The Downsides of Extreme Conscientiousness for Psychological Well‐being: The Role of Obsessive Compulsive Tendencies

Abstract

Although conscientiousness exhibits positive relations with psychological well-being, theoretical and empirical work suggests individuals can be too conscientious, resulting in obsessive-compulsiveness, and therein less positive individual outcomes. However, the potential for curvilinearity between conscientiousness and well-being has been underexplored. We measured 912 subjects on facets of conscientiousness, obsessive-compulsive personality, and well-being variables (life satisfaction, job satisfaction, self-esteem, positive affect, negative affect, work stress). Methods of scoring included traditional sum-scoring, traditional item response theory (IRT), and a relatively new IRT approach. Structural models were estimated to evaluate curvilinearity. Results confirmed the curvilinear relationship between conscientiousness and well-being, and demonstrated that differential facet-level relationships underlie weaker curvilinearity at the general trait level. Consistency was found in the strength of relation between conscientiousness facets with their obsessive-compulsive variants and their contribution to decreased well-being. The most common association was that higher standing on conscientiousness facets was positively related to negative affect. Findings support the idea that extreme standing on facets of conscientiousness more strongly linked to their obsessive-compulsive variants contributed to lower well-being, highlighting the importance of considering alternative functional representations of the relationship between personality and other constructs. Future work should seek to further clarify the link between conscientiousness and negative affect.

Personality traits and maladaptivity: Unipolarity versus bipolarity

“…These results are consistent with meta‐analyses of trait relations to psychopathology (Kotov et al, ; Samuel & Widiger, ), as well as research relating traits to measures of functioning (e.g., Calabrese & Simms, ; Ro & Clark, ). Somewhat unexpected was the lack of evidence for maladaptively high Conscientiousness, which has been indicated via relations to criterion variables (e.g., Carter et al, ; Samuel & Widiger, ), clinician ratings (Samuel & Widiger, ), structural analyses (Wright & Simms, ), and scale development (e.g., Crego, Samuel, & Widiger, ). The present study may have lacked the proper functioning variables (e.g., job satisfaction; Carter et al, ), inadequately measured OCPD, or missed a result that would be more evident at the facet level (Carter et al, ).…”

“…For instance, the latter two questions can inform whether additional conceptual and measurement resolution is needed to describe individual differences at maladaptive trait poles, such as through narrower traits (e.g., facets). With some exceptions (e.g., Carter, Guan, Maples, Williamson, & Miller, 2016;Samuel, 2011), these questions are rarely stated or researched, although answers to them are implied by specific PD trait models and measures.…”

“…Wright, Hopwood, and Simms () found a curvilinear effect for affiliative interpersonal problems (e.g., too cold vs. too warm) as related to interpersonal behavior instability. Finally, Carter et al () found a curvilinear effect between Conscientiousness and well‐being, though the decrement in well‐being at high levels of Conscientiousness was minor relative to the lack of well‐being associated with low Conscientiousness.…”

Too much of a good thing? Exploring the inverted‐U relationship between self‐control and happiness

“…In line with this, researchers have found the expected curvilinear pattern in closely related constructs. For example, abnormally high levels of conscientiousness predict obsessive-compulsive behaviors and less psychological well-being (Carter, Guan, Maples, Williamson, & Miller, 2015). Similarly, anorexia, which can be regarded as overregulation of eating (Halse, Honey, & Boughtwood, 2007), is associated with lower SWB (Kitsantas, Gillgan, & Kamata, 2003).…”

Individual Differences in Loss Aversion

“…Conscientiousness, whilst seemingly essential to long-term goal attainment (Duckworth, Peterson, Matthews, & Kelly, 2007), is also accompanied by a rigidity of thought and obsessiveness (Carter, Guan, Maples, Williamson, & Miller, 2015;Nettle, 2006). Such factors may be particularly problematic under specific circumstances, for example, when a desired outcome is not achieved or is achieved and then lost.…”