Understanding Personality: Big Five Personality Traits

By Elif Çalışkan

Psychologists have generally tried to categorize people since the emergence of personality psychology term after WWI. They have also used those categorizations to predict employee’s behaviors according to various situations and their personalities in the workplace (Chan, 2004). Above all, personality refers to individual differences in terms of thinking, feeling, understanding, and behaving (APA, 2020). On the other hand, personality trait is classifying a person according to the degree off a stable and consistent pattern of behaviors, attitudes, and feelings of the individual (Burger, 2006). 

We will write an article series to review different personality models. Firstly, we will focus on the Big Five Personality Traits (Five-Factor Model of Personality) which belongs to Costa and McCrae (1985, 1992). Those factors are Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness (Salgado, 1997). Let’s review the traits separately.

Neuroticism

Firstly, Neuroticism defines the degree to which individuals are anxious, insecure, depressed, self-pity, and emotional versus calm, self-confident, cool, and self-satisfied (Salgado, 1997; Burger, 2006). Due to their negative tendency, neurotic individuals experience more negative life events than other individuals (Judge, Heller, & Mount, 2002). Above all, such people are more tend to select situations that bring about negative outcomes. They also recall negative situations more. Researchers have found that negative emotions are more likely to have dysfunctional job-related thoughts. People who experience negative emotions at work more likely to focus on their failures rather than successes. Furthermore, they generally estrange from their coworkers and they want to stay alone. So, such situations cause showing less respect for the job environment. To sum up, their job satisfaction level starts to diminish (Judge, Higgins, Thoresen, & Barrick, 1999). Excessive workloads, such as team leading and management, can also cause those people more stressed.

Extraversion

Firstly, Extraversion defines the extent to which individuals are sociable, gregarious, assertive, and versus reserved, shy, and quiet (Salgado, 1997; Burger, 2006). Extraverted people more tend to engage in managerial and leadership roles in the workplace (Barrick & Mount, 1991). Evidence also shows that extraverted people have more friends and they spend more time in social situations than introverted people. Due to their social ability, they are more likely to find close interpersonal interactions also in the workplace. So, the ability to making friendships easily creates a perception of reward and success in their cognition (Judge, Heller, & Mount, 2002). The experience of positive emotions is also more likely to lead to positive feelings about the workplace and relationship with coworkers. So, they are able to associate the positive feelings with the job. To sum up, it results in favorable judgments of job satisfaction (Harari, Thompson & Viswesvaran, 2018).

Openness

Firstly, Openness represents being open to the experience. It defines individuals who are creative, curious, cultured, and broad-minded, various versus narrow-minded, old- fashioned, realistic, and ordinary (Salgado, 1997; Burger, 2006). Coping with change can be tough for individuals. Similarly, the employees who encounter a different experience can be uncertain about what the future holds. They also think they may fail if they are faced with new tasks. Individuals who perceive that a workplace change can be affected stress more directly. For example, people who closeness to experience are more affected by disruption to their jobs (Wanberg & Banas, 2000).  On the other hand, Opened people are more likely to exhibit certain tendencies of particular value in the contemporary workplace because they are able to adapt transitions and changes. So, they can think of dynamic ways, remaining open to new alternatives and training methods (Burke & Witt, 2002).

Agreeableness

Firstly, Agreeableness defines the degree to which individuals are cooperative, tolerant, warm, and agreeable versus disagreeable, skeptical, cold, and antagonistic (Salgado, 1997; Burger, 2006). The cooperative nature of agreeable people may have more successful careers, especially in teamwork occupations or customer service relevant job types because they are capable of showing respect and patience to others (Judge, Higgins, Thoresen, & Barrick, 1999) Agreeableness also related to happiness because agreeable individuals have high motivation to achieve interpersonal intimacy, which leads to greater levels of well-being. Researchers found that Agreeableness “involves getting along with others in pleasant, satisfying relationships.” They are also more likely to accept job-related tasks and responsibilities (Judge, Heller, & Mount, 2002) For example, if one of their colleagues doesn’t come to work due to he is sick, agreeable people are more likely to show empathy and take his responsibility if it is necessary.

Conscientiousness

Firstly, Conscientiousness defines the extent to which individuals are hardworking, dependable, organized, and persevering versus disorganized, lazy, and unstable (Salgado, 1997; Burger, 2006). Being conscientious is the most effective criterion in the workplace because conscientiousness plays an important and central role in determining performance levels at work. Researchers also found that conscientious individuals reported greater job satisfaction and job security, higher grade point average, and more positive perception as well as committed in social relationships. However, they are less likely to show deviant behaviors in the workplace (Farhadi, Fatimah, Nasir, & Shahrazad, 2012). On the other hand, workplace deviant behavior refers to counterproductive, dysfunctional, antisocial, maladaptive, or aggressive behaviors. For example, constantly evading responsibility in the workplace. However, conscientious people are the opposite. So, they depend on doing tasks without showing inappropriate behaviors.

Strengths of the Model

Some of the psychologists defend situational roles in behaviors. On the other hand, some of them defend stable traits. A recent trend in organizational researches shows dispositional explanations for the attitudes individuals display at work and their subsequent effects on employee behavior (Judge, Martocchio & Thoresen, 1997). Studies also show that this model is invaluable while working on patients with clinical conditions (Burger, 2006). Similarly, there is strong evidence of the heritability and universality of the traits. So, the stability of structure across cultures and measures has led to widespread acceptance of the Big Five Personality Traits (Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness) among personality researchers (Judge & Bono, 2000).

Weaknesses of the Model

Despite researches on this model have yielded fairly consistent results, restricting personality to just five dimensions has led to some criticism. Researchers sometimes show three, sometimes seven factors. For example, Hans Eysenck presented a personality model consisting of three main factors. Another study suggested that the Big Five Model only covered two large models. So, personality discloses itself in very different dimensions because understanding personality is a very complicated issue due to everybody has a unique history and different perspective on environmental situations (Burger, 2006).

Test your personality via Big Five Personality Test !!!

References

American Psychological Association. (n.d.). Personality. In APA dictionary of psychology. Retrieved August 9, 2020, from https://dictionary.apa.org/personality

Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The big five personality dimensions and job performance: a meta‐analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44(1), 1-26.

Burger, J. M.(2006). Kişilik. Çev. İnan Deniz Erguvan Sarıoğlu. İstanbul: Kaknüs Yayınları.

Burke, L. A., & Witt, L. A. (2002). Moderators of the openness to experience‐performance relationship. Journal of Managerial Psychology.

Chan, F. M. (2004). The effects of optimism and the five-factor model of personality on stress and performance in the work place.

Farhadi, H., Fatimah, O., Nasir, R., & Shahrazad, W. W. (2012). Agreeableness and conscientiousness as antecedents of deviant behavior in workplace. Asian Social Science, 8(9), 2.

Judge, T. A., & Bono, J. E. (2000). Five-factor model of personality and transformational leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(5), 751.

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), 530.

Judge, T. A., Higgins, C. A., Thoresen, C. J., & Barrick, M. R. (1999). The big five personality traits, general mental ability, and career success across the life span. Personnel psychology, 52(3), 621-652.

Judge, T. A., Martocchio, J. J., & Thoresen, C. J. (1997). Five-factor model of personality and employee absence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(5), 745.

Harari, M. B., Thompson, A. H., & Viswesvaran, C. (2018). Extraversion and job satisfaction: The role of trait bandwidth and the moderating effect of status goal attainment. Personality and Individual Differences, 123, 14-16.

Salgado, J. F. (1997). The five factor model of personality and job performance in the European community. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(1), 30.

Wanberg, C. R., & Banas, J. T. (2000). Predictors and outcomes of openness to changes in a reorganizing workplace. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(1), 132.