Uncovering the Motivational Core of Traits: The Case of Conscientiousness

Abstract

Knowledge of the motivational bases of conscientiousness would be crucial for disentangling competing explanations about the processes underlying this trait. Thereby, building on the results of a previous investigation identifying 21 goal classes connected to conscientiousness, we performed three studies aimed at clarifying the full spectrum of goals and motives underlying this trait. In Study 1 (N = 299), we conceptually replicated the original associations between goal classes and conscientiousness poles, and we identified nine goal classes that individuals ascribe to conscientious profiles more than to other profiles. In Study 2 (N = 329), we examined the associations between the subjective importance of conscientious and unconscientious goal classes and personality traits, as well as the role of goals for the desire to change one's conscientiousness. In Study 3 (N = 432), we developed a 72-item assessment of nine goal classes and explored their connections with the most important facets of conscientiousness, self-control, future orientation, and the consideration of future consequences, using network analysis. We discuss the relevance of our results for research on conscientiousness and its underlying processes.

A Participatory Intervention to Improve the Psychosocial Work Environment and Mental Health in Human Service Organisations. A Mixed Methods Evaluation Study

“…Changes of outcome variables over time was calculated using t -test for partially overlapping samples in order to handle partially different study population at each time point caused by employee turnover and drop-out [ 43 , 44 , 45 ]. We also tested for mass significance [ 46 ].…”

Descriptive, Predictive and Explanatory Personality Research: Different Goals, Different Approaches, but a Shared Need to Move beyond the Big Few Traits

“…Baumert et al, 2017; Briley, Livengood, & Derringer, 2018; Grosz, Rohrer, & Thoemmes, 2020), including articles in this issue (e.g. Costantini, Saraulli, & Perugini, 2020; Lukaszewski et al, 2020; Quirin et al, 2020). Here, we offer a few general ideas about how one could think of causes and useful explanations—and why these are not necessarily the same things.…”

“…average all items with factor loadings over .40) or (ii) deliberately create measures for distinct classes of personality–relevant phenomena (e.g. Costantini, Saraulli, & Perugini, 2020; Jackson et al, 2010).…”

Open Peer Commentary and Author's Response

“…However, these elements often need to be disentangled for process-oriented research: the risk is otherwise conflating the explanans and the explanandum. Whereas the HEXACO can give a contribution for organizing information involving all these parts of the system, we should also strive for more specific taxonomies and assessments, which make finer distinctions among these different elements (Costantini & Perugini, 2018;Costantini, Saraulli, & Perugini, 2020;Jackson et al, 2010;Wood, Gardner, & Harms, 2015).…”

“…Yet another possibility is to focus on facets, nuances, or even more specific constructs (Mõttus, Kandler, Bleidorn, Riemann, & McCrae, 2017). These approaches can be combined with the use of networks, which model personality processes in terms of sets of elements that continuously interact with each other (Costantini et al, 2015; Costantini, Richetin, Preti, Casini, & Perugini, in press; Cramer et al, 2012), as opposed to a finite set of basic dimensions.…”