Personality traits (original) (raw)

Abstract

Abstract This review paper on the current status of the studies on personality traits, aimed at summarizing the progress achieved in the study of personality traits and examining the evidences for the diverse study dimensions of the studies on Personality. As it seems that the study of personality traits is not a recent one (nearly a century old), the advances in the discipline can be identified as major ones as well as the recent ones. So, the present study engaged in summarizing (at least to a certain extent), both the major advances as well as the recent ones. Existing gaps in the study of the personality traits and the most outstanding debates at the time were also discussed briefly. Finally the paper will reviewed the future implications for the study of personality traits. As the methodology of the study, Online searches were carried out for the collection of data and the searches those which were published in English language mainly from 1930 to 2017. The sample included 64 review sources and the period of the searches was between January 2017 to September 2017. The theme study areas of personality traits those were discussed in this study are basic personality dimensions, broad and narrow personality traits, causal evidences for personality traits, cognitive affective personality systems, comparison of individuals on traits, overlapping of traits, functions of personality traits across lifespan, consistency of behavior, traits-situation interaction, different aspects of personality traits assessment and cross cultural studies on personality traits. Keywords: Personality traits, current status, personality research, trait research

Figures (2)

of personality traits. In addition to the above, this also aims at examining the evidences for the diverse study dimensions of the studies on Personality traits. As it seems that the study of personality traits is not a recent one (nearly a century old), the advances in the discipline can be identified as major ones as well as the recent ones. So the present study aims at summarizing (at least to a certain extent), both the major advances as well as the recent ones. Further this study will pay the attention to the existing gaps in the study of the personality traits and the most outstanding debates at the time will also be discussed briefly. Finally the paper will review the future implications for the study of personality traits. Online searches were carried out for the collection of data for this review paper. The searches were limited to online the journal articles, soft copies of books which are available for free downloading, online versions of the classical papers in the area of the study of Personality traits. These online searches were those which were published in English language mainly from 1930 to 2017. The sample included 64 review sources and the period of the searches was between January 2017 to September 2017. The studies which were reviewed included those which were conducted at both study and outcome level. A summary of reviewed studies is given in the following table.

of personality traits. In addition to the above, this also aims at examining the evidences for the diverse study dimensions of the studies on Personality traits. As it seems that the study of personality traits is not a recent one (nearly a century old), the advances in the discipline can be identified as major ones as well as the recent ones. So the present study aims at summarizing (at least to a certain extent), both the major advances as well as the recent ones. Further this study will pay the attention to the existing gaps in the study of the personality traits and the most outstanding debates at the time will also be discussed briefly. Finally the paper will review the future implications for the study of personality traits. Online searches were carried out for the collection of data for this review paper. The searches were limited to online the journal articles, soft copies of books which are available for free downloading, online versions of the classical papers in the area of the study of Personality traits. These online searches were those which were published in English language mainly from 1930 to 2017. The sample included 64 review sources and the period of the searches was between January 2017 to September 2017. The studies which were reviewed included those which were conducted at both study and outcome level. A summary of reviewed studies is given in the following table.

It may obviously be a difficult for a trait researcher to manage the time available for measuring large amount of trait descriptions in a given language or in a given individual. Though the number of items increases the accuracy of psychometric properties, it may cause a considerable behavioral discomfort for the respondent which may affect the responses. Due to this reason, most of the trait theorists seek to develop short measures of Traits. Big Five is also a kind of this category. Following the big Five approach, several current Shorts tests of personality traits have been developed and being researched (Ashton & Lee, 2009) '!. The most important usefulness of the study of personality traits is their Predictive ability of individual’s future behavior. These abilities reflect their relative individual differences from situation to situation (Heinstrom, 2003) 4, So, the content of this review paper will be a discussion on the current status of each theme area in the study of Personality traits which will be discussed under the Results and Discussion section as follows.

It may obviously be a difficult for a trait researcher to manage the time available for measuring large amount of trait descriptions in a given language or in a given individual. Though the number of items increases the accuracy of psychometric properties, it may cause a considerable behavioral discomfort for the respondent which may affect the responses. Due to this reason, most of the trait theorists seek to develop short measures of Traits. Big Five is also a kind of this category. Following the big Five approach, several current Shorts tests of personality traits have been developed and being researched (Ashton & Lee, 2009) '!. The most important usefulness of the study of personality traits is their Predictive ability of individual’s future behavior. These abilities reflect their relative individual differences from situation to situation (Heinstrom, 2003) 4, So, the content of this review paper will be a discussion on the current status of each theme area in the study of Personality traits which will be discussed under the Results and Discussion section as follows.

Loading...

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

References (52)

  1. References
  2. Ackerman PL, Heggestad ED. Intelligence, personality, and interests: Evidence for overlapping traits. Psychological Bulletin. 1997; 121(2):219-245. doi:10.1037//0033-2909.121.2.219
  3. Ashton M, Lee K. The HEXACO-60: A Short Measure of the Major Dimensions of Personality. Journal of Personality Assessment. 2009; 91(4):340-345. doi:10. 1080/00223890902935878
  4. Berge MT, Raad BD. The construction of a joint taxonomy of traits and situations. European Journal of Personality. 2001; 15(4):253-276. doi:10.1002/per.410
  5. Boag S. Explanation in personality psychology: "Verbal magic" and the five-factor model. Philosophical Psychology. 2011; 24(2):223-243. doi:10.1080/09515089.2010.548319
  6. Brezo J, Paris J, Hébert M, Vitaro F, Tremblay, R, Turecki G. Broad and narrow personality traits as markers of one-time and repeated suicide attempts: A population-based study. BMC Psychiatry. 2008; 8(1). doi:10.1186/1471-244x-8-15
  7. Buss AR. The Trait-Situation Controversy and the Concept of Interaction. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 1977; 3(2):196-201. doi:10.1177/014616727700300207
  8. Church AT, Katigbak MS, Reyes JA, Salanga MG, Miramontes LA, Adams NB. Prediction and cross- situational consistency of daily behavior across cultures: Testing trait and cultural psychology perspectives. Journal of Research in Personality, 2008; 42(5):1199-1215. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2008.03.007
  9. Çolakoğlu N, Gözükara I. A Comparison Study on Personality Traits Based on the Attitudes of University Students toward Entrepreneurship. Procedia -Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2016; 229:133-140. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.07.122
  10. Credé M, Harms PD, Blacksmith N, Wood D. Assessing the Utility of Compound Trait Estimates of Narrow Personality Traits. Journal of Personality Assessment, 2016; 98(5):503-513. doi:10.1080/00223891.2016.1170023
  11. Donnellan MB, Lucas RE. Age differences in the big five across the life span: Evidence from two national samples. Psychology and Aging, 2008; 23(3):558-566. doi:10.1037/a0012897
  12. Dougherty DM, Mathias CW, Marsh DM, Jagar AA. Laboratory behavioral measures of impulsivity. Behavior Research Methods, 2005; 37(1):82-90. doi:10.3758/bf03206401
  13. Eysenck HJ. Crime and Personality. Medico-Legal Journal. 1979; 47(1):18-32. doi:10.1177/002581727904700104
  14. Erlen JA, Stilley CS, Bender A, Lewis MP, Garand L, Kim Y, Shaler C. Personality traits and chronic illness: a comparison of individuals with psychiatric, coronary heart disease, and HIV/AIDS diagnoses. Applied Nursing Research. 2011; 24(2):74-81. doi:10.1016/j.apnr.2009.04.006
  15. Fitsgerald DA. Issacc D. Genotype-phenotype correlations with personality traits of healthcare professionals: a new use for the Human Genome Project. Medical Journal of Australia. 2002; 76(7):339- 40
  16. Funder DC. Global Traits: A Neo-Allportian Approach to Personality. Psychological Science, 1991; 2(1):31- 39. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.1991.tb00093.x
  17. Funder DC, Colvin CR. Explorations in behavioral consistency: Properties of persons, situations, and behaviors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1991; 60(5):773-794. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.60.5.773
  18. Funder DC, Furr RM. Persons, Situations and Person Situation interactions in John, O.P. & Robins, R. W.(ed) Handbook of personality.
  19. Furnham A, Crump J. Personality traits, types, and disorders: an examination of the relationship between three self-report measures. European Journal of Personality. 2005; 19(3):167-184. doi:10.1002/per.543
  20. González I, Peñas-Lledó EM, Pérez B, Dorado P, Álvarez M, Llerena A. Relation between CYP2D6 phenotype and genotype and personality in healthy volunteers. Pharmacogenomics, 2008; 9(7):833-840. doi:10.2217/14622416.9.7.833
  21. Heinstrom J. Five personality dimensions and their influence on information behavior, 2003.
  22. Iversen OL. Rimol R. Using narrow personality traits to identify top talents within a group of successful managers-Presented at the 17th congress of the European Association of Work and Organizational Psychology. assessit. Retrieved on. 2015, 2017. from www. assessit.no
  23. Kausel EE, Slaughter JE. Narrow personality traits and organizational attraction: Evidence for the complementary hypothesis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 2011; 114(1):3-14. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2010.08.002
  24. Kersting K. In Brief: Personality changes for the better with age. PsycEXTRA Dataset, 2003. doi:10.1037/e301162003-010
  25. Kihlstrom JF. The Person-Situation Interaction. Oxford Handbooks Online, 2013. doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199730018.013.0038
  26. Kraus. Do Genes Influence Personality? A Summary of Recent Advances in the Nature vs. Nurture Debate/Psychology Today. Psychology Today: Health, Help, Happiness Find a Therapist, 2013.
  27. Kressel L, Uleman J. Personality traits function as causal concepts. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 2010; 46:213-216.
  28. Linden DV, Tsaousis I, Petrides K. Overlap between General Factors of Personality in the Big Five, Giant Three, and trait emotional intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 2012; 53(3):175-179. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2012.03.001
  29. Mackay J, Haskell M. Consistent Individual Behavioral Variation: The Difference between Temperament, Personality and Behavioral Syndromes. Animals. 2015; 5(3):455-478. doi:10.3390/ani5030366
  30. Mathews G, Deary IJ. Whitemanm MC. Personality Traits. Mccrae RR. Cross-Cultural Research on the Five-Factor Model of Personality. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2002; 4(4). doi:10.9707/2307- 0919.1038
  31. Mccrae RR, Terracciano A, Fruyt FD, Bolle MD, Gelfand MJ, Jr PT. The Validity and Structure of ~ 45 ~ International Journal of Applied Research Culture-Level Personality Scores: Data from Ratings of Young Adolescents. Journal of Personality. 2010; 78(3):815-838. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.2010.00634.x
  32. McDonald JD. Measuring Personality Constructs: The Advantages and Disadvantages of Self -Reports, In formant Reports and Behavioural Assessments. Enquire. 2008; 1(1):75-94.
  33. Meda SA, Stevens MC, Potenza MN, Pittman B, Gueorguieva R, Andrews MM. Pearlson GD. Investigating the behavioral and self-report constructs of impulsivity domains using principal component analysis. Behavioural Pharmacology, 2009; 20(5-6), 390-399. doi:10.1097/fbp.0b013e32833113a3
  34. Mischel W, Shoda Y. A cognitive-affective system theory of personality: Reconceptualizing situations, dispositions, dynamics, and invariance in personality structure. Psychological Review, 1995; 102(2):246-268. doi:10.1037//0033-295x.102.2.246
  35. Nia ME, Besharat MA. Comparison of athletes' personality characteristics in individual and team sports. Procedia -Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2010; 5:808-812. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.07.189
  36. Ostendorf F, Angleitner A., a COMPARISON OF Different Measures proposed to measure Big Five. European Review of Applied Psychology, 1994; 44(1):45-53.
  37. Paterniti S, Niedhammer I, Lang T., Consoli, TM. Psychosocial factors at work, personality traits and depressive symptoms. The British Journal of psychiatry. 2002; 181(2):111-117; DOI: 10.1192/bjp.181.2.111
  38. Pérez-González JC, Sanchez-Ruiz M. Trait emotional intelligence anchored within the Big Five, Big Two and Big One frameworks. Personality and Individual Differences, 2014; 65:53-58. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2014.01.021
  39. Pimontel M, Sneed JR. Journal Watch review of Persons, situations and behaviors: Consistency and variability of different behaviors in four interpersonal situations. Leikas S. Lönnqvist J. -E. Verkasalo M. Persons, situations and behaviors: Consistency and variability of different behaviors in four interpersonal situations. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology. 2013; 103:1007-1022. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 2012; 61(2):337-339. doi:10.1177/0003065113484799
  40. Sharif F, Farsnia A, Mani A, Vasoghi M, Setoodeh G. Comparison of Personality Traits, Coping Styles, and Psychiatric Disorders in Adult Suicidal and Non- Suicidal Individuals. International Journal of Community based nursing and Midwifery, 2014; 2(3):148-156.
  41. Shoda Y, Wilson NL, Whitsett DD, Lee-Dussud J, Zayas V. (n.d.). The person as a cognitive-affective processing system: Quantitative ideography as an integral component of cumulative science. APA handbook of personality and social psychology, 4: Personality processes and individual differences. 2014; 491-513. doi:10.1037/14343-022
  42. Siegling AB, Furnham A, Petrides KV. Trait Emotional Intelligence and Personality. Journal of Psycho educational Assessment, 2014; 33(1):57-67. doi:10.1177/0734282914550385
  43. Smith, ME. A Comparison of Certain Personality Traits as Rated in the Same Individuals in Childhood and Fifty Years Later. Child Development, 1952; 23(3):159. doi:10.2307/1126098
  44. Speer Andrew B. Christiansen, Neil; and Honts, Christopher. Assessment of Personality through Behavioral Observations in Work Simulations, Personnel Assessment and Decisions: 2015; 1(1):6. Available at: http://scholarworks.bgsu.edu/pad/vol1/iss1/6
  45. Specht J, Egloff B, Schmukle SC. Stability and change of personality across the life course: The impact of age and major life events on mean-level and rank-order stability of the Big Five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2011; 101(4):862-882. doi:10.1037/a0024950
  46. Ten Item Personality Measure (TIPI) | Gosling. (n.d.). Retrieved, 2017. http://www.bing.com/cr? IG=29C9F2C7405B4A8AA7B280724156DE8B&CID =312FA389A826668A0C71A977A920677F&rd=1&h= tmfA10f1u- SYKWYeUwbEalpAQYfkwEzi4lAobGOlf7k&v=1&r= http%3a%2f%2fgosling.psy.utexas.edu%2fscales- weve-developed%2ften-item-personality-measure- tipi%2f&p=DevEx,5064.1
  47. Terracciano A, Mccrae RR. Cross-cultural studies of personality traits and their relevance to psychiatry. Epidemiologia e Psichiatria Sociale, 2006; 15(03):176- 184. doi:10.1017/s1121189x00004425
  48. Vainik U, Dubé L, Lu J, Fellows, LK. Personality and Situation Predictors of Consistent Eating Patterns. Plos One, 10(12). doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0144134
  49. Verhulst B, Eaves LJ, Hatemi PK. Correlation not Causation: The Relationship between Personality Traits and Political Ideologies. American Journal of Political Science, 2011; 56(1):34-51. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5907.2011.00568.x
  50. Wright LL. Review of Literature. A Comparison of Big Five and Narrow Personality Traits In Relation to Academic Performance-Doctoral Dissertations- University of Tennesee. 2008, 6-40.
  51. Widiger TA. Personality and psychopathology. World Psychiatry, 2011; 10(2):103-106. doi:10.1002/j.2051- 5545.2011.tb00024.x
  52. Yuen CH, Pillay N, Heinrichs M, Schoepf I, Schradin, C. Personality traits are consistent when measured in the field and in the laboratory in African striped mice (Rhabdomys pumilio). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 2016; 70(8):1235-1246. doi:10.1007/s00265-016-2131-1