Higher-order Personality Factors Research Articles

Mysticism Matters: Distinguishing between Intrinsic Religiosity, Extrinsic Religiosity, and Spirituality Using Higher-order Factors of Personality and Mysticism

The current study was designed to examine factors of personality and mystical experience that might predict the extent to which participants were intrinsically religious, extrinsically religious, and/or spiritual, while controlling for gender and race. Data from 777 introductory psychology students were used. Hypotheses were partially supported with three hierarchical multiple regression analyses. The personality factors traditionalism and transformation were found to be modest differentiating predictors of the three criterion variables. However, the three factors of mysticism, introvertive, extrovertive, and religious interpretation mysticism, were found to predict substantial differentiating variance between intrinsic religiosity and spirituality.

Gender differences in the nature and linkage of higher-order personality factors to trait and ability emotional intelligence

Amidst accumulating support for higher-order personality factors (the big two) and a general factor of personality (GFP), researchers theorize about their unique evolutionary and social underpinnings ( Rushton, Bons, & Hur, 2008). In the current study, these efforts were extended by (a) examining the relevance of a set of intra and interpersonal skills, which form what is more commonly known as trait or ability Emotional Intelligence (EI), to GFP and (b) exploring gender differences in the pattern of these relationships. Consistent with prior research findings, a series of exploratory factor analyses in the current study supported the GFP in both female and male samples. Moreover, EI dimensions dominated these GFPs, though the precise pattern and strength of loadings differ across gender. Specifically, trait Intrapersonal EI loaded highest on the GFP for the male sample. In the female sample, on the other hand, the GFP contributed to all EI ability-based (MSCEIT) dimensions positively, albeit weakly, while trait Interpersonal EI was most relevant to a GFP. Discussion centers on the role of EI as a biologically and socially adaptive, as well as socially-desirable, trait, given its empirical connection with the GFP.

Higher Order Factors of Personality: Do They Exist?

Scales that measure the Big Five personality factors are often substantially intercorrelated. These correlations are sometimes interpreted as implying the existence of two higher order factors of personality. The authors show that correlations between measures of broad personality factors do not necessarily imply the existence of higher order factors and might instead be due to variables that represent same-signed blends of orthogonal factors. Therefore, the hypotheses of higher order factors and blended variables can only be tested with data on lower level personality variables that define the personality factors. The authors compared the higher order factor model and the blended variable model in three participant samples using the Big Five Aspect Scales, and found better fit for the latter model. In other analyses using the HEXACO Personality Inventory, they identified mutually uncorrelated markers of six personality factors. The authors conclude that correlations between personality factor scales can be explained without postulating any higher order dimensions of personality.

The nature and structure of correlations among Big Five ratings: The halo-alpha-beta model.

In light of consistently observed correlations among Big Five ratings, the authors developed and tested a model that combined E. L. Thorndike's (1920) general evaluative bias (halo) model and J. M. Digman's (1997) higher order personality factors (alpha and beta) model. With 4 multitrait-multimethod analyses, Study 1 revealed moderate convergent validity for alpha and beta across raters, whereas halo was mainly a unique factor for each rater. In Study 2, the authors showed that the halo factor was highly correlated with a validated measure of evaluative biases in self-ratings. Study 3 showed that halo is more strongly correlated with self-ratings of self-esteem than self-ratings of the Big Five, which suggests that halo is not a mere rating bias but actually reflects overly positive self-evaluations. Finally, Study 4 demonstrated that the halo bias in Big Five ratings is stable over short retest intervals. Taken together, the results suggest that the halo-alpha-beta model integrates the main findings in structural analyses of Big Five correlations. Accordingly, halo bias in self-ratings is a reliable and stable bias in individuals' perceptions of their own attributes. Implications of the present findings for the assessment of Big Five personality traits in monomethod studies are discussed.

A validation and short form of the Basic Character Inventory

The Basic Character Inventory (BCI) contains 136 items, 17 lower-order personality factors and three higher-order personality factors derived from psychoanalytic theory: Oral, Obsessive Compulsion, and Hysteria. Previous research that investigated the BCI's psychometric properties examined small, special populations and did not use modern statistical methods to validate the BCI. The present study validates the BCI via confirmatory factor analyses using a large sample of 6,285 Norwegian nursing and teaching students. Reliability, convergent validity, and divergent validity of the BCI were also assessed. Results indicated general support for the original BCI factor structure in a reduced form of the BCI that possesses strong reliability and validity, and is suitable for use in time-limited measurement settings.

A general factor of personality: Evidence for the Big One in the five-factor model

Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses using different personality measures in three samples confirmed the existence of general factor of personality (The Big One) within the five-factor model. The Big One is characterized by high versus low Emotional Stability, Conscientiousness, Agreeableness, Extraversion, and Openness, and by high versus low higher-order factors of personality, Stability, and Plasticity. A comprehensive theoretical model of personality structure was therefore proposed with the Big One at the highest level of the hierarchy. The Big One was interpreted as a basic personality disposition that integrates the most general non-cognitive dimensions of personality. It is associated with social desirability, emotionality, motivation, well-being, satisfaction with life, and self-esteem. It also may have deep biological roots, evolutionary, genetic, and neurophysiological.

The K-factor: Individual differences in life history strategy

Until recently, variations in life history strategy were studied exclusively at the species level. Although this domain of study has been extended to examine systematic differences in life history strategy among various human ethnic groupings, more recent evolutionary theories of human development and related behavioral genetic work imply substantial within-group individual variation in life history strategy. We constructed a latent variable model identifying a single common factor, denoted as K, which underlies a variety of otherwise disparate life history parameters. This “ K-Factor” loaded 0.36 on childhood attachment to the biological father, −0.36 on childhood attachment to any non-biological father figure, 0.38 on adult romantic partner attachment, −0.51 on mating effort, −0.58 on Machiavellianism, and −0.41 on risk propensity. The bivariate correlations of the K-factor with higher-order personality factors were statistically significant, −0.24 with “Big Neuroticism” and −0.67 with “Big Psychoticism”, and approached significance, correlating 0.12, with “Big Extraversion”. The K-factor appears to be an underappreciated individual difference variable of major importance to human development.

Standing on the Shoulders of Giants: Notes on Early Positive Psychology (Psychofortology)

Psychofortology is an alternative designation for positive psychology, and fortology (Latin fortis = strong) an antonym for pathology. The strengths paradigm has ancient origins. In this article brief reviews are presented of contributions made during the first eight decades of the twentieth century by mainly psychologists and psychiatrists. Among the most outstanding were James, Jung, Allport, Murray, Rogers, Frankl, Maslow, Csikszentmihalyi and Antonovsky; in all, some 40 forerunners are mentioned. By way of integration, their concepts are classified in terms of J. M. Digman's (1997) higher order personality factors a (socialisation process) and β (personal growth), as well as spirituality/religiousness. A preponderance of the personal growth category was noticeable, particularly from the late 1950s until the early 1970s. The relative neglect of socialisation and interdependencies deserves to be remedied in fortological theory and research.

Special feature: a multifacet circumplex model of personality as a basis for the description and therapy of personality disorders.

A new circumplex model of personality, based upon two higher order personality factors, mental health and behavior control, is presented. This eight-octant model, which also includes the two multifacet dimensions of "social adaptation vs. unrestraint" and "self-actualization vs. inhibition," should not be confused with two other well-known circumplex models: the interpersonal model and the Eysenck model. Mental health, a multifacet construct, is defined as the ability to cope with external and internal demands. Behavior control, also a multifacet construct, is characterized by self-control (norm-, future-, work-, and reason-orientation; orderliness) vs. spontaneity (hedonism, excitement seeking, feeling orientation, liveliness). The theoretical background and facets of these constructs are presented. The model is useful for the description of personality disorders, and etiological hypotheses are formulated from the combination of this model with a circumplex model of interpersonal behavior. Finally, some therapeutic implications of the model are discussed.

The relationship of teacher and parent ratings of academically related personality traits to academic performance in elementary age students

The elementary school years are a critical transition time in the learning process of most children. For most children, these are the years that will make or break their academic progress in school and potentially in a future career. Research with adults has shown that certain personality traits (Conscientiousness and Agreeableness) have a significant impact on job performance criteria. Based on earlier exploratory research (Sneed 1989), this study hypothesizes that certain personality traits (Conscientiousness and Openness to Experience) will have a similar impact on the achievement of elementary-aged children. The goals in this study were three-fold. The first was to attempt to reproduce the predictive personality variables. The second was to compare teacher and parent ratings of personality dimensions, particularly in their potential to form higherorder or broad constructs. The third goal was concerned with external validity and addressed how well the higher-order personality factors predicted two criterion-related measures of academic skills, Academic Achievement and Word Skills, and whether differences in low reading achieving and normal reading achieving students are mediated by individual differences in the higher-order personality rating factors. That is, do teacher and parent assessment of child competence play a mediating role in predicting deficits in academic achievement and reading competence? Structural equation modeling (Joreskog & Sorbom 1988) techniques were used to test these research goals. The results showed that (a) two higher-order factors, Child Competence: Teacher and Child Competence: Parent, explained the relations among five child competence constructs, (b) the higher-order factor Child Competence: Teacher predicted individual differences in the two criterion measures of academic skills, Academic Achievement and Word Skills, and (c) low achieving students showed significant deficits only in the two higher-order factors. The data suggested a moderating role for the personality characteristics represented by the higher-order factors. That is, certain personality dimensions are predicted to have a critical impact on achievement.