Evaluating the Big Five as an organizing framework for commonly used psychological trait scales.

Bainbridge, Timothy F.; Ludeke, Steven G.; Smillie, Luke D.

doi:10.1037/pspp0000395

Cited by 74 publications

(73 citation statements)

References 162 publications

(332 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This model posits that all lower-order personality constructs (e.g., trait aggression) can be appropriately situated under one or more of the five domains (e.g., Lynam & Miller, 2015). Recent empirical work has provided clear evidence that the FFM serves as a clear taxonomy by which lower-order traits (e.g., trait aggression) can be organized (Bainbridge et al, 2021). The traits of the FFM are bipolar in nature, such that a low score on any given personality trait does not simply reflect an absence of that factor, but rather reflects high levels of that trait's opposing end of the spectrum.…”

Section: The Ffm and Trait Aggressionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The tangled webs we wreak: Examining the structure of aggressive personality using psychometric networks

West

Chester

2022

Journal of Personality

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The analyses in this manuscript constitute secondary data analysis as the datasets used were collected for other projects. However, our analysis plan for each dataset was preregistered (Sample 1: https://osf.io/3j4ya, Sample 2: https://osf.io/vuze8, Sample 3: https://osf.io/h9jr5), and is available along with all the code, data needed to replicate our findings, and supplemental documents (https://osf.io/kqxd5/files/).This manuscript is not currently under review or consideration at other publication outlets. We have no conflicts of interest to disclose. Research reported in this publication was supported by the NIAAA under award K01AA026647 (PI: Chester). All data collection procedures were subjected to and approved via ethical review.

show abstract

Section: The Ffm and Trait Aggressionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The tangled webs we wreak: Examining the structure of aggressive personality using psychometric networks

West

Chester

2022

Journal of Personality

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Importantly, it has good test-retest reliability (r=.72), which is relevant to our aim of establishing whether facial expressivity correlates with stable traits. Whether it measures global or narrow personality traits (as hinted at by Credé et al, 2016) is of less concern to our aims, in particular given that the majority of commonly-used scales appear to be facets of the Big Five scale (Bainbridge et al, 2022).…”

Section: Results -Manipulation Checks)mentioning

confidence: 99%

The face in everyday social interaction: social outcomes and personality correlates of facial behaviour

Kavanagh¹,

Whitehouse²,

Waller³

2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Facial behaviour is a central component of social interaction, yet is primarily studied in the absence of a social partner with a heavy focus on static, universal prototypes. Examination of individual variation in facial behaviour embedded within social interaction is essential to understand social function. We conducted a three-part multi-method study to examine how variation in facial behaviour impacts first impression formation, social outcomes during social interaction and perception from third-party observers. We recorded a semi-structured social interaction with fifty-two participants which involved interacting with a confederate via video call across various social contexts. A facial expressivity index was extracted using FACS (facial action coding system), and personality was measured by self-report. A subset of these participants (n=34) also completed tasks in which they attempted to achieve social goals via facial communication. Clips from the video call and the social tasks were then rated by an independent sample of 176 participants. Facial expressivity varied considerably across participants, but little across behavioural contexts. More facially expressive participants were more agreeable, more well-liked, and more successful at negotiating (if they were also more agreeable). Participants who were more facially competent, readable, and perceived as readable were also more well liked. Our findings suggest that facial behaviour could be a stable individual difference, and that it proffers social advantages which may vary depending on personality. These results point towards an affiliative function of facial behaviour.

show abstract

“…These questions withstanding, a drastic cleanup of theoretical constructs is required. A recent study showed that tens of constructs about self-concept, self-efficacy, self-esteem, life satisfaction, mindfulness, need for cognition, intellectual engagement, and so forth can be subsumed under the overall scheme of the Big Five factors as expressions of already extant facets (Bainbridge et al, 2022). The evidence discussed here suggests that an even larger reduction is needed in concern to the predictors of school performance.…”

Section: Integrated Cognition-personality-school Performance Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cognitive and personality predictors of school performance from preschool to secondary school: An overarching model.

Δημητρίου¹,

Spanoudis²,

Christou³

et al. 2023

Psychological Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, existing research investigating how school performance relates to cognitive, selfawareness, language, and personality processes is reviewed. We outline the architecture of the mind, involving a general factor, g, that underlies distinct mental processes (i.e., executive, reasoning, language, cognizance, and personality processes). From preschool to adolescence, g shifts from executive to reasoning and cognizance processes; personality also changes, consolidating in adolescence. There are three major trends in the existing literature: (a) All processes are highly predictive of school achievement if measured alone, each accounting for ∼20% of its variance; (b) when measured together, cognitive processes (executive functions and representational awareness in preschool and fluid intelligence after late primary school) dominate as predictors (over ∼50%), drastically absorbing self-concepts and personality dispositions that drop to ∼3%-5%; and (c) predictive power changes according to the processes forming g at successive levels: attention control and representational awareness in preschool (∼85%); fluid intelligence, language, and working memory in primary school (∼53%); fluid intelligence, language, self-evaluation, and school-specific self-concepts in secondary school (∼70%). Stability and plasticity of personality emerge as predictors in secondary school. A theory of educational priorities is proposed, arguing that (a) executive and awareness processes; (b) information management; and (c) reasoning, self-evaluation, and flexibility in knowledge building must dominate in preschool, primary, and secondary school, respectively.

show abstract

Evaluating the Big Five as an organizing framework for commonly used psychological trait scales.

Cited by 74 publications

References 162 publications

The tangled webs we wreak: Examining the structure of aggressive personality using psychometric networks

The tangled webs we wreak: Examining the structure of aggressive personality using psychometric networks

The face in everyday social interaction: social outcomes and personality correlates of facial behaviour

Cognitive and personality predictors of school performance from preschool to secondary school: An overarching model.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About