European Journal Of Personality Research Articles

A DAE perspective on the interface between adaptive and maladaptive personality development: A conceptual replication

This study aimed to examine Dispositional, Adaptational, and Environmental (DAE) variables at the intersection of adaptive and maladaptive personality development as a conceptual replication of the DAE-model (Asendorpf & Motti-Stefanidi, European Journal of Personality, 32(3), 167-185, 2018). In a community sample of adolescents (N = 463; Mage = 13.6 years; 51% female) hypotheses-driven cross-lagged panel models were tested. Longitudinal associations between Dispositional (i.e., neuroticism, disagreeableness and unconscientiousness), Adaptational (i.e., social problems), and Environmental (i.e., perceived quality of the parent-child relationship) variables were investigated. The results partially support the DAE hypotheses. High levels of neuroticism, disagreeableness and social problems were found to predict the perceived quality of the parent-child relationship. In turn, the perceived quality of the parent-child relationship was found to predict levels of unconscientiousness and social problems. No mediation effects were found and, in contrast to DAE hypotheses, results did not indicate bidirectional influences between dispositions and adaptations. The results shed light on differential person-environment interactions that shape personality development and the importance of the perceived quality of the parent-child relationship. These findings provide insight in pathways of personality development, that may lead to personality pathology, and demonstrate the value of the DAE model as a structured guideline that provides testable hypotheses.

Online self-regulated learning, academic performance, and well-being of Senior High School Students in the NCR: A mediation analysis

Online self-regulated learning, academic performance, and well-being of Senior High School Students in the NCR: A mediation analysis

The Effect of Big Five Personality Traits on Leader Member Exchange and Organization Citizenship Behavior in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Universities

The Effect of Big Five Personality Traits on Leader Member Exchange and Organization Citizenship Behavior in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Universities

Who Knows Best What the Next Year Will Hold for You? The Validity of Direct and Personality–based Predictions of Future Life Experiences across Different Perceivers

This study explored the validity of person judgements by targets and their acquaintances (‘informants’) in longitudinally predicting a broad range of psychologically meaningful life experiences. Judgements were gathered from four sources (targets, N = 189; and three types of informants, N = 1352), and their relative predictive validity was compared for three types of judgement: direct predictions of future life experiences (e.g. number of new friendships), broad (Big Five) domains (e.g. extraversion), and narrower personality nuances (e.g. sociable). Approximately 1 year later, the targets’ actual life experiences were retrospectively assessed by the targets, and by informants nominated by the targets (TNI). Overall, we found evidence for predictive validity across predictor sources and types. Direct predictions by targets were by far the most valid, followed by TNI. Personality–based predictions by targets and TNI had substantial but lower validity. Domain–based predictions were less valid than nuance–based predictions. Overall, informants with lower ‘liking’ and ‘knowing’ towards targets made less valid predictions. Person–centred multilevel analyses showed both considerable validity of direct predictions (which increased with knowing) and positivity bias (which increased with liking). Taken together, given the relatively high methodological rigour of the study, these results provide an especially realistic picture of the rather moderate predictive power of person judgements regarding future life experiences and corroborate the common practice of obtaining such judgements from targets and their close acquaintances. © 2020 The Authors. European Journal of Personality published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Association of Personality Psychology

Voice Pitch \u2013 A Valid Indicator of One\u2019s Unfaithfulness in Committed Relationships?

ObjectivesWhen judging a male speakers’ likelihood to act sexually unfaithful in a committed relationship, listeners rely on the speakers’ voice pitch such that lower voice pitch is perceived as indicating being more unfaithful. In line with this finding, a recent study (Schild et al. Behavioral Ecology, 2020) provided first evidence that voice pitch might indeed be a valid cue to sexual infidelity in men. In this study, male speakers with lower voice pitch, as indicated by lower mean fundamental frequency (mean F0), were actually more likely to report having been sexually unfaithful in the past. Although these results fit the literature on vocal perceptions in contexts of sexual selection, the study was, as stated by the authors, underpowered. Further, the study solely focused on male speakers, which leaves it open whether these findings are also transferable to female speakers.MethodsWe reanalyzed three datasets (Asendorpf et al. European Journal of Personality, 25, 16–30, 2011; Penke and Asendorpf Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 1113–1135, 2008; Stern et al. 2020) that include voice recordings and infidelity data of overall 865 individuals (63,36% female) in order to test the replicability of and further extend past research.ResultsA significant negative link between mean F0 and self-reported infidelity was found in only one out of two datasets for men and only one out of three datasets for women. Two meta-analyses (accounting for the sample sizes and including data of Schild et al. 2020), however, suggest that lower mean F0 might be a valid indicator of higher probability of self-reported infidelity in both men and women.ConclusionsIn line with prior research, higher masculinity, as indicated by lower mean F0, seems to be linked to self-reported infidelity in both men and women. However, given methodological shortcomings, future studies should set out to further delve into these findings.

Personality in Action: Assessing Personality to Identify an ‘Ideal’ Conscientious Response Type with Two Different Behavioural Tasks

Performance on achievement tests is characterized by an interplay of different individual attributes such as personality traits, motivation or cognitive styles. However, the prediction of individuals’ performance from classical self–report personality measures obtained during large and comprehensive aptitude assessments is biased by, for example, subjective response tendencies. This study goes beyond by using behavioural data based on two different types of tasks, requiring different conscientious–related response behaviours. Moreover, a typological approach is proposed, which includes different behavioural indicators to obtain information on complex personality characteristics. © 2020 The Authors. European Journal of Personality published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Association of Personality Psychology

Towards an explanatory personality psychology: Integrating personality structure, personality process, and personality development

Structural approaches to personality have brought about considerable progress in description and prediction of interindividual differences in thoughts, feelings, and behavior. However, in order to move towards personality psychology as an explanatory science, we argue that structural, process-oriented and developmental approaches to personality have to be integrated. We summarize the main propositions of a theoretical framework published in a target article in the European Journal of Personality (Baumert et al., 2017a), and highlight the resulting challenges for future personality research.

Continued Quality, Openness, and Curiosity at the European Journal of Personality

Continued Quality, Openness, and Curiosity at the European Journal of Personality

Individual Differences in Personality Associated with Aggressive Behavior among Adolescents Referred for Externalizing Behavior Problems

The present study examined the extent to which individual differences in personality that have been previously associated with aggression in non-clinical subjects (Caprara et al., European Journal of Personality, 27(3), 290–303, 2013, Caprara et al., Developmental Psychology, 50(1), 71–85, 2014) account for aggression among adolescents referred to psychiatric services with diagnosis within the externalizing spectrum (i.e., conduct disorder, oppositional defiant disorder, and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder). In particular a conceptual model was examined in which individual differences in basic traits (i.e., emotional instability and agreeableness), lower order traits (i.e., irritability and hostile rumination), and social cognitive mechanisms (i.e., moral disengagement) account for aggressive behavior. One hundred and nine adolescents (81 males, 74.3%), ranging in age from 11 to 18 (M = 13.83, SD = 1.70) and referred to psychiatric services for the above diagnoses, participated at the study. Adolescents filled in questionnaires measuring the Big Five traits, as well as irritability, hostile rumination, and moral disengagement; their parents filled in the Child Behavior Checklist to assess children’s aggressive behavior. Findings corroborated the posited pattern of relations previously found in non-clinical samples. In accordance with those findings, moral disengagement largely mediated the association between traits and aggressive behavior. The model explained a significant portion of variance in aggressive behavior. As a novelty, findings showed a direct association between emotional instability and aggressive behavior, pointing to the major relevance of emotional disregulation in adolescents referred for externalizing problem behaviors in comparison to non-clinical adolescents.

Psychometri properties of the Cognitive Emotion Regulation Questionnaire in a sample of Iranian population

Psychometri properties of the Cognitive Emotion Regulation Questionnaire in a sample of Iranian population

A multilevel longitudinal study of adolescent Internet addiction: The role of obsessive–compulsive symptoms and classroom openness to experience

Internet addiction (IA) in adolescence was longitudinally examined in relation to individual obsessive–compulsive symptoms and the personality trait of openness to experience (OTE) at the classroom level. The study consists of a two-point measure of a normative sample comprising 648 Greek adolescents (retention = 363, age 16–18 years, wave 1: age = 15.75 years, SD = 0.57, males = 46.2%, females = 53.8%). IA was assessed with the IA Test (Young, K. S. [1998]. Caught in the net: How to recognize the signs of internet addiction—And a winning strategy for recovery. New York, NY: Wiley), obsessive–compulsive symptoms with the Symptom check list 90 revised (Derogatis, L. R., & Savitz, K. L. [1999]. The SCL-90-R, brief symptom inventory, and matching clinical rating scales. In M. E. Maruish (Ed.), The use of psychological testing for treatment planning and outcomes assessment (2nd ed., pp. 679–724). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers) and OTE with the FFFK (Asendorpf, J. D., & van Aken, M. A. G. [2003]. Validity of big five personality judgments in childhood: A 9 year longitudinal study. European Journal of Personality, 17, 1–17). A three-level hierarchical linear model investigated individual- and classroom-level effects on IA score and its changes over time. The findings revealed that IA at the initial level was associated with the obsessive–compulsive symptoms of the individual and negatively related to classroom-level OTE. However, adolescents high on obsessive–compulsive symptoms in high on OTE classrooms presented higher IA scores over time.

The Issue of Fuzzy Concepts in Test Construction and Possible Remedies

With the first issue of 2015, I want to continue the series ofeditorials aimed at highlighting specific topics relevant dur-ing test construction. More importantly, I focus on issuesthat repeatedly lead to paper rejections. In this issue, I wantto take up the cudgels for a mixed methods approach in testconstruction. The quantitative aspects of testing a newlyconstructed assessment tool range prominently within thisjournal (Alonso-Arbiol & van de Vijver, 2010). However,some issues arising during the test development processcannot be dealt with using quantitative methods alone.Along with the coauthors of this editorial – experts in theapplication of a mixed methods approach in test construc-tion – I want to explore these issues.Many test constructions show a lack of awareness con-cerning the comprehensibility of items, specifically in per-sonality tests. However, this lack of awareness can haveimplications for psychometric quality. Frequently, it is sim-ply assumed that respondents’ understanding of a test itemmatches the meaning implied by the test developer. It is,however, rarely ever tested whether all respondents of thetargeted population actually understand the test items cor-rectly and in a similar way. As pointed out in the last edito-rial (Ziegler, 2014), item content should be precisely tunedto the needs of every potential respondent in a populationtargeted by a newly developed test. More specifically, per-son variables such as age, gender, and education (Ramm-stedt & Kemper, 2011) have to be taken into accountwhen constructing test items in order to assure that eachpotential respondent fully understands the meaning andmay respond accordingly. If these person variables areneglected in the process of test construction, the psycho-metric quality of a test may be substantially affected byfuzzy concepts. The goal of this editorial is to raise aware-ness for the detrimental effects fuzzy concepts can have intest development and possible remedies.

Erratum

Journal of PersonalityVolume 81, Issue 2 p. 231-231 ErratumFree Access Erratum This article corrects the following: Integrating Normal and Abnormal Personality Structure: The Five-Factor Model Thomas A. Widiger, Paul T. Costa Jr., Volume 80Issue 6Journal of Personality pages: 1471-1506 First Published online: December 5, 2012 First published: 20 March 2013 https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12036AboutSectionsPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditWechat Widiger, T. A., & Costa, P. T. (2012). Integrating Normal and Abnormal Personality Structure: The Five-Factor Model. Journal of Personality, 80, 1471– 1506. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-6494.2012.00776.x The purpose of this erratum is to provide a clarification of statements made within Widiger and Costa (2012). This article cited a review paper by Ashton and Lee (2001) as support for the existence of the five domains of the five-factor model across different languages. However, as Widiger and Costa further indicated, Ashton and Lee (2008) advocate instead a six-factor model. Widiger and Costa's statement though that Ashton and Lee (2008) “have since suggested” a six-factor structure implied (incorrectly) that this was not the position Ashton and Lee advocated in 2001. Widiger and Costa's comments on de Raad et al. (2010b) can also be clarified. It should be acknowledged that there is considerable disagreement as to the most accurate interpretation of the findings of this study (e.g., Ashton & Lee, 2010; de Raad et al., 2010a). There is probably agreement that the first three factors are replicable across languages, but there is a difference of opinion as to whether the fourth, fifth, and sixth factors obtain adequate replication and how to best define and/or distinguish the sixth factor of honesty-humility versus agreeableness. An argument can be made that the sixth factor is at times more replicable than the fifth, perhaps though depending in part on how the sixth factor is defined. References Ashton, M. C., & Lee, K. (2001). A theoretical basis for the major dimensions of personality. European Journal of Personality, 15, 327– 353. Wiley Online LibraryWeb of Science®Google Scholar Ashton, M. C., & Lee, K. (2008). The prediction of Honesty-Humility-related criteria by the HEXACO and Five-Factor models of personality. Journal of Research in Personality, 42, 1216– 1228. CrossrefWeb of Science®Google Scholar Ashton, M. C., & Lee, K. (2010). On the cross-language replicability of personality factors. Journal of Research in Personality, 44, 436– 441. CrossrefWeb of Science®Google Scholar De Raad, B., Barelds, D. P. H., Levert, E., Mlacic, B., Church, A. T., Katigbak, M. S., Ostendorf, F., Hrebickova, M., Di Blas, L., & Szirmak, S. (2010a). Only three personality factors are fully replicable across languages: A reply to Ashton and Lee. Journal of Research in Personality, 44, 442– 445. CrossrefWeb of Science®Google Scholar De Raad, B., Barelds, D. P. H., Levert, E., Mlacic, B., Church, A. T., Katigbak, M. S., Ostendorf, F., Hrebickova, M., Di Blas, L., & Szirmak, S. (2010b). Only three personality factors are fully replicable across languages: A reply to Ashton and Lee. Journal of Research in Personality, 44, 442– 445. CrossrefWeb of Science®Google Scholar Widiger, T. A., & Costa, P. T. Jr. (2012). Integrating normal and abnormal personality structure: The Five-Factor Model. Journal of Personality, 80, 1471– 1506. Wiley Online LibraryPubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar Volume81, Issue2April 2013Pages 231-231 ReferencesRelatedInformation

Personality Psychology in the First Decade of the New Millennium: A Bibliometric Portrait

Nine principal personality psychology journals— Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (JPSP), Journal of Personality (JP), Journal of Research in Personality (JRP), European Journal of Personality (EJP), Personality and Individual Differences (PAID), Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin (PSPB), Personality and Social Psychology Review (PSPR), Journal of Personality Assessment (JPA), and Journal of Personality Disorders (JPD)—have published 8510 research papers from 2001 to 2010. These papers have been cited 149 108 times (September 2011) by papers published in journals indexed in the Web of Science. Although personality psychologists from the US published the largest number of papers (4924, 57.9%) and had the largest number of citations (101 875, 68.3%), their relative contribution to personality literature has slightly diminished during the first decade of the new millennium. Unlike other countries, personality psychologists residing in the US demonstrated a strong country self–citation bias: They were about 14% more likely to cite papers which were written by their compatriots rather than non–US authors in three leading journals JPSP, PSPB, and PSPR. The intensity and pattern of citations indicate that personality psychology indeed occupies one of the core positions at the heart of psychological knowledge. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Reviewers for European Journal of Personality (Reviews Completed from 1St September 2011 to 31St August 2012)

Reviewers for European Journal of Personality (Reviews Completed from 1St September 2011 to 31St August 2012)

On Correlated Errors

On Correlated Errors

On Issues of Validity and Especially on the Misery of Convergent Validity

On Issues of Validity and Especially on the Misery of Convergent Validity

Reviewers for European Journal of Personality (Reviews Completed from 1 September 2010 to 31 August 2011)

Reviewers for European Journal of Personality (Reviews Completed from 1 September 2010 to 31 August 2011)

Some Thoughts Concerning the Recent Shift from Measures with Many Items to Measures with Few Items

Some Thoughts Concerning the Recent Shift from Measures with Many Items to Measures with Few Items

The construct validity of three entry level personality inventories used in the UK: a cautionary case study

We report an error in “The Construct Validity of Three Entry Level Personality Inventories Used in the UK: A Cautionary Case Study” by Neil Anderson and Deniz S. Ones (European Journal of Personality, 2003, Vol. 17, S39–S66). We also alert the reader to a potential data shift of one data row in the dataset reported on in Anderson and Ones (2003) and provide an alternate table. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.