THE BIG FIVE

Jeremy Alexander
Doug Berry
Gayle Oatley

February 2, 2008
What is the Big Five?
Personality Traits or Personality Dimensions
An integration of personality research that
represents the various personality descriptions in
one common framework.
Individual differences in social and emotional life
organized into a five-factor model of personality
“broad abstract level and each dimension
summarized a larger number of … personality
characteristics” (Oliver & Srivastava, 1999)
Where did the Big Five come from?
Personality relevant terms from dictionary
Lexical hypothesis: most of the socially relevant and
salient personality characteristics have become
encoded in the natural language.
Allport and Odbert (1936): 18,000 terms, identified 4
categories
Cattell (1943) : broke 18,000 down to subset of 4,500
trait terms, then down to 35
Tupes and Christal (1961) through analysis found
five factors
Factor I
Extroversion, Sociability, Surgency
High
Sociable
Energetic
Adventurous
Enthusiastic
Outgoing
Low
Quite
Reserved
Shy
Factor II
Agreeableness
High
Forgiving
Kind
Appreciative
Trusting
Sympathetic
Low
Cold
Unfriendly
Quarrelsome
Factor III
Conscientiousness
High
Organized
Thorough
Deliberate
Responsible
Precise
Low
Careless
Disorderly
Frivolous
Factor IV
Emotional Stability (Neuroticism)
High
Tense
Moody
Anxious
Fearful
Touchy
Low
Stable
Calm
Contented
Factor V
Openness to Experience
Curious
Imaginative
Wide interests
Original
Intelligent
Low
Narrow interests
Simple
Shallow
Examples of personality tests
NEO Five Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI)
Full sentences, 240 items
(Costa & McCrey , 1988)
Big Five Inventory (BFI)
Short phrases, 44 items
(John & Srivastava, 1999)
Trait Descriptive Adjectives TDI
100 trait-descriptive adjectives
(Goldberg, 1992)
Extraversion and Agreeableness
Conscientiousness and Neuroticism
Openness
Reliabilities of Big 5 Tests
Convergent Validities of Big 5 Tests
Validity Coefficients from Confirmatory
Factor Analysis
The Big 5 and Job Performance
 Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The Big Five personality dimensions and
job performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44 (1), 1-26.

 C showed consistent relations with all job performance criteria for

all occupational groups

 E predicted success in management and sales (requiring social

interaction)

 O and E predicted training proficiency

 A and N predict performance when employees work in groups

Meta-Analysis Results
The Big 5 and Job Satisfaction
 Judge, T. A., Heller, D., & Mount, M. K. (2002). Five-factor model of personality
and job satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87 (3).

 Job satisfaction was correlated with each of the traits individually

(see next slide)

 Only the relationships between N and E and job satisfaction

generalized across all studies

 Together, the Big 5 traits had a multiple correlation of .41 with job
satisfaction
Meta-Analysis Results
Criticisms of the “Big Five”
According to Block (1995) and others…
A frequent objection to the Big Five is that five
dimensions cannot possibly capture all of the
variation in human personality

The dimensions are much too broad

Not all support the Big Five, because there are
discrepancies surrounding “which Big Five,” and so
on. Of the five factors, each seems to have many
different names
Criticisms of the “Big Five”
 The fact that the labels differ does not mean they
are different, though. There is a large amount of
communality across various labels

Other names for all five:

Need for stability, originality, extroversion,
accommodation, consolidation
Criticisms of the “Big Five”
 Most of the other four factors generalize across
cultures and countries, but the fifth factor
(openness to experience) is usually the dimension
that varies

 In Netherlands, their ‘openness to experience’

emphasized unconventionality and rebelliousness,
rather than intellect and imagination (as in ours)
Criticisms of the “Big Five”
The advantage of categories as broad as the “Big
Five” is their enormous bandwidth
Their disadvantage, of course, is their low fidelity

Extremely useful for some initial rough

distinctions but of less value for predicting specific
behaviors of a particular object
Names and methods of assessment

Lexical - The term • Questionnaire - The

"Big Five" was coined term "Five-Factor Model"
by Lew Goldberg has been more commonly
associated with studies of
Originally associated
traits using personality
with studies of questionnaires
personality traits used • Developed by Costa &
in natural language McCrae
Tend to call the fifth Tend to call the fifth
factor “intellect” or factor “openness to
“imagination” experience”
 Goldberg’s (1992) Personality Questionnaire

Please use this list of common human traits to describe yourself as accurately as possible. Describe
yourself as you see yourself at the present time not as you wish to be in the future. Describe yourself as
your are generally or typically, as compared with other persons you know of the same sex and of roughly
your same age. Before each trait, please write a number indicating how accurately that trait describes
you, using the following rating scale:

Inaccurate Accurate
____________________________________ ___________________________________

Extremely Very Quite Slightly Neither Slightly Quite Very Extremely

____ Active ____Extraverted ____ Negligent ____ Trustful

____ Agreeable ____ Fearful ____ Nervous ____ Unadventurous
____ Anxious ____ Fretful ____ Organized ____ Uncharitable
____ Artistic ____ Generous ____ Philosophical ____ Uncooperative
____ Assertive ____ Haphazard ____ Pleasant ____ Uncreative
____ Bashful ____ Harsh ____ Practical ____ Undemanding
____ Bold ____ Helpful ____ Prompt ____ Undependable
____ Bright ____ High-strung ____ Quiet ____ Unemotional
____ Careful ____ Imaginative ____ Relaxed ____ Unenvious
____ Careless ____ Imperceptive ____ Reserved ____ Unexcitable
____ Cold ____ Imperturbable ____ Rude ____ Unimaginative
____ Complex ____ Impractical ____ Self-pitying ____ Uninquisitive
____ Conscientious ____ Inconsistent ____ Selfish ____ Unintellectual
____ Considerate ____ Inefficient ____ Shallow ____ Unintelligent
____ Cooperative ____ Inhibited ____ Shy _____Unkind
____ Creative ____ Innovative ____ Simple _____Unreflective
____ Daring ____ Insecure ____ Sloppy _____Unrestrained
____ Deep ____ Intellectual ____ Steady _____Unsophisticated
____ Demanding ____ Introspective ____ Sympathetic _____Unsympathetic
____ Disorganized ____ Introverted ____ Systematic _____Unsystematic
____ Distrustful ____ Irritable ____ Talkative _____Untalkative
____ Efficient ____ Jealous ____ Temperamental _____Verbal
____ Emotional ____ Kind ____ Thorough _____Vigorous
____ Energetic ____ Moody ____ Timid _____ Warm
____ Envious ____ Neat ____ Touchy _____ Withdrawn
Support for lexical approach
Their interest is primarily in the language of
personality
These concepts are of interest because language
encodes the characteristics that are central for
cultural, social, or biological reasons, to human life
and experience
So….they highlight the important and meaningful
psychological phenomena
Criticisms of lexical approach
There may exist important characteristics
that people may not be able to observe and
describe verbally
If so, the agenda specified by the lexical
approach may be incomplete and would
need to be supplemented by more
theoretically driven approaches
Mini-Test
1. Restrained or Emotional 14. Practical or Insightful
2. Dependent or Independent 15. Curious or Uninquisitive
3. Firm or Changeable
4. Anxious or Tranquil 16. Irritable or Pleasant
5. Unconcerned or Self-Critical 17. Neighborly or Impersonal
18. Strict or Lenient
6. Talkative or Untalkative 19. Helpful or Reluctant
7. Serious or Cheerful 20. Cooperative or Resistant
8. Sluggish or Energetic
9. Extroverted or Introverted 21. Efficient or Sloppy
10. Shy or Forward 22. Carefree or Responsible
23. Precise or Inexact
11. Satisfied or Curious 24. Reliable or Forgetful
12. Unaware or Observant 25. Inattentive or Cautious
13. Logical or Imaginative
BFI Individual Scores
totE totA totC totN totO

2.50 3.56 3.78 4.25 3.30

2.38 3.44 4.78 2.75 3.30
4.50 3.89 3.56 2.13 3.40
2.25 5.00 4.44 2.50 3.10
2.38 4.33 4.22 1.75 3.70
2.88 2.33 4.11 3.75 4.20
4.00 3.89 4.00 2.25 4.00
2.25 4.11 4.56 2.13 3.10
2.88 3.22 4.89 2.63 3.50
4.38 4.11 4.00 2.00 4.40
4.63 4.44 4.00 2.13 3.50
4.63 4.11 3.00 2.75 3.50
4.25 3.78 3.89 2.88 3.20
3.75 4.56 3.89 4.13 3.30

Number of cases read: 14 Number of cases listed: 14

BFI Class Averages
N Minimum Maximum Mean Stan. Dev.

totE 14 2.25 4.63 3.4018 .97957

totA 14 2.33 5.00 3.9127 .65107
totC 14 3.00 4.89 4.0794 .49197
totN 14 1.75 4.25 2.7143 .79425
totO 14 3.10 4.40 3.5357 .40308
Valid N 14
(listwise)