorce. Personality may change after specific events. For example, both men and women who experienced separation or divorce became less emotionally stable in the following years. The results implicated that total agreeableness was not a guarantee for long-lasting romantic relationships, as less agreeable individuals were more likely to experience both positive and negative major romantic events. == Critique ==

The Big Five model has been subjected to considerable critical scrutiny in a number of published studies. This was followed by a number of published critical replies from Block. Dan P. McAdams has called the Big Five a "psychology of the stranger", because they refer to traits that are relatively easy to observe in a stranger; other aspects of personality that are more privately held or more context-dependent are excluded from the Big Five. Block has pointed to several less-recognized but successful efforts to specify aspects of character not subsumed by the model. In his 1968 book Personality and Assessment, Walter Mischel asserted that personality instruments could not predict behavior with a correlation of more than 0.3. Social psychologists like Mischel argued that attitudes and behavior were not stable, but varied with the situation. Scientists such as Mischel claimed predicting behavior from personality instruments was impossible. However, during the 1980s, emerging methodologies increasingly confirmed personality theories. Though generally failing to predict single instances of behavior, researchers found that they could predict patterns of behavior by aggregating large numbers of observations. As a result, correlations between personality and behavior increased substantially, and it became clear that "personality" did in fact exist. The Big Five is not theory-driven but a statistical investigation of certain descriptors that tend to cluster. The model has been replicated in several languages, and the ICD and DSM models for personality disorders are shifting toward the FFM. ==See also ==