Evolution, the Five‐Factor Model, and Levels of Personality

Abstract

This article interprets the five-factor model as subsuming variation in normative, species-typical systems with adaptive functions in the human environment of evolutionary adaptedness. It is argued that the evolutionary logic of personality systems is apparent in the patteming of mean sex differences in personality. Personality systems are conceptualized as evolved motivational systems with an affective core. The evolved motive dispositions at the core of personality anchor a hierarchy of levels of cognitive and behavioral functioning aimed at attaining or avoiding the affective states central to these personality systems. Personality systems are seen as often in dynamic conflict within individuals and as highly compartmentalized in their functioning between settings. While variation iti personality consists of a range of viable strategies for humans, extremes on these systems tend to be maladaptive, although in at least some cases individuals who approach the maladaptive extremes of individual variation may be viewed as engagitig in high-risk evolutionary strategies. Within this wide range of viable strategies, personality variation functions as a resource environment for individuals in the sense that personality variation is evaluated according to the interests of the evaluator.The five-factor model (FFM) emerges from the English lexicon and can be understood as reflecting independent dimensions of human functioning from the point of view of an observer (Goldberg, 1981). The proposal is that the factors identified by the FFM denote variation in a set of semantically linked subsystems which evolved in order to solve adaptive I wish to acknowledge the very useful comments on previous versions of this manuscript made by

Evolved individual differences: Advancing a condition-dependent model of personality

“…The high pole of extraversion in humans, for example, may be conceptualized as an interpersonal strategy that can increase mating opportunities (MacDonald, 2006). High levels of extraversion could lead to increased mating opportunities both directly by engaging potential mates and indirectly by leading to the formation of friendships and social alliances that facilitate increases in status and ascension in the social hierarchy (Denissen & Penke, 2008;Nettle, 2005Nettle, , 2006.…”

Children's Risky Play from an Evolutionary Perspective: The Anti-Phobic Effects of Thrilling Experiences

“…Still, research concludes on boys being far more represented than girls in the willingness to take risks and engage in risky play (Cairns and Cairns, 1994;Ginsburg and Miller, 1982;MacDonald, 1995;Morrongiello and Rennie, 1998;Smith, 1998), intense challenging physical play and rough-and-tumble play (Blurton Jones, 1976;DiPietro, 1981;Eaton and Enns, 1986;Eaton and Yu, 1989;Smith, 1984, 1987;MacDonald, 1998;Pellegrini and Smith, 1998;Power, 2000;Smith, , 2005. Research findings also indicate that boys have a higher injury liability than girls (Boles, Roberts, Brown, and Mayes, 2005;Coppens and Gentry, 1991;Matheny, 1987;Morrongiello and Rennie, 1998;Ordoñana et al, 2008;Rosen and Peterson, 1990;Schwebel, Brezausek, and Belsky, 2006).…”

Personality structure and social style in macaques.

“…Variation in human personality has been explained as adaptations for alternative behavioral strategies (Buss, 1991;MacDonald, 1995;Nettle, 2011), including social behaviors (e.g., mate selection and alliance formation). Given the trait-like persistence of personality and our shared evolutionary history, it is reasonable to expect that such an adaptive explanation could also apply to accounts of personality differences in nonhuman species.…”