Longitudinal stability of personality traits: A multitrait–multimethod–multioccasion analysis.

Abstract

The longitudinal stability of personality was investigated in a group of several hundred adults who were rated by themselves, their marriage partners, and their acquaintances in 1935-1938 and by themselves and their marriage partners in 1954-1955. For both men and women, there were very similar factorial structures in all five sources of ratings. Individual differences in neuroticism, social extraversion, and impulse control had reasonably high levels of longitudinal stability over a 19-year period. Both the synchronic and diachronic correlations converged across methods and discriminated among traits. Self-report personality inventory data available in 1935-1938 and 1954-1955 provided corroborating evidence of the longitudinal and methodological robustness of personality traits. In data gathered on the same panel in 1980-1981, the questionnaire and the life history correlates of neuroticism and social extraversion displayed patterns indicative of temporal stability, methodological convergence, and discrimination among constructs. The data of this longitudinal study carried out over five decades strongly indicate that there is a set of personality traits that are generalizable across methods of assessment and are stable throughout adulthood.

A new Big Five: Fundamental principles for an integrative science of personality.

“…Second, data from a number of longitudinal studies were published in the 1980s and 1990s showing long-term stability in individual differences for personality traits (Conley, 1985;Costa & McCrae, 1994;Roberts & DelVecchio, 2000). Test-retest correlations on self-report trait scales over periods of the adult life course for as long as 30 years were so robust that one set of authors suggested that William James may have been close to right when he asserted long ago that personality is "set like plaster" after about age 30 (Costa & McCrae, 1994).…”

Individual behavioral phenotypes: An integrative meta‐theoretical framework. Why “behavioral syndromes” are not analogs of “personality”

“…For example, great tits were studied from juvenile phases to adulthood spanning 2 to 3 year intervals . Humans were studied from childhood to adulthood spanning ages 3 to 21 (Caspi, 2000); so far the longest studied time spans cover up to 45 to 50 years (Conley, 1984(Conley, , 1985Haan, Millsap, & Hartka, 1986;Soldz & Vaillant, 1999). Given the species differences in lifetimes, stabilities from 6 through 20 years of age in rhesus macaques (Suomi et al, 1996) cover similar extended periods of life.…”

“…Variable-and individual-oriented analyses allow for systematic study, for example, of rank-order stability, within-individual and population mean level stability, individual profile stability, and stability of profile type membership (Akse, Hale III, Engels, Raaijkmakers, & Meeus, 2007;Conley, 1985;Biesanz, West, & Kwok, 2003). Such analyses will shed more light on fundamental issues in individual development across the life span in different species (Block, 1971;Magnusson, 1988;Mervielde & Asendorpf, 2000;van Aken, 2008).…”

Personality and Internet usage: A large-scale representative study of young adults

“…They have been shown to be robust across a range of different frameworks, populations, and cultures (Barrick & Mount, 1991;Conley, 1983). The Big Five characterizes personality using five different traits (McCrea & Costa, 1999).…”