Revision as of 12:39, 5 March 2022

ABSTRACT

Understanding personality science is the key to optimizing your behaviour and getting to control working dynamics. Every single person has inherited traits from their parents, created others in their childhood and nurtured a complicated, self-developed and multi-dimensional set of characteristics that eventually will define them as a person and their relationships with their surroundings. Researchers have found that there is a science to personality and grouped them into 5 dimensions, fondly known as the Big Five or using the acronym O.C.E.A.N (can also be referred as C.A.N.O.E). Developed from the 1980s onward in psychology traits and with factor analysis applied to personality surveys, these cited dimensions grew to be: Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness and Neuroticism.

This article presents the results of a review of numerous studies, to provide a comprehensive overview of the differences between traits and how these affect us. It aims to identify how we can benefit from our “default settings” to build competent working teams and manage big programs or projects through the remark of pioneer individual skills that will germinate in the essential rapport of an entire team. The five basic personality traits is a theory developed in 1949 by D.W. Fiske and later expanded upon by other researchers including Norman (1967), Smith (1981) and McCrae and Cost (1987). We will dive upon the years spent trying to pin down character traits as a way of analysing people’s attitudes and how they were reduced from 4000, to 16 and eventually 5.

History of the theory

In 1936 two American psychologists Gordon Allport and H.S. Odbert began to focus on finding the most efficacious way to describe differences between people’s personalities. They suggested that the individual differences that are most salient and socially relevant in people’s lives would eventually become encoded into their language; the more important the more likely is it to become expressed as a single word. This becomes known as the Lexical Hypothesis ^[1]. They took 18,000 words from Webster Dictionary to describe personality traits and found adjectives that described non-physical characteristics creating 4500-word bank of observable behaviour markers.

In 1946 Raymond Cattell used the emerging technology of computers to analyse the Allport-Odbert list. He organised the list into 181 clusters and asked subjects to rate people whom they knew by the adjectives on the list, which, through factor analysis generated the 16PF Personality Questionnaire, that remains in use today.

In 1961, two Air Force researchers, Tupes and Christal analysed personality data from eight large samples. Using Cattell’s trait measures, they found five recurring factors. This work was replicated by Norman shortly afterwards. He found that five major factors were sufficient to account for a large set of personality data. At a 1981 symposium in Honolulu, four prominent researchers, Lewis Goldberg, Naomi Takemoto-Chock, Andrew Comrey, and John M. Digman, reviewed the available personality tests and widespread the acceptance of the five-factor model among personality researchers. Beneath each proposed global factor, there were several correlated and more specific primary factors. These traits were not black and white but rather place on continua.

The Big Five Personalities

Fondly known as the Big 5 Personality Traits, or O.C.E.A.N (can also be referred as C.A.N.O.E), this is the most scientific model to comprehend the relationship between personality and academic behaviour. ^[2].

Openness

This characteristic includes imagination and insight. The world, other people, and an eagerness to learn and experience new things is particularly high for this personality trait. They demonstrate a general appreciation to the world surrounding as well as demonstrating a bigger awareness of their feelings and to hold more unconventional beliefs. It leads to having a broad range of interests and being more adventurous when it comes to decision making. Some disagreement remains about how to interpret and contextualize the openness factor as there is a lack of biological support for this particular trait. Openness had not shown a significant association with any brain regions as opposed to the other four traits which did when using brain imaging to detect changed in volume associated with each trait. [38W]

- Openness had a 57% genetic influence. [quiz]

Think of that person who’s always ordering the most exotic thing on the menu, going to different places, and having gobsmacking interests. You could normally describe him/her as someone with a rich vocabulary, vivid imagination, excellent ideas, quickly understanding of things, someone who spends time reflecting on things and is full of ideas.

Anyone low in this trait tends to be viewed with more traditional approach to life and my struggle when it comes to problem solving outside their comfort zone of knowledge as adapting to certain situations may provoke a challenge. They are consistent and cautious.

Conscientiousness

Conscientiousness is a trait that includes high levels of thoughtfulness, good impulse control, and goal-directed behaviours. Describes how organized and dependable you can be and shows a tendency to display self-discipline, act dutifully and strive for achievement against measure or outside expectations. The average level of conscientiousness rises among young adults and then declines among older adults [41W]

- Conscientiousness has 49% genetic influence. [quizref]

A highly conscientious person will regularly plan ahead and analyse their own behaviour to see how it affects others, it is always prepared, pays attention to details, gets chores done right away, likes order, follows a schedule and is generally exciting in work, they like to know the plan rather than be spontaneous.

People low in this trait tend to dislike structure and schedules, procrastinate on important tasks, and finally fail to complete them as well. They are more easy-going and laid back.

Extraversion

Extraversion (can also be referred as extroversion) is a trait that many will have come across in their own lives and describes how you interact with people. It’s easily identifiable and widely recognisable as “someone who gets energised in the company of others”.

- Extraversion has 54% genetic influence.

They thrive on being the centre of attention, enjoy meeting new people and somehow tend to have the biggest friend and acquaintance group you have known. The identify themselves as being the life of the party, feel comfortable around people, start conversations, talk a lot of different people at parties.

The opposites are introverts. They prefer solitude and have less energy in social situations. Being at the centre of attention or making small talk can be quite taxing and they are more reserved. Their lack of social involvement should not be interpreted as shyness or depression, instead they are more independent of their social world than extroverts.

Agreeableness

People who exhibit high agreeableness will show signs of trust, altruism, kindness and affection, it is how you feel towards others and also have an optimistic view of human nature. Highly agreeable people tend to have high prosocial behaviours which means that they’re more inclined to be helping other people. Empathy towards others is commonly understood as another form of agreeableness even if the term doesn’t quite fit.

- Agreeableness has 42% genetic influence.

Interest in people, sympathize with other feelings, have a soft heart, take time for others, feel other emotions, make people feel at ease.

The opposite manifests in behaviour trait that are social unpleasant like manipulation and nastiness towards others and a lack of caring or sympathy, self-interest is placed above getting along with others. They are more analytical and detached.

Neuroticism

Neuroticism is characterised by sadness, moodiness, and emotional instability, it may be described as how you deal with emotions. Often mistaken for anti-social behaviour, or worse a greater psychological issue, neuroticism is a physical and emotional response to stress and perceived threats in someone’s daily life. Anxiety, which plays a large part in the makeup of neuroticism, is about an individual’s ability to cope with stress and perceived or actual risk. People who suffer with neuroticism will overthink a lot of situations and find difficulty in relaxing even in their own space.

According to Hans Eysenck's (1967) theory of personality, neuroticism is interlinked with low tolerance for stress or aversive stimuli [29W]. Neuroticism is a classic temperament trait that as been studied in temperament research for decades before it was adapted by the Five Factors Model [50W].

- Neuroticism has 48% genetic influence.

Those who are sensitive and tend to be more nervous will rate high in this trait. They generally get stressed out easily, worry about things, easily disturbed, and easily upset, change their mood a lot, have frequent mood swings, get irritated easily and often feel blue.

Of course, those who rank lower on the neurotic level will exhibit a more stable and emotionally resilient attitude to stress and situations. Low neurotic also rarely feels sad or depressed, taking the time to focus on the present moment and not get involved in mental arithmetic on possible stress inducing factors.

History of the theory

Originally developed in 1949, the big 5 personality traits is a theory established by D.W. Fiske and later expanded upon by other researchers including Norman (1967), Smith (1967), Golberg (1981) and McCrae and Costa (1987).

Early stages of development

Historically preceding the Big Five personality traits was Hippocrates’s four types of temperament: sanguine, phlegmatic, choleric, and melancholic [56W]. The sanguine type is most closely related to emotional stability and extraversion, the phlegmatic type is also stable but introvert, the choleric type is unstable and extraverted, and the melancholic type is unstable and introverted.

Modern Psychology

In 1936 two American psychologists Gordon Allport and H.S. Odbert began to focus on finding the most efficacious way to describe differences between people’s personalities. They suggested that the individual differences that are most salient and socially relevant in people’s lives would eventually become encoded into their language; the more important the more likely is it to become expressed as a single word. This becomes known as the Lexical Hypothesis [5]. They took 18,000 words from Webster Dictionary to describe personality traits and found adjectives that described non-physical characteristics creating 4500-word bank of observable behaviour markers.

In 1946 Raymond Cattell used the emerging technology of computers to analyse the Allport-Odbert list. He organised the list into 181 clusters and asked subjects to rate people whom they knew by the adjectives on the list, which, through factor analysis generated the 16PF Personality Questionnaire, that remains in use today.

In 1961, two Air Force researchers, Tupes and Christal analysed personality data from eight large samples. Using Cattell’s trait measures, they found five recurring factors. This work was replicated by Norman shortly afterwards. He found that five major factors were sufficient to account for a large set of personality data. At a 1981 symposium in Honolulu, four prominent researchers, Lewis Goldberg, Naomi Takemoto-Chock, Andrew Comrey, and John M. Digman, reviewed the available personality tests and widespread the acceptance of the five-factor model among personality researchers.

How Personality affects you

Biological and development factors

Weinsberg and DeYoung in 2011 studied the big 5 traits and in particular gender differences in personality and concluded that women tend to score higher on extraversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism than men. [Thomas]. It has also been widely recognised that the older we get, the more our behaviour traits will change. We become less extroverted, less neurotic, and less open to new experiences whilst our agreeableness and conscientiousness will grow.

We are only beginning to understand the complex ties between our brain, body, and personality but here are few findings that hint at how our chemistry effects our behaviour:

- People high in extraversion carry long forms of the gene DRD4 which dictated how we produce dopamine, in other words, the higher the bigger chemical pleasure boost when experiencing something new.
- People high in conscientiousness have been found more volume in the middle frontal gyrus in the let lateral pre-frontal cortex part of the brain where we plan and make decisions.
- People high in agreeableness present less volume in the orbitofrontal lobe of their brain where we process emotions. They are goo at working in teams because they excel at understanding and forecasting behavioural and emotional states.
- People high in neuroticism carry long forms of the serotonin transport gene which calms us down. If they produce this gene more slowly, they have harder time regulating their emotions after a negative event. [quizref]

The Facial mapping processes

A person’s face can be used to predict personality and behaviour, and this claim can be sectioned off in 2 main areas: according to social life science research, personalities are affected by genes and our face reflects our DNA. Research conducted in the University of Edinburg [6] studied over 800 sets of twins and found that identical twins, who share the same DNA, were twice as likely to share traits compared with non-identical twins. These uncountable studies tell us that genetic influence is the key to how successful a person will be in life and their ability to learn and develop.

Lefevre [7] has found that people with higher levels of testosterone tend to be wider-faced with bigger cheekbones, and they are also more likely to have more assertive, and sometimes aggressive, personalities. The link between face shape and dominance is surprisingly widespread, from capuchin monkeys – the wider the face, the more likely they are to hold a higher rank in the group’s hierarchy – to professional football players. Differences in skin colour like barely noticeable tints may reflect differences in lifestyle. You appear to be in more robust health, if your skin has a slightly yellowish, golden tone. We exhibit this pigment because we haven’t used these vitamins to battle illness. More intriguingly, the authors also found evidence of a “Dorian Gray effect” – where the ageing face began to reflect certain aspects of the personality that hadn’t been obvious when the people were younger. Women who had more attractive, sociable, personalities from adolescence to their 30s slowly started to climb in physical attractiveness, so that in their 50s they were considered better-looking than those who had been less personable but naturally prettier. Their inner confidence was reflected on subtle differences in expression.

Predicting behaviour at work

At a microlevel, business managers are continually grappling with the challenge of using scarce resources optimally, that is, pursuing organizational effectiveness. One indicator of organizational effectiveness is the job performance levels of individual employees. This study focusses primarily on the management of human resources to address the requirement of organizational effectiveness. Human endeavour in business organizations is typically measured by means of the job performance levels of individual employees. [4] Taking into consideration their competent skills set and how different personalities complement each other is crucial for team formation.

When hiring employees, we are encouraged to accurately try to predict future performance. Each personality type will have a positive or negative impact within the working environment and amongst other staff. For instance, in their journal article “Which Personality Attributes Are Most Important in the Workplace?” Paula Cakett and Philip Walmsley claim that conscientiousness and agreeableness are “important to success across many different jobs” [47W]

A candidate with a high openness score would be willing to learn new skills and tools. Present with more abstract problems, they would be focused on tackling new problems that were perhaps previously overlooked.

Candidates with high conscientiousness wouldn’t necessary be sat at their desk until midnight, but however, be keen to get their work done, meet deadlines and be self-starter. Requiring little handholding, project management teams and Hr departments regularly have highly conscientious people working int their teams to help balance out the structural roles within the overall team development. [Thomas]. This organised and structured approach is often found withing people who work in science and even high-retail finance where detail orientation and organisation are required as a skill set.

The ideal extraversion scores would depend on the role you are hiring for. Extroverts tend to have very public facing roles including areas such as sales, marketing, teaching and politics, they stand out in environments where they thrive off interaction with others. Seen as leaders, extroverted people will be more likely to lead than stand in the crowd and be seen to not be doing anything.

A candidate who shows high agreeableness would suit a role where personal skills and ability to be at the service of others are needed. They lean to find careers in areas where they can help the most such as charity workers, medicine, mental health and even those who volunteer in soup kitchens and dedicate time to the third sector (social studies). Because agreeableness is a social trait, research had shown that one’s agreeableness positively correlated with the quality of relationships with one’s team member. Agreeableness also positively predicts transformational leadership skills. In a study conducted among 169 participants in leadership positions in a variety of professions, individuals were asked to take a personality test and have two evaluations completed by directly supervised subordinates. Leaders with high levels of agreeableness were more likely to be considered transformational rather than transactional. Although the relations were not strong, it was the strongest of the Big Five. However, the same study showed no predictive power of leadership effectiveness as evaluated by the leader’s direct supervisor [45W].

Finally, a candidate who exhibits high neuroticism will not be suited to a role where there are consistent changed, tasks that require strong self-starter tendencies or high stress levels.

How are they measured?

Traditionally, the big 5 personality test is taken with a questionnaire and a multiple-choice response. For example, these questions will ask how much a person agrees or disagrees that he or she is someone who exemplifies various specific statements such as “I am trusting to others”. The responses will determine to what extent the person may be grouped into different personality traits.

The O.C.E.A.N personality test is, to date, the most scientifically validated and reliable psychological model to measure personality. Several measure of the Big Five exist:

- International Personality Item Pool (IPI). [210W]
- NEO-PI-R.
-The Ten-Item Personality Inventory (TIPI) and the Five Item Personality Inventory (FIPI) are vert abbreviated rating forms of the Big Five personality trait. [210W]
- Self-descriptive sente questionnaire. [141W]
- Lexical questionnaires. [212 W]
- Self report questionnaire. [213W]
- Relative socked Big 5 measure. [214W]
- Workplace Personality Test [Thomas questionnaire]

Conclusion

One of the most significant advances of the five-factor model was the establishment of a common framework that demonstrates order in a previously scattered and disorganised field. The “Big Five” has provided psychologists with a common basis for researching personality variances in a consistent and systematic manner. What separates the five-factor model of personality from all others is that it is not based on the theory of any one particular psychologist, but rather on language, the natural system that people use to communicate their understanding of one another.

After all, there is so much more to our appearance than the bone structure and skin tone, personality can also blush through. Some humans tend to work better with one another naturally as their biological schemes are bound to help one another, but in an overall view, there are no better or worse personality skill set but each is relative to the work environment and results aimed. What it can be highlighted form this study is that personality traits should be taken into consideration when team formation as it can step the first milestone to success and pave the way to success.

References

1. ↑ https://www.psychometric-assessment.com/the-lexical-hypothesis-and-factor-models/
2. ↑ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits