Status-driven risk taking and the major dimensions of personality

Ashton, Michael C.; Lee, Kibeom; Pozzebon, Julie A.; Visser, Beth A.; Worth, Narnia

doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2010.09.003

Cited by 44 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Importantly, Ashton and Lee (, ) describe individuals low in Honesty‐Humility as striving for power and social status, which is substantiated by negative correlations between this trait and materialistic tendencies (Ashton & Lee, ), the motivational value of power (Pozzebon & Ashton, ), and status‐driven risk taking (Ashton, Lee, Pozzebon, Visser, & Worth, ). Moreover, several studies have indicated a negative relation between Honesty‐Humility and social dominance orientation (e.g., Lee et al, ), a social attitude reflecting “a preference for social hierarchy and inequality” (p. 170).…”

Section: Multiple Response Processesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dissociating Indifferent, Directional, and Extreme Responding in Personality Data: Applying the Three‐Process Model to Self‐ and Observer Reports

Zettler

Lang

Hülsheger

et al. 2015

Journal of Personality

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research suggests that respondents vary in their tendency to use the response scale of typical (Likert-style) questionnaires. We study the nature of the response process by applying a recently introduced item response theory modeling procedure, the three-process model, to data of self- and observer reports of personality traits. The three-process model captures indifferent, directional, and extreme responding. Substantively, we hypothesize that, and test whether, trait Honesty-Humility is negatively linked to extreme responding. We applied the three-process model to personality data of 577 dyads (self- and observer reports of the HEXACO Personality Inventory-Revised; Lee & Ashton, ) of Dutch and German undergraduate respondents. First, we provide evidence that indifferent, directional, and extreme responding can be separated from each other in personality data through the use of the three-process model. Second, we show that the various response processes show a pattern of correlations across traits and rating sources which is in line with the idea that indifferent and extreme responding are person-specific tendencies, whereas directional responding is content-specific. Third, we report findings supporting the hypothesis that Honesty-Humility is negatively linked to extreme responding. In Likert-based personality data, applying the three-process model can unveil individual differences in the response process.

show abstract

Section: Multiple Response Processesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dissociating Indifferent, Directional, and Extreme Responding in Personality Data: Applying the Three‐Process Model to Self‐ and Observer Reports

Zettler

Lang

Hülsheger

et al. 2015

Journal of Personality

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition to conscientiousness, which has been robustly found to be inversely associated with risk taking in Big 5 models, honesty/humility has demonstrated considerable predictive validity for risky, unethical, and otherwise counterproductive behaviors, making it a potential candidate for predicting MPUWD . Honesty/humility has been associated with the dark triad traits (i.e., psychopathy, machiavellianism, and narcissism), which have also been linked with impulsivity, sensation‐seeking behaviors, and risky choices .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Who is a Distracted Driver? Associations between Mobile Phone Use while Driving, Domain‐Specific Risk Taking, and Personality

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mobile phone use while driving (MPUWD) is an increasingly common form of distracted driving. Given its widespread prevalence, it is important for researchers to identify factors that may predict who is more likely to engage in this risky behavior. The current study investigates associations between MPUWD risk behaviors, domain-specific risk perceptions, and broad personality dimensions. An Italian community sample (n = 804) completed a survey regarding MPUWD risk perceptions and engagement in MPUWD, in addition to the HEXACO-PI-R, a broad six-factor personality inventory (honesty-humility, emotionality, extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, openness to experience), and the DOSPERT, a six-factor domain-specific self-report risk-taking measure (health/safety, recreational, social, ethical, gambling, and investment). With respect to domain-specific risk taking, greater frequency of SMS use while driving most strongly was associated with greater risk taking for the health/safety, gambling, and ethical risk domains. Further, greater honesty-humility and conscientiousness, two traits related to cognitive control and risk behaviors, and to a lesser extent openness to experience, were associated with less frequent MPUWD, and positively associated with MPUWD risk perceptions. With growing public safety concern surrounding MPUWD, understanding associated personality factors is not only important for identifying psychological mechanisms underlying risk behavior, but also for more effective prevention and intervention programs.

show abstract

“…Along with the drive to attain power, a strong motivation to be very rich is likely to characterize people who are low in Honesty–Humility and high in the Dark Triad. Some studies have already found that persons low in Honesty–Humility were more likely to make unethical business decisions (Ashton & Lee, ; Lee, Ashton, Morrison, Cordery, & Dunlop, ), to take major physical risks for the attainment of personal financial gains (Ashton, Lee, Pozzebon, Visser, & Worth, ), or to adopt selfish behaviours in economic experiments such as the dictator game, the ultimatum game, or other public goods games (Hilbig & Zettler, ; Hilbig, Zettler, & Heydasch, ; Perugini, Tan, & Zizzo, in press).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sex, Power, and Money: Prediction from the Dark Triad and Honesty–Humility

et al. 2013

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Data were collected from two undergraduate student samples to examine (i) the relations of the ‘Dark Triad’ variables (Machiavellianism, Psychopathy, and Narcissism) with the HEXACO personality dimensions, as well as (ii) the ability of the aforementioned characteristics and of the Big Five personality factors to predict outcome variables related to sex, power, and money. Results indicated that the common variance of the Dark Triad was very highly correlated with low Honesty–Humility and that the unique variance of each of the Dark Triad variables also showed theoretically meaningful relations with the other five HEXACO factors. Furthermore, the Dark Triad and Honesty–Humility were strong predictors of three domains of outcome variables—Sex (short‐term mating tendencies and sexual quid pro quos), Power (Social Dominance Orientation and desire for power), and Money (conspicuous consumption and materialism)—that were not well predicted by the dimensions of the Big Five. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

Status-driven risk taking and the major dimensions of personality

Cited by 44 publications

References 13 publications

Dissociating Indifferent, Directional, and Extreme Responding in Personality Data: Applying the Three‐Process Model to Self‐ and Observer Reports

Dissociating Indifferent, Directional, and Extreme Responding in Personality Data: Applying the Three‐Process Model to Self‐ and Observer Reports

Who is a Distracted Driver? Associations between Mobile Phone Use while Driving, Domain‐Specific Risk Taking, and Personality

Sex, Power, and Money: Prediction from the Dark Triad and Honesty–Humility

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About