2007
DOI: 10.1016/j.paid.2006.10.004
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Exploring the interplay between personality dimensions: A comparison of the typological and the dimensional approach in stress research

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

1
21
0
4

Year Published

2007
2007
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

2
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 28 publications
(26 citation statements)
references
References 152 publications
(213 reference statements)
1
21
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…We have also examined more closely what can predict stress among junior house officers: as anticipated, both inadequate support from colleagues and sleep deprivation play a role as well as perceived medical recording skills 52) . Nonetheless, such job stress is primarily connected to particular personality traits and personality types 52,53) . A link has also been shown between interpersonal problems and occupational stress among Norwegian physicians 54) .…”
Section: Work and Mental Distressmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We have also examined more closely what can predict stress among junior house officers: as anticipated, both inadequate support from colleagues and sleep deprivation play a role as well as perceived medical recording skills 52) . Nonetheless, such job stress is primarily connected to particular personality traits and personality types 52,53) . A link has also been shown between interpersonal problems and occupational stress among Norwegian physicians 54) .…”
Section: Work and Mental Distressmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…), whereas Extraversion predisposes them to experience positive affect (Watson et al, 1988). Rovik et al (2007) concluded that the combination of the personality dimensions of Neuroticism, Extraversion, and Conscientiousness may be important in understanding an individual's reaction to stress.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The negative relationship between conscientiousness and risk-10 taking behaviors could be explained by several relevant features of low conscientious people 11 such as carelessness, lack of self-control, impulsivity and a lack of respect for authority and 12 social order (Clarke & Robertson, 2005). 13 Although it is reasonably established that conscientiousness is negatively related to 14 risk-taking (Clarke & Robertson, 2005;Vollrath & Torgersen, 2002) little is known about 15 how the personality factors of extraversion and neuroticism might moderate this association 16 (Røvik et al, 2007). The examination of such interactions is at the heart of the typological 17 approach, which Vollrath and Torgersen (2002) used to examine personality differences in 18 relation to high-risk health behaviors (tobacco, alcohol, drug consumption; high-risk sexual 19 behaviors).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%