More on the "Big Five" Five-Factor Model of Personality

[lpetrich]

A Stunning Study of 1.5 Million People Reveals There Are Only 4 Personality Types (And Most People Are the Same Type) | Inc.com
A robust data-driven approach identifies four personality types across four large data sets | Nature Human Behaviour

Though the Big Five dimensions are generally accepted, the notion of personality types isn't. A simplistic approach is to split the dimensions and use permutations of their being low and high as personality types. Hippocrates's four-humor theory is a good example, with each type being either high or low of Extroversion and Neuroticism. The 16 MBTI types are another example, from subdividing the MBTI's four dimensions.

But the real world does not work like that. Personality-test scores have a LOT of scatter. But this team of researchers have found four concentrations of personality features, sort of like lumps in batter.

	Average	Reserved	Self-Centered	Role Model
Openness	---	---	---	+++
Conscientiousness			---	+++
Extroversion	+++		+++	+++
Agreeableness			---	+++
Neuroticism	+++	---		---

+++ high, --- low, (blank) in the middle
I'm like Role Model except for being very introverted.

 

[fromderinside]

That's not the Big Five, you are thinking of the Myer's Briggs, which is not really taken seriously in the personality psych community, but laypeople people seem to eat it up, and it is sold to hiring managers as a way of screening candidates. I think it is more similar to astrology and horoscopes than serious science, although that may be harsh. It's basically a failed model that got really popular among non-psychologists and business people.

The Big Five on the other hand, is taken seriously. Although, it is somewhat controversial (or rather, some people simply don't find it appealing), because it is an empirically derived model, essentially the result of factor analysis on personality survey data. In terms of explanatory value, it is probably the most robust model in personality psych, which is often criticized for its lack of rigor.

Empirical? Factor Analysis? Multiple correlation as empirical? Where did you learn about science J842P? In a personality class?

When you can show me a survey choice is actually related to physical conditions like, say psychophysical determination of sensory limen, then let's talk. And that is a relatively feeble case. I'd actually prefer evidence of descending moderation in first receptor in sensorium. Until then ....

You are right in questioning personality research and theory as science at any level including medical. We haven't even got stuff like approach withdraw, seek avoid, paradigms down to science yet.*

* T. C. Schneirla brought that up in the fifties and journals are still accepting articles about approach avoid phenomena.

 

[lpetrich]

I have found four "Big Five" online personality tests. I have taken all of them:

The Big Five Project - Personality Test
O = 91 . C = 96 . E = 3 . A = 34 . N = 13 . (0 to 100)

Free Big Five Personality Test - Accurate scores of your personality traits
O = 92 . C = 77 . E = 19 . A = 56 . N = 23 . (0 to 100)

Big Five Personality Test
O = 96 . C = 87 . E = 37 . A = 14 . N = 2 . (0 to 100)

Free open-source BigFive personality traits test - translated to multiple languages
O = 101 . C = 108 . E = 64 . A = 101 . N = 52 . (0 to 120)

That last one has subtraits, six per trait:

• Neuroticism: Anxiety, Anger, Depression, Self-Consciousness, Immoderation, Vulnerability
• Extraversion: Friendliness, Gregariousness, Assertiveness, Activity Level, Excitement-Seeking, Cheerfulness
• Openness: Imagination, Artistic interests, Emotionality, Adventurousness, Intellect, Liberalism
• Agreeableness: Trust, Morality, Altruism, Cooperation, Modesty, Sympathy
• Conscientiousness: Self-Efficacy, Orderliness, Dutifulness, Achievement-Striving, Self-Discipline, Cautiousness

My composing this post ought to be independent evidence that I am high in Conscientiousness.

 

[lpetrich]

I'll assemble the three subtrait systems here, and added the one from  Revised NEO Personality Inventory

• Stability
  • Conscientiousness
    • Industriousness, Orderliness
    • Organization, Productiveness, Responsibility
    • Competence, Order, Dutifulness, Achievement Striving, Self-Discipline, Deliberation
    • Self-Efficacy, Orderliness, Dutifulness, Achievement Striving, Self-Discipline, Cautiousness
  • Agreeableness
    • Compassion, Politeness
    • Compassion, Respectfulness, Trust
    • Trust, Straightforwardness, Altruism, Compliance, Modesty, Tender-Mindedness
    • Trust, Morality, Altruism, Cooperation, Modesty, Sympathy
  • Neuroticism
    • Volatility, Withdrawal
    • Anxiety, Depression, Emotional Volatility
    • Anxiety, Hostility, Depression, Self-Consciousness, Impulsiveness, Vulnerability
    • Anxiety, Anger, Depression, Self-Consciousness, Immoderation, Vulnerability
• Plasticity
  • Openness
    • Intellect, Esthetic Openness
    • Intellectual Curiosity, Aesthetic Sensitivity, Creative Imagination
    • Fantasy, Aesthetics, Feelings, Actions, Ideas, Values
    • Imagination, Artistic interests, Emotionality, Adventurousness, Intellect, Liberalism
  • Extroversion
    • Enthusiasm, Assertiveness
    • Sociability, Assertiveness, Energy Level
    • Warmth, Gregariousness, Assertiveness, Activity, Excitement Seeking, Positive Emotions
    • Friendliness, Gregariousness, Assertiveness, Activity Level, Excitement Seeking, Cheerfulness

I've found the book "Personality, Character, and Leadership In The White House: Psychologists Assess the Presidents" by Steven J. Rubenzer and Thomas R. Faschingbauer, and it uses the same subtrait / facet names as does a previous post here, but with "Angry Hostility" instead of "Hostility".

For the most part, in each pair of lists of six subtraits, each one in one list is another name for one in another list.


The Big Five model has been criticized as incomplete, and the Wikipedia article on the Big Five lists some proposed additional personality dimensions: "religiosity, manipulativeness/machiavellianism, honesty, sexiness/seductiveness, thriftiness, conservativeness, masculinity/femininity, snobbishness/egotism, sense of humour, and risk-taking/thrill-seeking." The HEXACO model has an additional dimension: Honesty/Humility.

 

[fromderinside]

Wet dreams and the misuse of statistics made obvious. Why not leave the data itself reveal structure?  Factor analysis

 

[lpetrich]

Wet dreams and the misuse of statistics made obvious. Why not leave the data itself reveal structure?  Factor analysis

That is what was done.  Big Five personality traits:

When factor analysis (a statistical technique) is applied to personality survey data, some words used to describe aspects of personality are often applied to the same person. For example, someone described as conscientious is more likely to be described as "always prepared" rather than "messy".

Nonhuman species:
Personality Dimensions in Nonhuman Animals: A Cross-Species Review - Samuel D. Gosling, Oliver P. John, 1999 - the journal paper itself.

Bilateria: E, N

• Protostomia - Octopus
• Deuterostomia - Osteichthyes (bony fish)
  • Actinopterygii (ray-finned fish) - Guppy
  • Sarcopterygii (lobe-finned fish) - Boreoeutheria (has A)

E - Extroversion - Boldness
N - Neuroticism - Sensitivity to Threat
A - Agreeabieness - Sociability

Now for going back further:
Cnidarian chemical neurotransmission, an updated overview - ScienceDirect
Convergent evolution of neural systems in ctenophores

The highest-level phylogeny of Metazoa, the animal kingdom, is still unclear, and a cautious phylogeny is

• Porifera (sea sponges)
• Placozoa (Trichoplax - a little blob)
• Ctenophora (comb jellies)
• Cnidaria (sea anemones, jellyfish, etc.) + Bilateria (anything bilaterially symmetric)

Cnidaria + Bilateria share several neurotransmitters, including catecholamines (dopamine-like ones) and serotonin.

But what might be a good personality test for a jellyfish? I'm guessing rate it on boldness (extroversion) and sensitivity to threat (neuroticism).

 

[fromderinside]

Right the misapplication of names to factors is justified by statistical technique. The names may have nothing to do with factors but a given population might yield results near those associated with a particular data set. A Factor Analysis is not an empirical tool it is is as associative tool.

 

[lpetrich]

Right the misapplication of names to factors is justified by statistical technique. The names may have nothing to do with factors but a given population might yield results near those associated with a particular data set. A Factor Analysis is not an empirical tool it is is as associative tool.

I don't know what you mean by that.

If one does a principal components analysis, then it's straightforward to interpret the axes - look at what variables are most strongly represented in each one of them.

 

[lpetrich]

An Introduction to the Five‐Factor Model and Its Applications - McCrae - 1992 - Journal of Personality - Wiley Online Library

Gives how the Big Five were discovered.

The first path to it was from lexical analysis - analzying vocabulary - what we have words for. The second path to it was with personality quizzes.

Theories of personality have been remarkably diverse, and it might have been anticipated that the questionnaire scales designed to operationalize them would show little resemblance to each other. In fact, however, there is considerable redundancy in what they measure. In particular, many scales measure the chronic negative emotions that are of such great concern to psychiatrists and clinical psychologists, and many others deal with the interpersonal activity so important for social psychologists.

In 1964, HJ Eysenck constructed a theory of personality from these two dimensions: neuroticism and extraversion - N and E.

This theory went back to antiquity, though it treated N and E as binary.

In 1974, two pairs of psychologists proposed another dimension of personality. Tellegren and Atkinson proposed "Openness to Absorbing
and Self-Altering Experience" or Absorption, and Costa and McCrae proposed "Openness to Experience". This is Openness - O.

In 1980, Costa and McRae proposed self-control and in 1982 Tellegren constraint. These are forms of Conscientiousness - C.

The remaining dimension is Agreeableness - A.

A big problem in the research is the large number of personality tests that different researchers have devised. A good test of them would mean having several subjects take several of these tests -- one will have to recruit a large number of subjects who will agree to be very busy taking different tests.

Lexical research is much easier - subjects could rate themselves or others with them and one could look for correlations in the subjects' ratings.

 

[lpetrich]

In addition to the empirical evidence for the model, there is something intuitively appealing about the factors: They make a great deal of sense. In part, this may be because they make explicit the implicit personality theory that is encoded in the personality language we all use; in part, the model probably squares well with our experience of self and others.

I find the Big Five *much* more intuitive than the MBTI, and that's why I seem like such a big Big Five enthusiast.

As to why the Big Five weren't discovered sooner, authors McCrae and John speculate about such causes as clinical psychologists mainly being interested in N from their concern with psychological dysfunction. Also the difficulty of factor analysis in the early days of computers. Also low-quality research: "litter-ature".

Another problem is measuring features that are mixtures of the Big Five dimensions. Shyness: +N -E, hostile and temperamental: +N -A.

The Big Five is not a comprehensive theory, but a good overall one. Each of the five traits in it includes several subtraits.

Any additional factors? Possible but unlikely. Culture? Values? Masculinity / Femininity? Positive Evaluation? Negative Evaluation? Some research does indeed find additional ones, but it is hard to replicate that research. So there is no consistent evidence of more factors.

Does cognitive ability also count? It can be treated as a separate dimension, g, though there is a correlation between g and O.

 

[lpetrich]

Some researchers think the opposite, that the Big Five ought to be some smaller number:

• HJ Eysenck's E, N, and Psychoticism -A -C.
• Peabody's removal of N - rough approximation of the MBTI
• Digman's Socialization +A +C -N and Self-Actualization +E +O -N
• Tellegen's Negative Emotionality -A +N

These are inconsistent, and it looks like all 5 are necessary.

Observer ratings vs. self-rating? The Big Five appear in both places. An artifact of cognitive biases? Unlikely.

The authors of this paper don't get into either supertraits or subtraits/facets.

 

[lpetrich]

 Extraversion and introversion

Extraversion (also spelled as extroversion[1]) is the state of primarily obtaining gratification from outside oneself.[5] Extraverts tend to enjoy human interactions and to be enthusiastic, talkative, assertive, and gregarious. Extraverts are energized and thrive off being around other people. They take pleasure in activities that involve large social gatherings, such as parties, community activities, public demonstrations, and business or political groups. They also tend to work well in groups.[6] An extraverted person is likely to enjoy time spent with people and find less reward in time spent alone. They tend to be energized when around other people, and they are more prone to boredom when they are by themselves.

Introversion is the state of being predominantly interested in one's own mental self.[5] Introverts are typically perceived as more reserved or reflective.[6] ... Introverts often take pleasure in solitary activities such as reading, writing, or meditating. An introvert is likely to enjoy time spent alone and find less reward in time spent with large groups of people. Introverts are easily overwhelmed by too much stimulation from social gatherings and engagement, introversion having even been defined by some in terms of a preference for a quiet, more minimally stimulating external environment.[8] They prefer to concentrate on a single activity at a time and like to observe situations before they participate, especially observed in developing children and adolescents.[9] They are more analytical before speaking.[10]

...
Extraverts and introverts have a variety of behavioural differences. According to one study, extraverts tend to wear more decorative clothing, whereas introverts prefer practical, comfortable clothes.[34] Extraverts are more likely to prefer more upbeat, conventional, and energetic music than introverts.[35] Personality also influences how people arrange their work areas. In general, extraverts decorate their offices more, keep their doors open, keep extra chairs nearby, and are more likely to put dishes of candy on their desks. These are attempts to invite co-workers and encourage interaction. Introverts, in contrast, decorate less and tend to arrange their workspace to discourage social interaction.[36]

The halfway state is sometimes called ambiversion.

 

[lpetrich]

 Openness to experience

Openness involves five facets, or dimensions, including active imagination (fantasy), aesthetic sensitivity, attentiveness to inner feelings, preference for variety, and intellectual curiosity.[3] A great deal of psychometric research has demonstrated that these facets or qualities are significantly correlated.[2] Thus, openness can be viewed as a global personality trait consisting of a set of specific traits, habits, and tendencies that cluster together.

People who score low on openness are considered to be closed to experience. They tend to be conventional and traditional in their outlook and behavior. They prefer familiar routines to new experiences, and generally have a narrower range of interests. Openness has moderate positive relationships with creativity, intelligence and knowledge. Openness is related to the psychological trait of absorption, and like absorption has a modest relationship to individual differences in hypnotic susceptibility.

A number of studies have found that openness to experience has two major subcomponents, one related to intellectual dispositions, the other related to the experiential aspects of openness, such as aesthetic appreciation and openness to sensory experiences. These subcomponents have been referred to as intellect and experiencing openness respectively, and have a strong positive correlation (r = .55) with each other.[11]

According to research by Sam Gosling, it is possible to assess openness by examining people's homes and work spaces. Individuals who are highly open to experience tend to have distinctive and unconventional decorations. They are also likely to have books on a wide variety of topics, a diverse music collection, and works of art on display.[12]

Openness is also correlated with intelligence, at least the sort that IQ tests measure.

It also has two main subtraits, one about ideas and one about experience proper. So "openness to experience" only covers part of it, with "openness to ideas" cover the rest. So "openness" is as good a name as any for the whole thing.

 

[lpetrich]

 Conscientiousness

Conscientiousness is the personality trait of being careful, or diligent. Conscientiousness implies a desire to do a task well, and to take obligations to others seriously. Conscientious people tend to be efficient and organized as opposed to easy-going and disorderly. They exhibit a tendency to show self-discipline, act dutifully, and aim for achievement; they display planned rather than spontaneous behavior; and they are generally dependable. It is manifested in characteristic behaviors such as being neat, and systematic; also including such elements as carefulness, thoroughness, and deliberation (the tendency to think carefully before acting).[1]

Conscientiousness is one of the five traits of both the Five Factor Model and the HEXACO model of personality and is an aspect of what has traditionally been referred to as having character. Conscientious individuals are generally hard-working, and reliable. They are also likely to be conformists.[2] When taken to an extreme, they may also be "workaholics", perfectionists, and compulsive in their behavior.[3] People who score low on conscientiousness tend to be laid back, less goal-oriented, and less driven by success; they also are more likely to engage in antisocial and criminal behavior.[4]

...
In the NEO framework, Conscientiousness is seen as having six facets: Competence, Order, Dutifulness, Achievement Striving, Self-Discipline, and Deliberation. Other models suggest a smaller set of two "aspects": orderliness and industriousness form an intermediate level of organization, with orderliness associated with the desire to keep things organized and tidy and industriousness being more associated with productivity and work ethic.[7]

...
People who score high on the trait of conscientiousness tend to be more organized and less cluttered in their homes and offices. For example, their books tend to be neatly shelved in alphabetical order, or categorized by topic, rather than scattered around the room. Their clothes tend to be folded and arranged in drawers or closets instead of lying on the floor. The presence of planners and to-do lists are also signs of conscientiousness. Their homes tend to have better lighting than the homes of people who score low on this trait.[16]

...
Conscientiousness is importantly related to successful academic performance in students and workplace performance among managers and workers.[18] Low levels of conscientiousness are strongly associated with procrastination.[19] A considerable amount of research indicates that conscientiousness has a moderate to large positive correlation with performance in the workplace,[20][21] and indeed that after general mental ability is taken into account, the other four of the Big Five personality traits do not aid in predicting career success.[22]:169[irrelevant citation]

Conscientious employees are generally more reliable, more motivated, and harder working. They also have lower rates of absenteeism and counterproductive work behaviors such as stealing and fighting with other employees.[23]

A complication in researching this trait is the desirability of many of the features associated with it. That meant that it was originally considered a moral trait, but it is now recognized to be a psychological one.

 

[lpetrich]

 Agreeableness

Agreeableness is a personality trait manifesting itself in individual behavioral characteristics that are perceived as kind, sympathetic, cooperative, warm, and considerate.[1]

...
People who score high on this dimension are empathetic and altruistic, while a low agreeableness score relates to selfish behavior and a lack of empathy.[3][4] Those who score very low on agreeableness show signs of dark triad behavior such as manipulation and competing with others rather than cooperating.[5]

Agreeableness is considered to be a superordinate trait, meaning that it is a grouping of personality sub-traits that cluster together statistically. The lower-level traits, or facets, grouped under agreeableness are: trust, straightforwardness, altruism, compliance, modesty, and tender-mindedness.[6]

The HEXACO model splits Agreeableness, with one part being Honesty-Humility (Straightforwardness and Modesty -- fairness) and the other part being the rest (Trust, Altruism, Compliance, and Tender-Mindedness -- tolerance). HEXACO Agreeableness also includes some subtraits of Neuroticism: (Temperamentalness and Irritability).

 

[lpetrich]

 Neuroticism

Individuals who score high on neuroticism are more likely than average to be moody and to experience such feelings as anxiety, worry, fear, anger, frustration, envy, jealousy, guilt, depressed mood, and loneliness.[1] People who are neurotic respond worse to stressors and are more likely to interpret ordinary situations as threatening and minor frustrations as hopelessly difficult. They are often self-conscious and shy, and they may have trouble controlling urges and delaying gratification.

People with high neuroticism indexes are at risk for the development and onset of common mental disorders,[2][3] such as mood disorders, anxiety disorders, and substance use disorder, symptoms of which had traditionally been called neuroses.[3][4]

...
Individuals who score low in neuroticism tend to be more emotionally stable and less reactive to stress. They tend to be calm, even-tempered, and less likely to feel tense or rattled. Although they are low in negative emotion, they are not necessarily high on positive emotion. Being high in scores of positive emotion is generally an element of the independent trait of extraversion. Neurotic extraverts, for example, would experience high levels of both positive and negative emotional states, a kind of "emotional roller coaster".[7][8]

Neuroticism may also be called negative emotionality or emotional instability.

 

[lpetrich]

Adding "Lexical facets" in  Facet (psychology) gives:

• Stability
  • Conscientiousness
    • Industriousness, Orderliness
    • Organization, Productiveness, Responsibility
    • Orderliness, Decisiveness-Consistency, Reliability, Industriousness
    • Competence, Order, Dutifulness, Achievement Striving, Self-Discipline, Deliberation
    • Self-Efficacy, Orderliness, Dutifulness, Achievement Striving, Self-Discipline, Cautiousness
  • Agreeableness
    • Compassion, Politeness
    • Compassion, Respectfulness, Trust
    • Warmth-Affection, Gentleness, Generosity, Modesty-Humility
    • Trust, Straightforwardness, Altruism, Compliance, Modesty, Tender-Mindedness
    • Trust, Morality, Altruism, Cooperation, Modesty, Sympathy
  • Neuroticism
    • Volatility, Withdrawal
    • Anxiety, Depression, Emotional Volatility
    • Irritability, Insecurity, Emotionality
    • Anxiety, Hostility, Depression, Self-Consciousness, Impulsiveness, Vulnerability
    • Anxiety, Anger, Depression, Self-Consciousness, Immoderation, Vulnerability
• Plasticity
  • Openness
    • Intellect, Esthetic Openness
    • Intellectual Curiosity, Aesthetic Sensitivity, Creative Imagination
    • Intellect, Imagination-Creativity, Perceptiveness
    • Fantasy, Aesthetics, Feelings, Actions, Ideas, Values
    • Imagination, Artistic interests, Emotionality, Adventurousness, Intellect, Liberalism
  • Extroversion
    • Enthusiasm, Assertiveness
    • Sociability, Assertiveness, Energy Level
    • Sociability, Unrestraint, Assertiveness, Activity-Adventurousness
    • Warmth, Gregariousness, Assertiveness, Activity, Excitement Seeking, Positive Emotions
    • Friendliness, Gregariousness, Assertiveness, Activity Level, Excitement Seeking, Cheerfulness

 

[lpetrich]

I've found  List of U.S. states ranked per five-factor model personality trait, and it looks like a good place to look for correlations between the Big Five.

I've also found The next Big Five Inventory (BFI-2): Developing and assessing a hierarchical model with 15 facets to enhance bandwidth, fidelity, and predictive power. - PsycNET with an online version at Soto_John_2017.pdf - it proposes 3 facets per Big Five trait.

Also renames:

• Neuroticism -> Negative Emotionality
• Openness to Experience -> Open-Mindedness

BFI-2 domains/facets	NEO PI-R facets	AB5C facets	Lexical subcomponents	Big Five aspects
Extraversion
Sociability	Gregariousness	Gregariousness	Sociability	Enthusiasm
Assertiveness	Assertiveness	Assertiveness	Assertiveness	Assertiveness
Energy Level	Positive Emotions/Activity	—	Activity-adventurousness	Enthusiasm
Agreeableness
Compassion	Altruism	Understanding	Warmth-affection	Compassion
Respectfulness	Compliance	Cooperation	Gentleness	Politeness
Trust	Trust	Pleasantness	—	—
Conscientiousness
Organization	Order	Orderliness	Orderliness	Orderliness
Productiveness	Self-Discipline	Efficiency	Industriousness	Industriousness
Responsibility	Dutifulness	Dutifulness	Reliability	—
Negative Emotionality
Anxiety	Anxiety	Toughness (R)	Emotionality	Withdrawal
Depression	Depression	Happiness (R)	Insecurity	Withdrawal
Emotional Volatility	Angry Hostility	Stability (R)	Irritability	Volatility
Open-Mindedness
Intellectual Curiosity	Ideas	Intellect	Intellect	Intellect
Aesthetic Sensitivity	Aesthetics	Reflection	—	Openness
Creative Imagination	Fantasy	Ingenuity	Imagination-creativity	—

• BFI-2 domains/facets (that paper)
• NEO PI-R facets (McCrae & Costa, 2010)
• AB5C facets (Goldberg, 1999; Hofstee et al., 1992)
• Lexical subcomponents (Saucier & Ostendorf, 1999)
• Big Five aspects (DeYoung et al., 2007)

 

[lpetrich]

P154 Allport's Lexical Analysis - YouTube - In 1936, psychologists Gordon Allport and Henry Odbert did a detailed study of words in the English language related to psychological traits and states and effects. He started with the 400,000 terms in the 1925 Webster's Unabridged Dictionary. 17,953 terms that could differentiate individuals.

• Category I: 4,503 words - neutral terms (potentially stable traits)
• Category II: 4,541 words - present or temporary state (attitudes, moods, emotions, ...)
• Category III: 5,226 words - Character evaluation
• Category IV: 3,682 words - Miscellaneous (behaviors, physical qualities, talents / abilities)

P154 Five Factor Model of Personality History Part 1 of 3 - YouTube

Raymond Cattell (1905 - 1998) - he developed a 16-factor model.

Descriptors of Low Range	Primary Factor	Descriptors of High Range
Sizothymia	Warmth	Affectothymia
Lower Scholastic Mental Capacity	Reasoning	Higher Scholastic Mental Capacity
Lower Ego Strength	Emotional Stability	Higher Ego Strength
Submissiveness	Dominance	Dominance
Desurgency	Liveliness	Surgency
Low Super Ego Strength	Rule-Consciousness	High Super Ego Strength
Threctia	Social Boldness	Parmia
Harria	Sensitivity	Premsia
Alaxia	Vigilance	Protension
Praxernia	Abstractedness	Autia
Artlessness	Privateness	Shrewdness
Untroubled	Apprehension	Guilt Proneness
Conservatism	Openness to Change	Radicalism
Group Adherence	Self-Reliance	Self-Sufficiency
Low Integration	Perfectionism	High Self-Concept Control
Low Ergic Tension	Tension	High Ergic Tension

He used lots of arcane vocabulary, and I won't bother to track it down. But if anyone wants to do so, then go right ahead. Post what you find here.

Several psychologists tried to replicate Cattell's work, but they found only 5 dimensions of variation. The discrepancy was not resolved until the 1980's, when psychologist John Digman (U of Hawaii) got to work on the problem. He used Cattell's own data and used a university computer on it. He found 5 factors, as the others had. The discrepancy is from the shortcuts that Cattell had taken in his calculations. He had hired a lot of assistants who had used mechanical adding machines to do the calculations, and he used a shortcut technique called bootstrapping to do the factor analysis. It also turned out that Cattell's correlation matrix was erroneous. Digman, however, did the calculations from scratch with his university's computer, and that's how he got it right.

Nowadays, he could do all his analysis in a typical laptop computer -- and make the graphics and compose a paper in in it.

 

[lpetrich]

P154 Five Factor Model of Personality the traits Part 2 of 3 - YouTube

Prof. Botwin then discusses the five factors in detail. He presents the downsides of both extremes of each of the five traits. Thus, one can be too non-neurotic or too conscientious or too agreeable.

Neuroticism. Woody Allen.
Anxiety and Depression vs. being Calm and Well-Adjusted.
Facets: Anxious, Angry, Depressed, Self-Consciousness, Impulsive, Vulnerable.

High:

• Chronic negative affect
• Anxiety
• Fearfulness
• Tension
• Irritability
• Dejection
• Difficulty inhibiting impulses
• Perfectionistic demands on self

Low:

• Lack of appropriate concern for potential problems in health or social adjustment
• Emotional blandness

Neuroticism is a development of sensitivity to threat, and too little sensitivity can make one dangerously complacent.