Social and Personality

Psychological Reports

Openness to 2020, Vol. 123(3) 903–928

! The Author(s) 2019
Article reuse guidelines:
Experience, sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/0033294119826884
Extraversion, and journals.sagepub.com/home/prx

Subjective Well-Being
Among Chinese
College Students:
The Mediating Role
of Dispositional Awe

Rui Dong
Zhejiang University of Finance and Economics, Hangzhou,
People’s Republic of China

Shi G. Ni
Graduate School at Shenzhen, Tsinghua University,
Shenzhen, People’s Republic of China

Abstract
Awe is the emotion experienced when people confront stimuli so vast and novel that
they require accommodation. Dispositional awe, in contrast, captures individual
differences in the tendency to experience awe. Previous research has found that
state awe could predict life satisfaction; however, no study has focused on the indi-
rect effects of dispositional awe on the relationship between personality traits and
subjective well-being. Previous studies have found that both openness to experience
and extraversion were significant predictors of subjective well-being. Both openness
to experience and awe involve cognitive flexibility. Awe can also arise from engaging
in social events. Previous research has found that those who are higher in disposi-
tional awe tend to be more extraverted and open to experience. Therefore, the

Corresponding Author:
Shi Guang Ni, Graduate School at Shenzhen, Tsinghua University, Shenzhen, Guangdong Province 518055,
People’s Republic of China.
Email: ni.shiguang@sz.tsinghua.edu.cn
904 Psychological Reports 123(3)

main purpose of this study is to test the mediating role of dispositional awe among
openness to experience, extraversion, and subjective well-being. To test this hypoth-
esis, a total of 332 Chinese college students were invited to complete an anonymous
survey using a cross-sectional design. The results of structural equation modeling
showed that openness to experience and extraversion predicted higher levels of
dispositional awe, while dispositional awe predicted higher levels of subjective well-
being. Moreover, dispositional awe mediated the effects of openness to experience
and extraversion on subjective well-being. The findings of this study suggest that
openness to experience and extraversion may invite more experiences of awe and
thus promote subjective well-being.

Keywords
Awe, subjective well-being, openness to experience, extraversion, mediation

Introduction
Psychology research has traditionally focused on repairing mental illness and
suffering. In contrast, positive psychology focuses on “what makes life most
worth living” (Seligman, 1999, p. 562). Positive psychologists Seligman and
Csikszentmihalyi (2000) suggest that the mission of positive psychology is to
understand and improve the psychological factors that lead individuals, com-
munities, and society to flourish. Positive emotions are one of the main topics in
the study of positive psychology (Seligman, 2012; Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi,
2000; Seligman, Steen, Parl, & Peterson, 2005). The emotion of awe has an
important influence on subjective well-being (Rudd, Vohs, & Aaker, 2012).
In this study, we explore the possible mediating role of dispositional awe
between personality traits and subjective well-being.

The definition of awe

Although awe is increasingly drawing interest among positive psychologists, it
has only just recently begun to undergo empirical investigation (Chirico, Yaden,
Riva, & Gaggioli, 2016), and it has become a “hot” topic in contemporary
psychology (Schneider, 2017). Awe is defined as an emotion that is experienced
when people confront stimuli so vast that their current knowledge structures
cannot fully assimilate it (Keltner & Haidt, 2003; Shiota, Keltner, & Johns,
2006). Accordingly, vastness not only refers to the physical size but also to
social size, such as fame and prestige. The other core characteristic is a need
for accommodation, that is, the challenges faced by our mental schemas with
this perceived vastness and the difficulty in assimilating the new experience
into our mental structures (Keltner & Haidt, 2003; Razavi, Zhang, Hekiert,
Dong and Ni 905

Yoo, & Hewell, 2016). The state awe is the momentary experiences of stimulus-
focused, self-diminishing, and state need for cognitive accommodation (Shiota,
Keltner, & Mossman, 2007). The dispositional awe is the experiences of awe so
chronically that individuals become accustomed to the psychological consequen-
ces associated with the state awe and had a low need for cognitive closure
(Valdesolo & Grahm, 2014).
Since the operational definition of awe given by Keltner and Haidt (2003),
there has been an increasing number of studies about awe. Some studies explore
the effect of awe on human cognitions (Griskevicius, Shiota, & Neufeld, 2010;
Piff, Dietze, Feinberg, Stancato, & Keltner, 2015) and behaviors (Prade &
Saroglou, 2016; Rudd et al., 2012) by triggering a momentary experience of
awe in laboratory settings. State awe can be triggered by watching awe-
inducing videos or images (Piff et al., 2015; Valdesolo, Park, & Gottlieb,
2016) or by recalling an event that induced a feeling of awe (Prade &
Saroglou, 2016). The aim of other research, which regards awe as a dispositional
variable, was to the type of people who experience awe more frequently and to
identify the relationship between awe and other psychological variables such as
Big Five personality and attachment style (Shiota, Keltner, & Johs, 2006).
Dispositional awe means that some people are more prone to experience awe
than others. Shiota et al. (2006) developed the Dispositional Positive Emotion
Scales (DPES) in which one of the subscales measure dispositional awe. The
other subscales measure joy, contentment, pride, love, compassion, and amuse-
ment. The dispositional awe scale of the DPES is most widely used in studies
regarding dispositional awe (Razavi et al., 2016).

The relationship between awe and subjective well-being

The broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions suggests that, relative to
negative emotions and neutral states, positive emotions can broaden people’s
scope of attention, thinking, and actions and can build physical, intellectual, and
social resources (Fredrickson, 1998, 2001). The cumulative experience of posi-
tive emotions during an individual’s life tends to lead to higher levels of ego
resilience (Aspinwall, 1998; Folkman & Moskowitz, 2000; Fredrickson & Joiner,
2002). Because resilience is related to many important life outcomes such as
better interpersonal and intrapersonal adjustment (Klohnen, 1996) and less
depression after tragedy (Fredrickson, Tugade, Waugh, & Larkin, 2003), posi-
tive emotions tend to increase life satisfaction by building resilience (Cohn,
Fredickson, Brown, & Mikels, 2009). Therefore, the function of positive emo-
tions is to build an individual’s resources for survival and increase social bonds
(Fredrickson, 2013).
However, an increasing number of studies suggest that positive emotions
should be perceived as discrete (Lench, Flores, & Bench, 2011; Linley, Dovey,
Beaumont, Wilkinson, & Hurling, 2016). A discrete emotion perspective
906 Psychological Reports 123(3)

suggests that not all positive emotions are the same (Lench et al., 2011). Based
on emotion-specific thought-action tendencies and resources accrued
(Fredrickson, 2003), each positive emotion is discrete in the sense that it has
unique elicitors, action tendencies, processes, and cognitive and behavioral out-
comes (Lench et al., 2011; Prade & Saroglou, 2016; Tong, 2015). Some empirical
studies support that awe can also enhance the prosocial thoughts and behaviors
better than other positive emotions. For example, inducing state awe tends to
increase participants’ intentions of generosity and willingness to help people
compared to the induction of amusement or a neutral condition (Prade &
Saroglou, 2016). State awe also tends to expand people’s perception of time
compared to happiness (Rudd et al., 2012). Therefore, there appears to be
something unique about awe compared to other positive emotions.
The definition of subjective well-being by Diener and Lucas (1999) is people’s
evaluation of their lives. The evaluation includes “both cognitive judgments of
one’s life satisfaction in addition to affective evaluations of mood and emotions”
(p. 213). According to Steel, Schmidt, and Shulz (2008) and Seligman (2011),
positive affect and negative affect are usually considered to be aspects of sub-
jective well-being; thus, it is necessary to distinguish awe and positive affect.
The Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS; Watson, Clark, &
Tellegen, 1988) is one of the most widely used measures of positive and negative
affect (Forgeard, Jayawickreme, Kern, & Seligman, 2011). Positive affect
reflects “the extent to which a person feels enthusiastic, active, and alert”
(Watson et al., 1988, p. 1063). The PANAS assesses a number of different pos-
itive emotions such as pride and interest. Awe is not included as a measure of
positive affect in the PANAS. Despite this, it is also important to compare awe
with other affects such as amusement, contentment, interest, pride, love, and
joy. The core relational themes, expressive displays, and physiological index are
different among awe, amusement, contentment, interest, pride, love, and joy (see
Campos, Shiota, Keltner, Gonzaga, & Goetz, 2013). The core relational themes
of amusement, interest, and joy are “awareness of incongruity in a situation”
and feeling “playful with others in the environment,” “attention absorbed by
novelty” and “felt they could explore,” and improvement “in resources” and
“increase in positive energy” separately. In contrast, the core relational themes
of awe are “situation-challenged worldview” and “felt smallness relative to
something greater than oneself.” For expressive displays, amusement, content-
ment, love, pride, and joy are associated with a smile, while smiling rarely
appears in the posed displays of awe. Interest displays raised and contracted
brows, lip presses, and head tilts; however, awe displays typically include parted
lips, dropped jaw, raised inner eyebrows, and raised eyelids. For the potential
biological pathway for the association between positive emotions and
health, awe is the strongest predictor of lower levels of pro-inflammatory
cytokines compared with the other six position affects (Stellar et al., 2015).
Based on the above analysis, there is something unique about awe in
Dong and Ni 907

comparison with other affects. Therefore, awe can be considered distinct from
subjective well-being.
Awe can make people view themselves as part of something much greater
than themselves (Bai et al., 2017; Piff et al., 2015; Shiota et al., 2007). Inducing
state awe can expand the scope of an individual’s attention on a broader
scale and cause people to pay less attention to themselves (Piff et al., 2015).
This suggests that awe can be regarded as a self-transcendent emotion (Van
Cappellen & Saroglou, 2012). According to extended-now theory (Vohs &
Schmeichel, 2003), focusing on the present moment elongates time perception.
Therefore, in the experience of awe, people feel that they have more time avail-
able and are less impatient. This leads to that people view their lives more
positively and are more satisfied with their lives (Rudd et al., 2012). The extend-
ed subjective experience of time plays a mediating role between state awe and life
satisfaction. Bussing et al. (2014) also find that state awe and gratitude can help
people draw their attention away from disease to the more beautiful things in
life. Krause and Hayward (2015) find that people who are in awe of God feel
more intensely connected with others, and the connectedness with others medi-
ates the relationship between awe of God and life satisfaction. Therefore, we can
propose Hypothesis 1 (H1): Dispositional awe predicts higher levels of subjective
well-being.

The association between openness to experience, extraversion, and awe

The previous research has largely focused on induced awe and its psychological
effects such as time perception and life satisfaction (Krause & Hayward, 2015;
Rudd et al., 2012). The relationship between awe and personality traits is also
an important topic. However, previous studies have not come to agreement on
the relationship between personality factors and awe (Pilgrim, Norris, &
Hackathorn, 2017; Shiota et al., 2006; Silvia, Fayn, Nusbaum, & Beaty,
2015). Most studies supported that openness to experience linked to awe
(Shiota et al., 2006; Silvia et al., 2015). However, Pilgrim et al. (2017) found
that individuals high in openness to experience experienced awe only when they
also preferred reflective and complex music (Pilgrim et al., 2017). Shiota et al.
(2006) and Silvia et al. (2015) also found the opposite results on the relationship
between extraversion and awe. Although the awe experience is thought to be
universal, the extent to awe experiences may vary among individuals (Pilgrim
et al., 2017). Some people experience awe more frequently than others.
Personality differences may affect a person’s ability to experience awe more
generally (Pilgrim et al., 2017), especially openness to experience and extraver-
sion. Therefore, based on previous studies (Pilgrim et al., 2017; Shiota et al.,
2006; Silvia et al., 2015), the current study continues to investigate the possible
individual differences about openness to experience and extraversion.
908 Psychological Reports 123(3)

Openness to experience and extraversion are two dimensions of the Big Five
personality traits. Shiota et al. (2006) explore the relationship between the Big
Five personality traits and positive emotion dispositions including dispositional
awe. They find that the association between dispositional awe and other per-
sonality traits is not significant except for openness to experience and extraver-
sion. Those who are high in openness tend to have a wide range of interests and
tend to be creative and imaginative (McCrae & Costa, 1991). Furthermore, such
individuals have an attitude or mind-set that is open to new ideas and opinions,
and they tend to be curious about new things (Kaufman, 2013). In addition,
people who score high in openness to experience are open to new experiences,
aesthetically imaginative, and sensitive, and they appreciate beauty and the arts
(Kaufman, 2013). Moreover, research has found that awe is negatively related to
the need for cognitive closure (Shiota et al., 2007; Van Cappellen & Saroglou,
2012). It reflects cognitive flexibility and openness. Keltner and Haidt (2003)
also suggested that the need for accommodation is a central feature of awe.
When facing new challenges, people can adjust their mental schemas and recon-
struct their psychological processes. Rudd et al. (2012) find that the state of awe
can inspire people’s desire to acquire new knowledge; Shiota et al. (2006) sim-
ilarly determine that dispositional awe has medium to high positive correlations
with openness to experience. Individuals who are more open to experience are
more curious about things. These individuals are likely to broaden their schemas
and search for stimuli and changes. Thus, they have a greater potential to expe-
rience awe. Silvia et al. (2015) also support this opinion. They find that openness
to experience can predict a tendency to experience state awe when people watch
pictures of nature. Based on the above analysis, we propose Hypothesis 2 (H2):
Openness to experience predicts higher levels of dispositional awe.
Extraversion is defined as “representing the quantity and intensity of inter-
personal interaction, the need for stimulation and the capacity for joy”
(Piedmont, 1998, p. 86). Individuals who are high in extraversion are more
active and are better at expressing themselves in social interactions (Watson &
Clark, 1997). Extraverts are talkative, cheerful, and optimistic, and enjoy change
and excitement in their lives (Watson & Clark, 1997). According to Watson and
Clark (1997), early concepts of extraversion identified by Guilford, Zimmerman,
and Guilford (1976), Eysenck and Eysenck (1975), and Cattell, Eber, and
Tatsuoka (1980) strongly emphasize the social/interpersonal aspects of the
dimension. Contemporary concepts of extraversion increasingly focus on the
positive emotional aspects along with the social/interpersonal aspects (Watson
& Clark, 1997). Extraversion from Costa and McCrae (1992) is composed of six
primary facets, including warmth, gregariousness, assertiveness, activity, excite-
ment seeking, and positive emotions. Although most items on extraversion
scales asked about social activities and dominance, the scales measuring positive
emotions loaded on the same factor (McCrae & Costa, 1991). Watson and Clark
(1997) suggest that extraversion should be relabeled as positive emotionality
Dong and Ni 909

from the broad dimension. Although positive emotional experience plays an

important role in extraversion, McCrae and Costa (1987) still keep lively socia-
bility (the enjoyment of others’ company) in the core of the dimension. Besides,
extraversion and subjective well-being are commonly treated as different con-
structs by researchers (e.g., Furnham & Cheng, 1997; Steel et al., 2008).
Therefore, extraversion and positive emotions are separate constructs.
The behavioral activation system (BAS) and the behavioral inhibition system
are two proposed systems that guide our behavior (Gray, 1982; Van & Abrams,
2017). The BAS is sensitive to the signals of reward (Carver & White, 1994),
which is considered to be responsible for the experience of positive emotions
(Carver & White, 1994; Gray, 1994). Reward orientation or responses to oppor-
tunities in the environment may be a common feature in extraversion, and they
may be directly related to positive emotions (Carver & White, 1994;
Fredrickson, 1998; Watson & Clark, 1997). Studies have found that extraversion
can have a positive relationship with an individual’s global positive emotions
and experiences (Costa & McCrae, 1980; Gross, Sutton, & Ketelaar, 1998; Prade
& Saroglou, 2016; Shiota et al., 2006; Watson & Clark, 1997; Wilson & Gullone,
1999). Awe, amusement, contentment, gratitude, interest, joy, love, and pride
are all positive emotions (Campos et al., 2013). Although awe is a more distal
emotion than joy and pride, which are considered concrete rewards, we still
contend that extraversion has a positive relationship with awe based on the
shared underlying components of BAS. For example, Razavi et al. (2016) find
that people in the United States report higher scores on dispositional awe than
people in Iran. They hypothesize that higher levels of extraversion among
American versus Iranians may explain this difference. In addition, Prade and
Saroglou (2016) find that state awe can enhance an individual’s prosocial nature
and connection with society. Individuals who experience awe of God are more
likely to feel connected with others, which leads to individuals who feel more
satisfied with their lives (Krause & Hayward, 2015).
Some empirical studies have explored the relationship between extraversion
and awe. However, the results of Shiota et al. (2006) and Silvia et al. (2015) are
inconsistent. Shiota et al. (2006) find that dispositional awe has low to medium
positive correlations with extraversion. Conversely, Silvia et al. (2015) do not
find evidence that extraversion predicts state awe. One reason for this discrep-
ancy may be the different definitions of awe in their studies. Dispositional and
state awe have different impacts on individuals’ life (Shiota et al., 2007;
Valdesolo & Grahm, 2014). For example, state awe elicits feelings of certainty
and control and increases the intolerance for uncertainty (Valdesolo & Grahm,
2014), while dispositional awe is associated with a greater tolerance for uncer-
tainty (Shiota et al., 2007) because individuals become accustomed to the psy-
chological consequences associated with the state awe (Valdesolo & Grahm,
2014). As for the results of the relationship between extraversion and awe,
Shiota et al. (2006) measure dispositional awe as an individual trait. However,
910 Psychological Reports 123(3)

state awe measured by Silvia et al. (2015) is induced by pictures of nature and
music. Awe is described as a stimulus-oriented emotion that can be elicited by
physical elicitors (such as music or a tornado), cognitive elicitors (such as a
grand theory), or social elicitors (such as someone’s achievement or a powerful
leader) (Keltner & Haidt, 2003). Because openness to experience is associated
with aesthetic experiences and appreciations (Conner & Silvia, 2015), it is rea-
sonable to examine the relationship between openness to experience and state
awe through the physical elicitors of nature and music. However, social elicitors,
such as one’s achievement or social events, can also trigger state awe; state awe
can also arise from the perceived moral virtue of others, notably others’ benev-
olence toward third parties (Horberg, Oveis, & Keltner, 2011; Keltner & Haidt,
2003), and a charismatic leader’s moving speech also inspires state awe (Razavi
et al., 2016).
Recently, Bai et al. (2017) find that interpersonal events and nature are the
most common elicitors in people’s daily lives both in China and America. More
specifically, state awe is experienced more frequently by socially engaging events
in collectivistic cultures. However, state awe is experienced more frequently with
respect to personal events in individualistic cultures. Bai et al. find that Chinese
people experience awe more frequently in response to another person (e.g., a
friend who excels on an exam). However, Bai et al. find that Americans expe-
rience awe more frequently in response to themselves (e.g., doing better on an
exam than expected). Moreover, Bai et al. find that awe strengthens the close-
ness of social ties more strongly in Chinese people than American people.
Bai et al. also argue that there is methodological bias such that most of the
published research on state awe uses nature as an elicitor. Thus, to study
the relationship between extraversion and awe, it may be more suitable to
use social elicitors, as extraverts may experience awe more frequently when
communicating with others during social events because they have greater
opportunities to encounter moral paragons or learn about others’ achievements,
especially in collectivistic cultures such as China. Because lively sociability is
the core of extraversion McCrae and Costa (1987), extraverts are more active
in socially engaging events than introverts. Hence, during this process, they
extraverts experience awe more frequently than introverts. Based on this
analysis, we propose Hypothesis 3 (H3): Extraversion predicts higher levels of
dispositional awe.

Awe as a potential mechanism

Personality traits are one of the most important factors that affect subjective
well-being, even more important than the impact of the environment (Steel
et al., 2008). Based on a meta-analysis, Steel et al. find that extraversion mea-
sured by the Neuroticism-Extroversion-Openness (NEO) Inventory is a signif-
icant predictor of positive affect, happiness, overall affect, life satisfaction,
Dong and Ni 911

negative affect, and quality of life. Openness to experience measured by the

NEO is a significant predictor of happiness, positive affect, and quality of life.
Other empirical research also finds that openness to experience and extraversion
may be possible predictors of subjective well-being (Chen & Li, 2014; Furnham
& Cheng, 1997). The survey of 3192 subjects of different age groups by the
Chinese researchers Chen and Li (2014) shows that there is a significant corre-
lation between the Big Five personality traits and subjective well-being.
Openness to experience is found to be a significant predictor of subjective
well-being across different age groups. The association between extraversion
and subjective well-being is found across most groups in China, except for the
age-group from 50 to 59.
Previous studies have examined some possible mediators among openness
to experience, extraversion, and subjective well-being, such as social support
and interpersonal trust (J. R. Zhang, Sun, & Yang, 2010), emotional regu-
lation (Gross & John, 2003; Z. Q. Li, Wang, Zhang, & Liu, 2010), and
coping style (J. Li, Yao, & Liu, 2014). However, no study has considered
awe as a possible mediator among openness to experience, extraversion, and
subjective well-being. Based on H2, we assume that individuals with higher
levels of openness to experience may experience awe more frequently because
the two traits involve cognitive flexibility. According to H3, we assume that
individuals with higher levels of extraversion may experience awe more fre-
quently because the two traits are associated with the BAS. Furthermore,
based on H1, dispositional awe can positively affect subjective well-being.
One potential causal pathway is that those who exhibit higher levels of open-
ness to experience and extraversion are more likely to experience awe, which
will improve their level of subjective well-being in the future. Whereas most
studies regard awe as a state experience, it is an innovative perspective from
which to explore the mediating role of awe as a trait among openness to
experience, extraversion, and subjective well-being. Therefore, considering the
relationships among openness to experience, extraversion, dispositional awe,
and subjective well-being, as well as the age of the sample in the current
study, we propose Hypothesis 4 (H4) and Hypothesis 5 (H5): Dispositional
awe plays a mediating role between openness to experience and subjective well-
being and Dispositional awe plays a mediating role between extraversion and
subjective well-being.
The main purpose of this study is to explore the possible relationships among
openness to experience, extraversion, and subjective well-being using disposi-
tional awe as a mediator. Dispositional awe may play a mediating role between
personality factors and subjective well-being. In addition, although there has
been some progress on the topic of awe, most of the research has focused on
Western cultures. Accordingly, an additional purpose of this study is to expand
the focus of the research on awe in Chinese culture.
912 Psychological Reports 123(3)

Method
Participants
A convenience sample of 332 undergraduate and graduate students (91 males
and 241 females) was recruited from psychology courses at the Zhejiang
University of Finance and Economics, Zhejiang, China. The mean age of the
sample was 21.68 years (standard deviation (SD) ¼ 1.61). Their majors included
human resource management, marketing, law, economics, and English.
Voluntary consent forms were provided to all of the participants to complete.
The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Graduate School at
Shenzhen at Tsinghua University.

Measurements
Dispositional awe. We used the dispositional awe subscale obtained from the
DPES developed by Shiota et al. (2006). It is a seven-point Likert-type scale
that includes six items (e.g., “I feel wonder almost every day;” 1 ¼ strongly
disagree, 7 ¼ strongly agree). A blind translation/back-translation method was
used (Sahin, Iyigun, & Acikel, 2015). The questionnaire was independently
translated into Chinese by the two authors and one psychology postgraduate
student. Then, the translations were combined and prepared as a single text
before being back-translated into English by a bilingual Chinese scholar who
has earned a master’s degree and is working on her PhD in psychology in the
United States. Last, the translations were corrected by the first and second
authors together. In this research, the Cronbach’s alpha for all items was .73.

Openness to experience and extraversion. The measurements regarding openness to

experience (O) and extraversion (E) were derived from the 60-item NEO Five-
Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI, Costa & McCrae, 1985, 1992). Liu (2012) trans-
lated the Chinese version and found that the validity and reliability were accept-
able. The openness to experience and extraversion subscales each included
12 items (e.g., “I’m curious about a lot of things” for the openness dimension;
“I really enjoy talking to people” for the extraversion dimension) and were
measured using a five-point Likert-type response format (1 ¼ strongly disagree,
5 ¼ strongly agree). In the present research, the Cronbach’s alpha was .67 for
all items on the openness to experience subscale and .76 for all items on the
extraversion subscale.

Subjective well-being. The Index of Well-Being Scale developed by Campbell,

Converse, and Rodgers (1976) was used to measure people’s feelings
about life during the past month. The seven-point scale included nine items
and was divided into two components. The first component was the
general affect index about life that included eight semantic differential items
Dong and Ni 913

(e.g., “boring-interesting,” “empty-full,” “disappointing-rewarding”). The second

component was the single-item measure of overall life satisfaction (e.g.,
“satisfactory-unsatisfactory;” 1 ¼ complete dissatisfaction, 7 ¼ complete satisfac-
tion; Robinson, Shaver, & Wrightsman, 1991). The scale is psychometrically
sound for application to Chinese college students (J. Li & Zhao, 2000). In the
present research, Cronbach’s alpha for all items was .81.

Procedures and data analysis

The participants completed the questionnaires during class. Voluntary consent
forms were provided to all participants to complete. The participants then
responded to the dispositional awe, openness to experience, extraversion, and
subjective well-being measures. The demographic information was collected at
the end of the survey. Mplus7.4 (Muthén & Muthén, 1998; 2013;2015) was used
for data analysis.

Results
Confirmatory factor analysis for construct discrimination
Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) using structural equation modeling (SEM)
was conducted to discriminate the four constructs.1 To quantify item quality,
the items whose factor loadings were below .40 were deleted (Ford, MacCallum,
& Tait, 1986). In this study, one item (“I often feel awe”) in the awe scale was
deleted. Robust Cronbach’s alpha was .80 after deleting that item (Z. Y. Zhang
& Yuan, 2016).2 Robust McDonald’s omega was .80 (McDonald, 1970; Z. Y.
Zhang & Yuan, 2016). In this study, five reversed coded items (e.g., “It is dif-
ficult for me to imagine freely”) in openness to experiences subscale and four
reversed coded items (e.g., “I usually avoid situations where there are many
people”) in extraversion subscale were deleted.3 Then, two items (e.g. “I like
to waste my time daydreaming”) in openness to experiences subscale and four
items (e.g., “My life is very fast”) in extraversion subscale were deleted because
of their low factor loadings. There remained five items in the openness to expe-
rience subscale and four items in the extraversion subscale. Robust Cronbach’s
alpha was .67 in the openness to experience subscale4 and .77 in the extraversion
subscale after deleting these items. Robust McDonald’s omega was .68 in the
openness to experience subscale and .78 in the extraversion subscale. One item
(“painful-happy”) in the Index of Well-Being Scale was deleted. Robust
Cronbach’s alpha was .93 after deleting one item. Robust McDonald’s omega
was .93.
After deleting the low loading of items and negative items, the measurement
model of the four constructs provided acceptable fits, v2 ¼ 353.69, df ¼ 203,
v2/df ¼ 1.74, p < .001, root mean square error of approximation
914 Psychological Reports 123(3)

(RMSEA) ¼ .05, confirmatory factor index (CFI) ¼ .92, SRMR ¼ .05 (Hinkin,
1995; Hu & Bentler, 1999; Yuan & Bentler, 2000).

Common method bias analysis

Because of the potential problem of common method bias, we used procedural
techniques such as anonymity and reverse-scored methods for control as well as
statistical techniques. We controlled the unmeasured latent method construct
and compared the fit indices of five-, four-, three-, two-, and one-factor models
(Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee, & Podsakoff, 2003). After controlling for the
unmeasured latent method factor (i.e., all of the items were loaded on another
latent variable representing common method bias), the fits of five factor models
were not acceptable (see Table 1). This indicated that there was not a substantial
amount of common method variance in this research. The four-factor model
showed the best fit relative to the three-factor, two-factor, and one-factor
models. Therefore, we retained the four-factor model.

Mediation analysis
The means, SDs, and zero-order correlations for the observed variables5 can be
seen in Table 2.
We analyze the mediation models separately for openness to experience and
extraversion. The mediation model for openness to experience provides accept-
able fit, v2 ¼ 262.41, df ¼ 132, v2/df ¼ 1.99, p < .001; RMSEA ¼ .06; CFI ¼ .92;
SRMR ¼ .05. Openness to experience predicts higher levels of dispositional awe,
b ¼ .59, standard error (SE) ¼ .08, p < .001. Dispositional awe predicts higher
levels of subjective well-being when openness to experience is controlled for,
b ¼ .54, SE ¼ .11, p < .001. The direct effect6 of openness to experience on sub-
jective well-being is not significant when controlling for dispositional awe,
b ¼ .16, SE ¼ .11, p ¼ .15 (see Figure 1).
The mediation model for extraversion provides acceptable fit, v2 ¼ 232.91,
df ¼ 116, v2/df ¼ 2.01, p < .001; RMSEA ¼ .06; CFI ¼ .93; SRMR ¼ .05.
Extraversion predicts higher levels of dispositional awe, b ¼ .55, SE ¼ .08,
p < .001. Dispositional awe predicts higher levels of subjective well-being when
extraversion is controlled for, b ¼ .25, SE ¼ .09, p ¼ .01. The direct effect of
extraversion on subjective well-being is significant when controlling for dispo-
sitional awe, b ¼ .35, SE ¼ .09, p < .001 (see Figure 2).

Discussion
The mediating role of awe
Awe is a positive emotion that has a beneficial effect on people’s cognitions and
behaviors (Griskevicius et al., 2010; Rudd et al., 2012). As such, awe may
Dong and Ni 915

Table 1. The results of confirmatory factor analysis.

v2 df v2/df P CFI RMSEA SRMR

Five-factor model: Awe, openness, extra- 679.33 187 3.63 <.001 .74 .10 .05
version, well-being, CMV
Four-factor model: awe, openness, extra- 353.69 203 1.74 <.001 .92 .05 .05
version, well-being
Three-factor model: awe, open- 437.08 206 2.12 <.001 .88 .06 .06
ness þ extraversion, well-being
Three-factor model: awe þ well-being, 620.16 206 3.01 <.001 .78 .08 .10
openness, extraversion
Three-factor model: awe, openness, well- 507.46 206 2.46 <.001 .84 .07 .08
being þ extraversion
Two-factor model: awe þ well-being, 691.55 208 3.32 <.001 .74 .09 .10
openness þ extraversion
Two-factor model: awe þ 752.17 208 3.62 <.001 .71 .09 .11
extraversion þ well-being, openness
One-factor model: awe þ well- 853.11 209 4.08 <.001 .66 .10 .11
being þ openness þ extraversion

Note: Three-factor model (awe, openness þ extraversion, well-being) is tested in order to discriminate
the two constructs of openness to experience and extraversion because both constructs are personality
dimensions. Three-factor model (awe þ well-being, openness, extraversion) is tested to discriminate awe
from subjective well-being as awe can be considered a positive emotion and positive affect is an aspect of
subjective well-being. Three-factor model (awe, openness, well-being þ extraversion) is tested to dis-
criminate extraversion from well-being as positive emotionality sometimes loads onto the factor of
extraversion. Two-factor model (awe þ well-being, openness þ extraversion) is tested to discriminate
openness from extraversion as both are personality dimensions, and to discriminate awe from well-being
as awe can be considered a positive emotion and positive affect is an aspect of subjective well-being. Two-
factor model (awe þ extraversion þ well-being, openness) is tested to discriminate between awe, extra-
version, and well-being as positive emotionality sometimes loads onto the factor of extraversion, awe can
be considered a positive emotion, and positive affect is an aspect of subjective well-being. One-factor
model is tested to examine whether all the constructs belong on one individual trait construct. The latent
variables are scaled by setting the factor loading of one of the items for each latent variable to 1 and the
intercept of one of the items for each latent variable to 0. CMV: common methods variance; CFI: con-
firmatory factor index; RMSEA: root mean square error of approximation; SRMR: Standardized Root Mean
Square Residual.

Table 2. Means, SDs, and zero-order correlations.

Variables 1 2 3 4

Awe 1 1
Extraversion 2 .45** 1
Openness to experience 3 .43** .35** 1
Subjective well-being 4 .41** .43** .12* 1
M 4.96 3.55 3.57 5.14
SD 0.97 0.71 0.63 1.03
Note: SD: standard deviation.
*p < .05; **p < .01.
916 Psychological Reports 123(3)

Figure 1. Model of openness to experience, awe, and subjective well-being. ***p < .001. See
Appendix for more details.

Figure 2. Model of extraversion, awe, and subjective well-being. **p < .01; ***p < .001. See
Appendix for more details.

increase an individual’s prosocial behavior, protect an individual’s immunity

system against chronic and cardiovascular disease, cause an individual to expe-
rience more happiness, and incite an individual to invest more in their
spiritual life (Krause & Hayward, 2015; Piff et al., 2015; Rudd et al., 2012;
Stellar et al., 2015; Van Cappellen, Toth-Gauthier, Saroglou, & Fredrickson,
2016). The results of this study indicate that dispositional awe predicts one’s
subjective well-being. These results are consistent with previous findings where-
by state awe can increase life satisfaction (Rudd et al., 2012). This study further
supports the positive psychological benefit of awe. Awe may allow a person to
experience more pleasant and emotionally moving events in life and to more
Dong and Ni 917

frequently experience the beauty of life. Another possible reason for the psy-
chological benefit of awe may be that those who are high in dispositional awe
may experience the same events as those who are low in dispositional awe but
react to them differently. Facing a vast event or challenge, those who are high in
dispositional awe may be more likely to accommodate the new experience and
change their mental structures. The feelings of smallness and transcendence
could be experienced before, during, or after this process. Varieties of self-
transcendent experience, including self-transcendent positive emotions such as
awe, are often associated with subjective well-being (Yaden, Haidt, Hood, Vago,
& Newberg, 2017). Thus, it is concluded that experiences of awe are important
for people’s quality of life.
Who is more likely to experience awe? Shiota et al. (2006) find that the
association between openness to experience and dispositional awe is significant.
Silvia et al. (2015) find that openness to experience can predict the degree of
state awe with respect to natural images and music. The results of this study
indicate that openness to experience predicts dispositional awe, and they sup-
port the conclusions of previous studies regarding the relationship between
openness to experience and dispositional awe. It is further suggested that awe
is more likely to be experienced by individuals whose knowledge structures are
less fixed given that one core characteristic of awe is the need for accommoda-
tion. Open individuals have a preference for variety and are intellectually curi-
ous (Costa & McCrae, 1992). They are likely to broaden their schemas to search
for new stimuli and change. During the process, an open person may be more
likely to experience awe (Shiota et al., 2006). In Shiota et al.’s (2006) study,
extraversion has low to medium positive correlations with dispositional
awe measured by the dispositional awe subscale obtained from the DPES.
In Silvia et al.’s (2015) study, extraversion is not found to predict state awe
responses to nature and music. In the current study, we find that extraversion
can predict the higher levels of dispositional awe. The reason may be found in
the elicitors of awe and the measurement of awe. In Silvia’s study, they did not
find the evidence that extraversion predicts state awe. However, in Silvia et al.’s
(2015) study, state awe is triggered by physical elicitors, not by social elicitors,
such as natural images and music. Silvia et al. mainly measure state awe in two
ways. One is to obtain the physiological responses to some special situations
such as chills or goose bumps, while another is to directly obtain self-reported
emotional responses to awe. This discrepancy may be the result of the employed
methodology, especially from the types of elicitors. Bai et al. (2017) find that
awe is more frequently caused by socially engaging events in China than in the
United States. Thus, it is suggested that to explore the relationship between
extraversion and awe, social elicitors may be especially relevant, at least in
China. Bai et al. has shown that awe increases during collective engagement
and promotes integration into social groups. Thus, extraverts may be more
likely to experience awe in their social lives. Accordingly, it is necessary for
918 Psychological Reports 123(3)

future research to explore the relationship between extraversion and awe by

considering different sources of inducement and various measurement methods.
Based on the previous studies, this study discusses the relationship among
openness to experience, extraversion, dispositional awe, and subjective well-
being. The data reveal that variations in openness to experience and extraversion
predict the variations in dispositional awe, which in turn predict the variations in
subjective well-being. People who report greater openness to experience and extra-
version are more likely to experience awe in life. Dispositional awe, in turn,
predicts greater subjective well-being. These results support the hypothesis that
dispositional awe plays a mediating role among openness to experience, extraver-
sion, and subjective well-being.

Cultural variations in the expression of awe

Most of the studies of awe have been conducted in Western contexts. Few
studies have focused on non-Western cultures. Razavi et al. (2016) first validate
the factor structure of 16 items from DPES intended to measure awe, amuse-
ment, and pride in four countries, including the United States, Iran, Malaysia,
and Poland. Razavi et al. (2016) find that the item “I seek out experiences that
challenge my understanding of the world” does not have significant loading for
the Iranian and Polish samples. Nevertheless, they find that the scales of awe,
amusement, and pride, as three unique emotions are structural invariant (includ-
ing factor loadings, variance, and covariance) across all countries after exclud-
ing the problematic item. In addition, they also find that the mean score of
dispositional awe in the United States is higher than in Iran. However, the
Chinese culture is not included in these cross-cultural studies.
Bai et al. (2017) find that the elicitors of awe differ in collectivistic and indi-
vidualistic cultures. In the present study, the results of CFA reveal that the item
“I often feel awe” does not demonstrate good loading for the current Chinese
sample. Although the experience of awe is not limited to Western cultures, there
may be differences about the expression of awe between Chinese people and
Western people. In the extant research, only one item of the dispositional awe
subscale explicitly mentions “awe.” The concept of awe may be more abstract
for the Chinese than for Westerners. Awe can have a positive and/or a negative
valence depending on how the individual appraises his or her experience
(Chirico et al., 2016; Keltner & Haidt, 2003). Chirico et al. (2016) claim that
the existing research focuses on positive rather than on negative awe experien-
ces. However, the term “awe” in Chinese means both “respect” and “fear”
simultaneously. In Chinese, the word “awe” is written as “敬畏,” which is a
compound word in modern language. A statement regarding awe emphasizes
“fear” more often in the Chinese culture than it does respect, such as “Fear of
Heaven’s decree, fear of great men, and fear of sage’s words” (畏天命, 畏大人,
畏圣人之言), in The Analects of Confucius. Schneider (2017) emphasizes in his
Dong and Ni 919

qualitative study that awe is perceived as a mixed feeling that incorporates thrill,
anxiety, humility, and wonder. All of the items on the dispositional awe scale
describe a specific feeling about awe except for one item. It is necessary to
develop a Chinese version of the dispositional awe scale that involves more
negative aspects of awe. The indirect effect of awe may remain significant but
decrease. Further research should more carefully compare the measurements
and characteristics of awe between the Chinese and the Western contexts,
particularly with respect to the negative valence of awe.

Limitations and future direction

There are some limitations in the present study. First, the sample is limited to
one university. It is also limited to a single cultural context and a fairly young
age-group of university students. Whether these results will generalize to other
cultures in the broader community is unknown. Future studies should expand
the range of sampling, such as working adult samples and middle age and older
adult samples. Second, because the hypotheses in the current study are inferred
from the shared underlying components of cognitive flexibility between open-
ness to experience and awe, and another possible mechanism of BAS between
extraversion and awe, other pathways, such as awe increasing openness to expe-
rience/extraversion or even bidirectional relationships, are possible. Besides, the
data were collected at the same time and from a single source. We are unable to
confirm the causal relationship between and among variables. Because the data
come from a common rater, common scale formats, and measurement context
(Podsakoff et al., 2003), future studies could strive to design longitudinal
research to provide stronger evidence for a causal direction and use different
response formats, media, locations, raters, and measurement times. Third,
although the correlation between extraversion and openness to experience is
relatively high when compared to what was found in Steel et al.’s (2008)
meta-analysis, it is similar in magnitude to what has been found in other studies
with this age-group in China (e.g., X. N. Zhang, 2012). Fourth, the current
study did not control for other dispositional positive emotions. Thus, it is not
clear whether the tendency to experience awe has a unique role in the relation-
ship between extraversion and/or openness and subjective well-being or whether
it is caused by the tendency to experience positive emotions in general. Finally,
although the dispositional awe scale (Shiota et al., 2006) is most widely used in
studies regarding dispositional awe (Razavi et al., 2016), the items do not take
into account social and cognitive components of awe in an explicit way in the
scale. Further, since the item 5 mentions nature, the rest of the items could be
anchored to it (regarding beauty, wonder, etc.) and therefore be though as dis-
position to experience beauty, wonder, and patterns in the nature—which also
could explain some effects on well-being being due to restoration experiences in
nature. Future studies should include more than one item mentioned other
920 Psychological Reports 123(3)

generally social and cognitive elements of awe such as the great leader and the
grand theory because awe also can be elicited by social elicitors and cognitive
elicitors (Piff et al., 2015; Pizarro et al., 2018).

Conclusion
Awe is a transcendent and profound emotion. State awe has a potential positive
impact on an individual’s level of satisfaction with life (Rudd et al., 2012).
Considering the different impacts on individuals’ life between dispositional
and state awe, we test the positive influence of dispositional awe on individuals’
subjective well-being in the current study. Our study finds that dispositional awe
also affects individuals’ subjective well-being. The people who are open and
extroverted are more likely to experience awe frequently in their daily lives.
Therefore, dispositional awe plays an important mediation role among openness
to experience, extraversion, and subjective well-being.

Appendix
Retained items from the awe scale
A2: I see beauty all around me.
A3: I feel wonder almost every day.
A4: I often look for patterns in the objects around me.
A5: I have many opportunities to see the beauty of nature.
A6: I seek out experiences that challenge my understanding of the world.

Retained items from the openness to experience scale

O1: I love to immerse myself in fantasies and to explore all things that
is possible.
O2: I like to cultivate and develop new hobbies.
O3: I am fascinated by the beauty of nature and art.
O4: When I read a poem or enjoy a piece of art, I sometimes feel very excited.
O5: I am curious about a lot of things.

Retained items from the extraversion scale

Ex1: I like to have a lot of friends around me.
Ex2: I often feel energetic.
Ex3: I am an outgoing person
Ex4: I am an active person.
Dong and Ni 921

Retained items from the subjective well-being scale

S1: Boring—interesting
S3: Useless—valuable
S4: Lonely—animated
S5: Empty—full
S6: Hopeless—hopeful
S7: Disappointing—rewarding
S8: Life has not given me any chance—life is too good for me
S9: Satisfactory—unsatisfactory

Authors’ Contributions
Both of the authors have made substantial, direct, and intellectual contribution to the
work, including designing the research, writing, and revising the manuscript before it was
submitted for publication.

Declaration of Conflicting Interest

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research,
authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, author-
ship, and/or publication of this article: The project was supported by the National
Philosophy and Social Sciences Foundation of China (Grant no. 16CZX062).

ORCID iD
Rui Dong http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7143-5007

Notes
1. All missing values were processed using Full Information Maximum Likelihood (max-
imum likelihood estimation with robust standard errors, MLR). There were 4 partic-
ipants (1.21%) with missing data on awe scale, 13 participants (3.92%) with missing
data on the openness to experience subscale, 5 participants (1.51%) with missing data
on the extraversion subscale, and 23 participants (6.93%) with missing data on the
subjective well-being scale.
2. According to Zhang and Yuan (2016), we used the online software (https://websem.
psychstat.org/apps/alpha/). Both alpha and omega were estimated from the observa-
tion data with missing values using robust method.
3. S. Q. Luo and Jiang (2014) argued that, under Chinese cultural thinking habits, the
Chinese people are more used to positive-coded items in those self-reported scales, and
they are not used to the reverse-coded items. The assumption of the reverse-coded
items was that participants could symmetrically self-report those items objectively.
922 Psychological Reports 123(3)

For example, the NEO-FFI in this study was coded using a five-point Likert-type
scale, and there were some understanding derivations with those low loading reverse-
coded items of the scale.
4. Although NEO instruments to measure the Big Five are widely used, some issues have
been found with the NEO in past research (Egan, Deary, & Austin, 2000; Marsh et al.,
2010; Marsh, Nagengast, & Morin, 2013; Rosellini & Brown, 2011). Some items were
found to have salient cross-loadings and nonsalient primary factor loadings in 1025
British subjects, especially in the openness to experience and extraversion factors
(Egan et al., 2000). In the current study, we also found that there are some nonsalient
or low-factor loading items that were deleted before the formal SEM analysis. Based
on meta-analysis, J. Luo and Dai (2011) found that the reliabilities got from Chinese
psychologists were lower than Western counterparts. For example, the Cronbach’s
alpha of openness to experience and extraversion is about .718 and .766 in NEO. The
reason for the low Cronbach’s alpha with regard to openness to experience subscale
may be due to Cronbach’s alpha being sensitive to the number of items in a scale
(Green, Lissitz, & Mulaik, 1977). However, we thought it is acceptable because it was
greater than .650 recommended by Devellis (1991).
5. The observed variables in Table 2 were calculated by taking the average of the items
on each scale.
6. Historically, a popular approach to mediation analysis is the causal steps approach,
also known as the Baron and Kenny (1986) method. Complete and partial mediations
are concepts that are the result of the causal steps approach. Hayes (2013) suggests
that the concepts of complete and partial mediations should be abandoned because
“they are too sample-size-dependent and the distinction between them has no sub-
stantive or theoretical meaning or value of any consequence” (p. 172). All mediation
should be viewed as partial mediation.

References
Aspinwall, L. G. (1998). Rethinking the role of positive affect in self-regulation.
Motivation and Emotion, 22, 1–32. doi:10.1023/A: 1023080224401
Bai, Y., Naruskin, K., Chen, S., Gordon, A. M., Stellar, J. W., McNeil, G. D.,. . .
Keltner, D. (2017). Awe, the diminished self, and collective engagement: Universals
and cultural variations in the small self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
113(2), 185–209. doi:10.1037/pspa0000087
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social
psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0096304
Bussing, A., Wirth, A. G., Reiser, F., Zahn, A., Humbroich, K., Gerbershagen, K., . . .
Baumann, K. (2014). Experience of gratitude, awe and beauty in life among patients
with multiple sclerosis and psychiatric disorders. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes,
12, 1–12. doi:10.1186/1477-7525-12-63.
Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., & Rodgers, W. L. (1976). The quality of American life:
Perceptions, evaluation and satisfaction. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
Campos, B., Shiota, M. N., Keltner, D., Gonzaga, G. C., & Goetz, J. L. (2013). What is
shared, what is different? Core relational themes and expressive displays of eight
positives. Cognition & Emotion, 27(1), 37–52. doi:10.1080/02699931.2012.683852
Dong and Ni 923

Carver, C. S., & White, T. L. (1994). Behavioral inhibition, behavioral activation, and
affective responses to impending reward and punishment: The BIS/BAS scales. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 319–333. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.67.2.319
Cattell, R. B., Eber, H. W., & Tatsuoka, M. M. (1980). Handbook for the Sixteen Personality
Questionnaire (16PF). Champaign, IL: Institute for Personality and Ability Testing.
Chen, Z. X., & Li, Q. M. (2014). The relation between Big Five traits and well-being
across the life span. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 12(5), 633–638 (in Chinese).
doi:10.3969/j.issn.1672-0628
Chirico, A., Yaden, D., Riva, G., & Gaggioli, A. (2016). The potential of virtual reality
for the investigation of awe. Frontiers in Psychology, 7(26), 1766–1771. doi:10.3389/
fpsyg.2016.01766
Cohn, M. A., Fredrickson, B. L., Brown, S. L., & Mikels, J. A. (2009). Happiness
unpacked: Positive emotions increase life satisfaction by building resilience.
Emotion, 9(3), 361–368. doi:10.1037/a0015952
Conner, T. S., & Silvia, P. J. (2015). Creative days: A daily diary study of emotion,
personality, and everyday creativity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the
Arts, 9, 463–470. doi:10.1037/aca0000022
Costa, P. T., Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1980). Influence of extraversion and neuroticism on
subjective well-being: Happy and unhappy people. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 38(4), 668–678. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.38.4.668
Costa, P. T., Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1985). The NEO Personality Inventory manual.
Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
Costa, P. T., Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory
(NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual.
Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
Devellis, R. F. (1991). Scale development: Theory and applications. Applied social research
methods series 26. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.
Diener, E., & Lucas, R. R. (1999). Personality and subjective well-being. In E,
Kahneman, & E, Diener, & N, Schwarz (Eds.), Well-being: The foundations of hedonic
psychology (pp. 213–229). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
Egan, V., Deary, I., & Aystin, E. (2000). The NEO-FFI: Emerging British norm and an
item-level analysis suggest N, A, and C are more reliable than O and E. Personality
and Individual Differences, 29, 907–920. doi:10.1016/S0191-8869(99)00242-1
Eysenck, H. J., & Eysenck, S. B. G. (1975). Manual of the Eysenck Personality
Questionnaire. San Diego, CA: Educational and Industrial Testing Service.
Folkman, S., & Moskowitz, J. T. (2000). Positive affect and the other side of coping.
American Psychologist, 55, 647–654. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.55.6.647
Ford, J. K., MacCallum, R. C., & Tait, M. (1986). The application of exploratory factor
analysis in applied psychology: A critical review and analysis. Personnel Psychology,
39(2), 291–314. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1986.tb00583.x
Forgeard, M. J. C., Jayawickreme, E., Kern, M., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2011). Doing the
right thing: Measuring wellbeing for public policy. International Journal of Wellbeing,
1(1), 79–106. doi:10.5502/ijw.v1i1.15
Fredrickson, B. L. (1998). What good are positive emotions? Review of General
Psychology, 2, 300–319. doi:10.1037/1089-2680.2.3.300
924 Psychological Reports 123(3)

Fredrickson, B. L. (2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology:

The broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. American Psychologist, 56(3),
218–226. doi:10.1098/rstb.2004.1512
Fredrickson, B. L. (2003). Positive emotions and upward spirals in organizations. In K. S.
Cameron, J. E. Dutton, & R. E. Quinn (Eds.), Positive organizational scholarship:
Foundations of a new discipline (pp. 163–175). San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.
Fredrickson, B. L. (2013). Positive emotions broaden and build. Advances in
Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 1–53. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.56.3.218
Fredrickson, B. L., & Joiner, T. (2002). Positive emotions trigger upward spirals toward
emotional well-being. Psychological Science, 13, 172–175. doi:10.1111/1467-9280.00431
Fredrickson, B. L., Tugade, M., Waugh, C. E., & Larkin, G. R. (2003). What good are
positive emotions in crises? A prospective study of resilience and emotions following
the terrorist attacks on the United States on September 11th, 2001. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 365–376. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.84.2.365
Furnham, A., & Cheng, H. (1997). Personality and happiness. Psychological Reports, 83,
761–762. doi:10.1016/0191-8869(90)90138-H
Gray, J. A. (1982). The neuropsychology of anxiety: An inquiry into the functions of the
septo-hippocampal system. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Gray, J. A. (1994). Three fundamental emotion systems. In P. Ekman & R. J. Davidson
(Eds.), The nature of emotion: Fundamental questions (pp. 243–247). New York, NY:
Oxford University Press.
Green, S. B., Lissitz, R. W., & Mulaik, S. A. (1977). Limitations of coefficient alpha as an
index of test unidimensionality. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 37,
827–838. doi:10.1177/001316447703700403
Griskevicius, V., Shiota, M. N., & Neufeld, S. L. (2010). Influence of different positive
emotions on persuasion processing: A functional evolutionary approach. Emotion, 10,
190–206. doi:10.1037/a0018421
Gross, J. J., & John, O. P. (2003). Individual differences in two emotion regulation
process: Implications for affect, relationships, and well-being. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 85(2), 348–362. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.85.2.348
Gross, J. J., Sutton, S. K., & Kerelaar, T. (1998). Relations between affect and person-
ality: Support for the affect-level and affective-reactivity views. Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin, 24, 279–288. doi:10.1177/0146167298243005
Guilford, J. S., Zimmerman, W. S., & Guilford, J. P. (1976). The Guilford-Zimmerman
temperament survey handbook. San Diego, CA: Educational and Industrial
Testing Service.
Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process anal-
ysis: A regression-based approach. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Hinkin, T. R. (1995). A review of scale development practice in the study of organization.
Journal of Management, 21(5), 967–988. doi:10.1177/014920639502100509
Horberg, E. J., Oveis, C., & Keltner, D. (2011). Emotions as moral amplifiers:
An appraisal tendency approach to the influences of distinct emotions upon moral
judgment. Emotion Review, 3(3), 237–244. doi:10.1177/1754073911402384
Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure
analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling:
A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6, 1–55. doi:10.1080/10705519909540118
Dong and Ni 925

Kaufman, S. B. (2013). Opening up openness to experience: A four-factor model and

relations to creative achievement in the arts and sciences. The Journal of Creative
Behavior, 47, 233–255. doi:10.1002/jocb.33
Keltner, D., & Haidt, J. (2003). Approaching awe, a moral, spiritual, and aesthetic emo-
tion. Cognition & Emotion, 17(2), 297–314. doi:10.1080/02699930302297
Klohnen, E. C. (1996). Conceptual analysis and measurement of the construct of ego-
resiliency. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 1067–1079. doi:10.1037/
0022-3514.70.5.1067
Krause, N., & Hayward, R. D. (2015). Assessing whether practical wisdom and awe of
God are associated with life satisfaction. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 7(1),
51–59. doi:10.1037/a0037694
Lench, H. C., Flores, S. A., & Bench, S. W. (2011). Discrete emotions predict changes
in cognition, judgment, experience, behavior, and physiology: A meta-analysis of
experimental emotion elicitations. Psychological Bulletin, 137(5), 834–855.
doi:10.1037/a0024244
Li, J., Yao, D., & Liu, X. Q. (2014). Mediator effect of elderly’s coping style in
introversion-extroversion and general well-being. China Journal of Health
Psychology, 22(12), 1905–1907 (in Chinese). doi:10.13342/j.cnki.cjhp.2014.12.057
Li, J., & Zhao, Y. J. (2000). Validation of index of well-being in a sample of Chinese
college students. Chinese Journal of Clinical Psychology, 8(4), 225–227 (in Chinese).
doi:10.3969/j.issn.1005-3611.2000.04.009
Li, Z. Q., Wang, L., Zhang, H. C., & Liu, H. C. (2010). Personality traits and subjective
well-being: The mediating role of emotion regulation. Psychological Science, 22(1),
165–167 (in Chinese). doi:10. 16719/j. cnki. 1671-6981
Linley, P. A., Dovey, H., Beaumont, S., Wilkinson, J., & Hurling, R. (2016). Examining
the intensity and frequency of experience of discrete positive emotions. Journal of
Happiness Studies, 17, 875–892. doi:10.1007/s10902-015-9619-7
Liu, L. (2012). A study on the relationship between gender roles and the big-five personality
of the female supervisors (Doctoral dissertation). Southwestern University of Finance
and Economics, China (in Chinese).
Luo, J., & Dai, X. Y. (2011). Meta-analysis of big-five factor personality tests in China.
Chinese Journal of Clinical Psychology, 19(6), 740–752 (in Chinese). doi:10.16128/j.
cnki.1005-3611.2011.06.008
Luo, S. Q., & Jiang, Y. (2014). Management survey research methodology. Chongqing,
China: Chongqing Press (in Chinese).
Marsh, H. W., Lüdtke, O., Muthén, B., Asparouhov, T., Morin, A. J. S., Trautwein, U.,
& Nagengast, B. (2010). A new look at the Big Five factor structure through explor-
atory structural equation modeling. Psychological Assessment, 22(3), 471–491.
doi:10.1037/a0019227
Marsh, H. W., Nagengast, B., & Morin, A. J. S. (2013). Measurement invariance of big-five
factors over the life span: ESEM tests of gender, age2, plasticity, maturity, and LaDolce
vita effects. Developmental Psychology, 49(6), 1194–1218. doi:10.1037/a0026913
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T., Jr. (1987). Validation of the five-factor model of person-
ality across instruments and observers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
52(1), 81–90. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.52.1.81
926 Psychological Reports 123(3)

McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T., Jr. (1991). Adding Liebe und Arbeit: The full five-factor
model and well-being. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 12, 227–232.
doi:10.1177/014616729101700217
McDonald, R. P. (1970). Theoretical foundations of principal factor analysis, canonical
factor analysis, and alpha factor analysis. British Journal of Mathematical & Statistical
Psychology, 23, 1–21. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8317.1970.tb00432.x
Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998–2015). Mplus User’s Guide (7th ed.). Los Angeles,
CA: Muthén & Muthén.
Piedmont, R. L. (1998). The revised NEO Personality Inventory: Clinical and research
applications. New York, NY: Plenum Press.
Piff, P. K., Dietze, P., Feinberg, M., Stancato, D. M., & Keltner, D. (2015). Awe, the
small self, and prosocial behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
108(6), 883–899. doi:10.1037/pspi0000018
Pilgrim, L., Norris, J. I., & Hackathorn, J. (2017). Music is awesome: Influences of
emotion, personality, and preference on experienced awe. Journal of Consumer
Behavior, 16(5), 442–451. doi:10.1002/cb.1645
Pizarro, C. J., Cusi, I. O., Alfaro-Beracoechea, L., González-Burboa, A., Vera-
Calzaretta, A., Carrera, L. P., & y Darıo, P. R. (2018). Awe: Review of theory and
validation of an Awe Scale in Spanish. Latin American Journal of Positive Psychology,
4, 58–75 (in Spanish).
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common
method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recom-
mended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903. doi:10.1037/
0021-9010.88.5.879
Prade, C., & Saroglou, V. (2016). Awe’s effects on generosity and helping. The Journal of
Positive Psychology, 11(5), 522–530. doi:10.1080/17439760.2015.1127992
Razavi, P., Zhang, J. W., Hekiet, D., Yoo, S. H., & Howell, R. T. (2016). Cross-cultural
similarities and differences in the experience of awe. Emotion, 16(8), 1097–1101.
doi:10.1037/emo0000225
Robinson, J. P., Shaver, P. R., & Wrightsman, L. S. (1991). Measures of personality and
social psychological attitudes (Vol. 1; Z. F. Yang & Z. Q. Zhou, Trans.). San Diego,
CA: Academic Press.
Rosellini, A. J., & Brown, T. A. (2011). The NEO five-factor inventory: Latent structure
and relationships with dimensions of anxiety and depressive disorders in a large clin-
ical sample. Assessment, 18(1), 27–38. doi:10.1177/1073191110382848
Rudd, M., Vohs, K. D., & Aaker, J. (2012). Awe Expands people’s perception of time,
alters decision making, and enhances well-being. Psychological Science, 23(10),
1130–1136. doi:10.1177/0956797612438731
Sahin, S. Y., Iyigun, E., & Acikel, C. (2015). Validity and reliability of a Turkish version
of the modified moral sensitivity questionnaire for student nurses. Ethics & Behavior,
25(4), 351–359. doi:10.1080/10508422.2014.948955
Schneider, K. (2017). The resurgence of awe in psychology: Promise, hope, and perils.
The Humanistic Psychologist, 45, 103. doi:10.1037/hum0000060
Seligman, M. E. P. (1999). The president’s address. American Psychologist, 54(8),
559–562.
Seligman, M. E. P. (2011). Flourish. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
Dong and Ni 927

Seligman, M. E. P. (2012). Flourish: Positive psychology and positive interventions. In The

Tanner lectures on human values (Vol. 31, pp. 231–243). Salt Lake City: University of Utah
Press. https://tannerlectures.utah.edu/_documents/a-to-z/s/Seligman_10.pdf
Seligman, M. E. P., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology: An introduc-
tion. American Psychologist, 55(1), 5–14. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.5
Seligman, M. E. P., Steen, T. A., Park, N., & Peterson, C. (2005). Positive psychology
process: Empirical validation of interventions. American Psychologist, 60(5), 410–421.
doi:10.1037/0003-066X.60.5.410
Shiota, M. N., Keltner, D., & John, O. P. (2006). Positive emotion dispositions differ-
entially associated with Big Five personality and attachment style. The Journal of
Positive Psychology, 12(1), 61–71. doi:10.1080/17439760500510833
Shiota, M. N., Keltner, D., & Mossman, A. (2007). The nature of awe: Elicitors, apprais-
als, and effects on self-concept. Cognition & Emotion, 21(5), 944–963. doi:10.1080/
02699930600923668
Silvia, P. J., Fayn, K., Nusbaum, E. C., & Beaty, R. E. (2015). Openness to experience
and awe in response to nature and music: Personality and profound aesthetic experi-
ences. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 9(4), 376–384.
doi:10.1037/aca0000028
Steel, P., Schmidt, J., & Shulz, J. (2008). Refining the relationship between personality
and subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 134(1), 138–161. doi:10.1037/0033-
2909.134.1.138
Stellar, J. E., John-Henderson, N., Anderson, C. L., Gordon, A. M., McNeil, G. D., &
Keltner, D. (2015). Positive affect and markers of inflammation: Discrete positive
emotions predict lower levels of inflammatory cytokines. Emotion, 15(2), 129–133.
doi:10.1037/emo0000033
Tong, E. M. W. (2015). Differentiation of 13 positive emotions by appraisals. Cognition
and Emotion, 29, 484–503. doi:10.1080/02699931.2014.922056
Valdesolo, P., & Graham, J. (2014). Awe, uncertainty, and agency detection.
Psychological Science, 25(1), 170–178. doi:10.1177/0956797613501884
Valdesolo, P., Park, J., & Gottlieb, S. (2016). Awe and scientific explanation. Emotion,
16(7), 937–940. doi:10.1037/emo0000213
Van, D. V. J., & Abrams, D. (2017). Is moral elevation an approach-oriented emotion?
Journal of Positive Psychology, 12(2), 178–185. doi:10.1080/17439760.2016.1163410
Van Cappellen, P., & Saroglou, V. (2012). Awe activates religious and spiritual feelings
and behavioral intentions. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 4(3), 223–236.
doi:10.1037/a0025986
Van Cappellen, P., Toth-Gauthier, M., Saroglou, V., & Fredrickson, B. L. (2016).
Religion and well-being: The mediating role of positive emotions. Journal of
Happiness Study, 17, 485–505. doi:10.1007/s10902-014-9605-5
Vohs, K. D., & Schmeichel, B. J. (2003). Self-regulation and the extended now:
Controlling the self alters the subjective experience of time. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 85, 217–230. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.85.2.217
Watson, D., & Clark, L. A. (1997). Extraversion and its positive emotional core. In S. R.
W. H, Briggs. Jones, & R. Hogan (Eds.), Handbook of personality psychology.
Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
928 Psychological Reports 123(3)

Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief
measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 54, 1063–1070. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.1063
Wilson, K., & Gullon, E. (1999). The relationship between personality and affect over the
lifespan. Personality and Individual Differences, 27(6), 1141–1156. doi:10.1016/S0191-
8869(99)00058-6
Yaden, D. B., Haidt, J., Hood, R. W., Jr, Vago, D. R., & Newberg, A. B. (2017). The
varieties of self-transcendent experience. Review of General Psychology, 21(2),
143–160. doi:10.1037/gpr0000102
Yuan, K. H., & Bentler, P. M. (2000). Three likelihood-based methods for mean and
covariance structure analysis with nonnormal missing data. Sociological Methodology,
30, 165–200. doi:10.1111/0081-1750.00078
Zhang, J. R., Sun, X. J., & Yang, H. M. (2010). Mediating influence factors between
personality traits and subjective well-being. China Journal of Health Psychology,
18(11), 1371–1372 (in Chinese). doi:10.13342/j.cnki.cjhp
Zhang, X. N. (2012). The revision of International Personality Item Pool (IPIP NEO PI-
R) (Master’s dissertation). Yangzhou University, China (in Chinese).
Zhang, Z. Y., & Yuan, K. H. (2016). Robust coefficients alpha and omega and confidence
intervals with outlying observations and missing data: Methods and software. Educational
& Psychological Measurement, 76(3), 387–411. doi:10.1177/0013164415594658

Author Biographies
Rui Dong received the MS degree in applied psychology from Beijing Sport
University, Beijing, China, in 2011 and the PhD degree from Department of
Psychology, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China, in 2014, respectively. She is
currently an Associate Professor at the School of Business Administration,
Zhejiang University of Finance and Economics, Hangzhou, China. Her research
interests include in positive psychology, Business ethics and consum-
er psychology.

Shi G. Ni received the MS degree in applied psychology from Beijing Normal

University, Beijing, China, in 2008 and the PhD degree from Department of
Psychology, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China, in 2013, respectively. He is
currently an Associate Professor in the Division of Social Science and
Management, Graduate School at Shenzhen, Tsinghua University, Shenzhen,
China. His interdisciplinary research interests include in health and positive
psychology, positive technology and behavior big data.