RUNNING HEADER: PERSONALITY TRAITS OF LAU BEIRUT STUDENTS 1

Personality Traits of LAU Beirut Undergraduate Students Per School

Toufic Yaktine

201408048

Lebanese American University

 2
PERSONALITY TRAITS OF LAU BEIRUT STUDENTS

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to contribute to the almost non-existent literature examining

whether there was a correlation between choice of major and personality traits in Arab

populations. Using data from 75 undergraduate students from the Schools of Arts and Science,

Business, and Architecture and design from the Lebanese American University of Beirut, the

author drew on Holland’s theory of vocation (1985) and conducted an investigation as to whether

the 3 groups had differences on the Big Five model of personality (Extroversion, Negative

Emotionality, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness and Openness to Experience). The participants

completed an online survey using the Big Five Inventory-2 Short Form (BFI-2-S) (Soto, John;

2017). A one-way between subject ANOVA was conducted to compare the effects of the Big

Five on choice of major and found that there was not a significant effect.
 3
PERSONALITY TRAITS OF LAU BEIRUT STUDENTS

Personality traits of LAU Beirut Undergraduate Students Per School

The choice of one’s major is the first vital decision that young people have to make for

themselves upon embarking in the adult world. This decision will have a long lasting

impact and will greatly influence their choice of vocation which in turn will impact their

overall path in life. Therefore, it is very important for each young person’s choice of

major to be highly congruous with their personality traits in order to maximize their odds

of success within their respective fields of study. Holland (1997) suggests that there

exists an “optimal fit” between student and their major based on their personality, this in

turn would lead to a more harmonious vocational choice and higher job satisfaction. With

better knowledge of what makes this “optimal fit”, prospective students can be better

guided to make a choice regarding choosing a major that better suits them (Norman &

Redlo, 1952). The notion that differences exist in personality traits in students of different

majors is not a new one and has been studied before (e.g. Kaufman et al., 2009; Lievens

et al. Lounsbury et al., 2009; Rubinstein, 2005). One study (Lakhal, Frenette, Sevigny,

Khechine, 2012) found that Agreeableness, Neuroticism, Conscientiousness and

Openness to experience as key predictors for the choice of business major while another

study (De Fruyt & Mervielde, 1996) found that “business and law students were higher in

Extraversion and Conscientiousness than humanities students, as well as more

 4
PERSONALITY TRAITS OF LAU BEIRUT STUDENTS

conscientious than social-science majors”. Other studies (Harris, 1993; Hu & Gong;

1990) reported that natural-science majors were described as more introverted than their

humanities majors’ counterparts. The personality profile of students enrolled in

humanities majors were characterized by Neuroticism, Introversion and Carelessness in

relation to other groups. Social sciences majors were “often described as moderately

extraverted but less conscientious than other groups of students”. Additionally, it has also

been found that humanities majors scored lower on Conscientiousness compared to other

majors (Lievens et al., 2002; De Fruyt & Mervielde, 1996). A systematic review of the

major literature (Vedel; 2015) consistently found students of law, political sc, medicine

and economics scored high on Extraversion and that students of humanities/arts and

psychology scored high on Openness and Neuroticism. The literature on personality traits

and choice of major has mostly been conducted on Western and Asian populations. To

our knowledge, there are few studies that have attempted to replicate these previous

findings on an Arab population and validate them. We thus examined the personality

traits, namely the Big Five (Extraversion, Negative Emotionality, Neuroticism, Openness

to experience and Conscientiousness) of a sample of undergraduate students of different

majors from the Lebanese American University. The students’ majors were grouped (by

the university itself) under three different schools: The School of Arts and Science, The

School of Architecture and Design and the School of Business. We hypothesized that: (1)

Extraversion and Conscientiousness would be more prevalent in students from the School

of Business than those from other Schools; (2) Neuroticism and Negative Emotionality

would be more prevalent in the students from the School of Arts and Science than those

from other Schools; and lastly that (3) Openness to experience and Agreeableness would
 5
PERSONALITY TRAITS OF LAU BEIRUT STUDENTS

be more prevalent in the students from the School of Architecture and Design than those

from the other Schools.

Method

Participants

Initially the targeted number of participants was 140, 20 for each of the seven different schools

within the Lebanese American University Beirut campus. There were no specific criteria for

joining as long as they were from one of the seven schools. Participants were to be randomly

approached and selected. This would have been done via snowball sampling, face to face

interaction and word of mouth. However, before the participant selection process could begin,

the university had to be closed as a result of the Corona Virus, therefore the selection methods

had to be altered to include online interactions via zoom classes. Participants were also recruited

via message broadcasts on social media platforms WhatsApp and Instagram. Due to the

increased difficulty of targeting certain School demographics, participants clustered mostly

around 3 schools: The School of Arts and Science, the School of Business and the School of

Architecture and Design at 75 participants with 52 belonging to the School of Arts and Science,

8 to the School of Architecture and Design and 15 to the School of Business. 10 combined

participants from the other 4 remaining Schools had to be excluded due to them being too small

of a sample size to yield and significant results.

Materials
 6
PERSONALITY TRAITS OF LAU BEIRUT STUDENTS

Participants were given the Big Five Inventory-2 Short Form (BFI-2-S) a 30 item inventory

developed by Soto and John (2017) that measures the Big Five personality domains

(Extraversion, Negative Emotionality, Neuroticism, Openness to Experience and

Conscientiousness). The 30 items each asked the participant to rate how strongly they agreed or

disagreed with the statements (e.g. I am someone who tends to be quiet) on a 5-point scale

(1=strongly disagree, 5=strongly agree). Alpha reliabilities of the BFI-2-S domains averaged

0.77 or 0.78 (Soto, John; 2017) The short form was chosen over the standard Big Five Inventory

due to the smaller sample size and to increase the odds that participants would complete the

survey. Participants were also asked to state their majors and the School which they belonged to.

Procedure

Participants who agreed to partake in the study were provided a link to the online survey.

(https://forms.gle/yxwJCwFeitMx87S99). Before they could begin filling the survey, they had to

agree to a consent form stating that there were no risks or harms that could be incurred by

completing this survey and that their responses would be completely confidential. There were no

incentives or rewards offered for filling the survey. The survey took approximately five minutes

to complete. The data was collected across approximately 30 days.

Results

A one-way between subject ANOVA was conducted on participants’ Big Five ratings. The

analysis was found to be insignificant.

 7
PERSONALITY TRAITS OF LAU BEIRUT STUDENTS

Extraversion

For Extraversion, it was found that F (2, 72) = .456, p= .636 and participants from the schools of

Arts and Science, Business and Architecture and Design shared very similar scores (M= 19.67;

20.27; 18.50, SD= 4.36; 3.39; 3.78).

Agreeableness

For Agreeableness, it was found that F (2, 72) = .160, p= .852. It was also found that the

participants’ scores from the 3 Schools did not differ at all (M= 21.79; 21.13; 21.50, SD= 3.93;

3.54; 5.26)

Conscientiousness

For Conscientiousness, it was found that F (2, 72) = .117, p= .890. Additionally, the

participant’s scores from the 3 Schools had almost no variance (M=20.52; 20.40; 19.75, SD=

3.90; 4.88; 4.68).

Negative Emotionality

For Negative Emotionality, it was found that F (2, 72) = .139, p= .871. It was also noted that the

scores of the participants from the 3 Schools were very similar (M= 18.63; 19.33; 18.63. SD=

4.36; 5.15; 5.15).

Open Mindedness

For Open mindedness, it was found that F (2, 72) = .518, p= .598. The participants’ scores had

almost no variance (M= 23.77; 22.67; 23.50, SD= 3.64; 4.03; 3.42).
 8
PERSONALITY TRAITS OF LAU BEIRUT STUDENTS

Discussion

The insignificance of the results can be attributed to several factors, first of all the

number participants from the schools of Arts and Science, Business and Architecture and

Design greatly varied (N= 52; 15; 8). This would greatly skew the results. Secondly, the

sample size was very small (N =75) therefore a significant effect was not to be expected.

These findings do not support our 3 hypotheses (Extraversion and Conscientiousness

would be more prevalent in students from the School of Business than those from other

Schools; (2) Neuroticism and Negative Emotionality would be more prevalent in the

students from the School of Arts and Science than those from other Schools; and lastly

that (3) Openness to experience and Agreeableness would be more prevalent in the

students from the School of Architecture and Design than those from the other Schools).

However, this should not lead us to exclude the effect of the Big Five personality factors

on the choice of major, previously mentioned literature all contradict our current findings.

There were reasons to believe that threats to the internal validity of the study existed such

as the higher difficulty in obtaining a suitable sample size as a result of the closing of the

Lebanese American University, the general increase in negative emotions since the

Corona lockdown began leading participants to be less likely to complete the survey and

skewing their answers on the personality inventory at the same time. Future studies

would do well to take into account the current extenuating circumstances regarding

Corona Virus or any other global crisis and its effects on participants’ willingness to

engage in research and experimental studies and how it might affect their survey taking

or behaviors within an experimental setting.

 9
PERSONALITY TRAITS OF LAU BEIRUT STUDENTS

References

Balsamo, M., Lauriola, M., & Saggino, A. (2012). Personality and College Major Choice: Which

Come First? Psychology, 03(05), 399–405. doi: 10.4236/psych.2012.35056

De Fruyt, F., & Mervielde, I. (1996). Personality and interests as predictors of educational

streaming and achievement. European Journal of Personality, 10, 405-425.

doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-0984(199612)10:5<405: AID-PER255>3.0.

CO;2-M

Holland, J. L. (1997). Making vocational choices: A theory of vocational personalities

and work environments (3rd ed.). Odessa, FL, US: Psychological Assessment
 10
PERSONALITY TRAITS OF LAU BEIRUT STUDENTS

Resources.

Hu, C., & Gong, Y. (1990). Personality differences between writers and

mathematicians on the EPQ. Personality and Individual Differences,

11, 637-638. doi:10.1016/0191-8869(90)90047-U

Kaufman, J. C., Pumaccahua, T. T., & Holt, R. E. (2013). Personality and creativity in

realistic, investigative, artistic, social, and enterprising college majors.

Personality and Individual Differences, 54(8), 913–917. http://dx.doi.org/10.

1016/j.paid.2013.01.013.

Lakhal, S., Frenette, É., Sévigny, S., & Khechine, H. (2012). Relationship between choice of a

business major type (thing-oriented versus person-oriented) and Big Five personality traits. The

International Journal of Management Education, 10(2), 88–100. doi: 10.1016/j.ijme.2012.03.003

Larson, L. M., Wu, T. F., Bailey, D. C., Gasser, C. E., Bonitz, V. S., & Borgen, F. H. (2010).

The role of personality in the selection of a major: With and without vocational self-efficacy and

interests. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 76(2), 211–222. doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2009.10.007

Lievens, F., Coetsier, P., De Fruyt, F., & De Maeseneer, J. (2002). Medical students' personality

characteristics and academic performance: A five-factor model perspective. Medical Education,

36(11), 1050–1056. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2923.2002. 01328.x.

Logue, C. T., Lounsbury, J. W., Gupta, A., & Leong, F. T. L. (2007). Vocational Interest Themes

and Personality Traits in Relation to College Major Satisfaction of Business Students. Journal of

Career Development, 33(3), 269–295. doi: 10.1177/0894845306297348

 11
PERSONALITY TRAITS OF LAU BEIRUT STUDENTS

Norman, R. D., & Redlo, M. (1952). MMPI personality patterns for various college major

groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 36 (6), 404-409. Retrieved from

http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?vid=1&hid=6&sid=4588b78d-a8b3-46f3-9731-

e8f5dab9a668%40sessionmgr4&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=pdh

&AN=apl-36-6-404

Rubinstein, G. (2005). The Big Five among male and female students of different faculties.

Personality and Individual Differences, 38(7), 1495–1503.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2004.09.012