As has already been introduced, the Five-Factor Model of personality trait theory presents 5 major personality constructs, within each of which are grouped several secondary/minor/sub-facet traits. The five major traits hereafter referred to in this research follow the OCEAN acronym derived from five-factor theory which uses Openness (O), Conscientiousness (C), Extraversion (E), Agreeableness (A), and Neuroticism (N); there has always been terminology ambiguity concerning the naming of the traits, but as previously mentioned, there is certainly general consensus in terms of what is being measured/observed in each trait. The FFM includes a number of propositions about the nature and developmental course of each of the major personality traits, as well as about the relation of these traits to their respective sub-facets and to the behavioral outcomes associated with each.
The work of Costa & McCrae is considered invaluable to this particular point in five-factor theory, because their original naming of the major and sub traits is most popularly used as a basis for further investigation. For example, the table below is based on the use of Costa &
McCrae’s NEO Personality Inventory test as a measure of the big five traits. The table is a summarization of the big five traits, the names and definitions of their respective sub-facet traits, and profile adjectives describing what high and low scoring means within each trait. Following
this summary table, a detailed examination of the Big Five is given.
Extroversion
As one of the first traits to be highlighted as significant across the research, extroversion has perhaps always appeared in factor-analytic models, and is one of the traits to appear even in non five-factor models, such as Eysenck's PEN model. The term is incredibly recognizable - and possibly overused to the point of misnomer – even outside the realm of trait psychology. At its simplest, the term implies an “energetic approach to the social and material world” (Popkins, 2010) and high scorers in extroversion are described as having personality traits such as sociability, high activity, assertiveness, and positive emotionality. It has been referred to as social adaptability, though the popularity of this term seems to be waning (Zuckerman, 1991).
One of the most important aspects of the definition of extroversion is that it is "a trait characterized by a keen interest in other people and external events, and a venturing forth with confidence into the unknown" (Ewen, 1998). This emphasis on comfort in social interaction and the external is what is possibly most distinctive about persons who can be considered extroverts.
It is important to discuss traits associated with both extremes of each major trait spectrum.
Again, because of the wide understanding of the term extrovert, most laymen will have an idea of what it means to be considered an introvert; scientifically, that is, those who score low on the extroversion scale. Low scorers tend to lack the exuberance, energy, and activity levels of extroverts. To avoid the trap of merely pathologizing the low-end score traits of a major factor, the lack of social involvement of an introvert should not be interpreted as merely the extrovert’s sad opposite. Introversion is not the same as shyness or depression. Introverts simply need less interpersonal stimulation and often display a preference for being alone. Common personality components are a tendency to be quiet, deliberate, and independent.
The 6 sub-facet traits on the Extroversion (E) scale in the NEO Personality Inventory are Warmth, Gregariousness, Assertiveness, Activity, Excitement-Seeking, and Positive Emotions.
Observing these as examples of the five-factor sub-facet structure, it is relatively easy to see and understand how the structure works to present a comprehensive picture of personality. Each of these sub-facets has its unique definition (see above table), but they exist under the umbrella of Extroversion, each adding more detail to the overall concept.
Agreeableness
The Agreeableness (A) scale trait is primarily meant to measure interpersonal tendencies;
that is, how compatible a person is with others, or, more importantly, how interested a person is in getting along with others. The highly agreeable individual is fundamentally concerned with cooperation, altruism, and social harmony – a ‘people person’. Goldberg used the lexical approach to define Agreeableness as a major trait domain from the occurrence of personality words similar to the construct in language and in other previous work (Goldberg, 1981). The personality words used as sub-facet terms under Agreeableness illustrate the good-natured friendliness of the high scoring end of this trait easily and perfectly:
Trust (in others) – Agreeable people are optimistic about people and their intentions. They believe people are basically decent and so they trust easily.
Compliance – Because they are interested in social harmony, Agreeable people are more likely to compromise and/or avoid confrontations in order to get along.
Modesty – Working well with the facet of Compliance, Modesty is one of the components of Agreeableness that contributes to the likeability of a high scorer in this trait. Humility is generally more likeable than arrogance in personalities.
Sympathy – Also referred to as Tender Mindedness, it refers to an ability to be compassionate and empathetic.
Sincerity – High scoring in this facet may be related to being considered genuine;
somewhat controversially, this same sub-facet is often described as candid or frank, which are not necessarily positively connoted in common vernacular.
Altruism – Again, in the spirit of likeability and social harmony, Agreeable people tend to put others’ needs before their own.
On the low scoring end of the scale – the unavoidably negative sounding Disagreeable end – the individual is much more cynical, competitive, self-interested, and self-promoting, with reported difficulty feeling empathic and higher tendencies towards manipulation. Each end of the polarity in the major trait scales as well as their respective sub-facets has components that can be construed as positive and useful, however; the skepticism of a low scorer in the Trust sub-facet can be more optimal in a situation in which high scoring Compliance prevents a necessary confrontation, for example. The particular real world applications of each major domain are to be discussed later in the chapter.
Conscientiousness
Conscientiousness relates to a person’s level of attention. In the English language the basic dictionary term has its meaning derived from the conscience and this is reflected in the definitions measured within the sub-facets of the domain. Some of the sub-facets seem more aligned with the moral connotation of the term ‘conscientious’ and some align with the ideas of meticulousness and carefulness that relate to the conscience. Either way, Conscientiousness is associated with self-control – this is reflected in the fact that the term used for low-scorers on the scale is Impulsive. The opposite of a Conscientious individual in personality theory is an Impulsive individual.
The NEO PI-R sub-facets of Conscientiousness are Competence, Order, Dutifulness, Achievement-Striving, Self-Discipline, and Deliberation. Conscientiousness gets a lot of attention in terms of how it can benefit individuals in society. Obviously, high scoring in these constructs can be perceived as desirable character traits, especially in a work environment. High scoring in Competence, Self-Discipline and Deliberation is a reflection of abilities to think things through, plan for the future, and be careful in terms of one’s actions. High Order accounts for the neatness and thoroughness associated with Conscientious persons. Dutifulness is also referred to as Sense of Responsibility, and it is what contributes to the image of Conscientious people as reliable. Achievement-striving as a facet is somewhat self-explanatory, as it measures exactly that – the degree to which the individual values success and is willing to work towards it. The extreme high end of these traits can combine into a workaholic, perfectionist type nature, or perhaps be considered boring or even be associated with types of compulsive disorders.
According to the NEO Personality Inventory Professional Manual, “individuals low on Conscientiousness are unable to motivate themselves to perform a task that they would like to accomplish” (Costa & McCrae, 1992). If the highly Conscientious individual is consistently viewed as reliable and hard-working, then the unfortunate perception of Impulsive (low Conscientious) persons is that may be unreliable, lack ambition or work ethic, and disorderly.
Low Conscientiousness is an indication of an easy-going nature, and these persons are generally more spontaneous, but also less driven by a need for achievement.
Openness
Openness, also known as openness to experience or intellect, is held as a broad dimension of individual experiences, that includes both structural and motivational aspects: “Openness is seen as breadth, depth and permeability of consciousness, and in the recurrent need to enlarge
and examine experience (McCrae & Costa). The structural aspect of openness recalls Rokeach’s (1960) classic conception of dogmatism in terms of labeled beliefs, and also Hartmann’s (1991) description of thick and thin boundaries in the mind. The motivational side of openness suggests links to Murray’s (1938) needs for understanding, change, and sentience as well as Zuckerman’s (1979) Experience Seeking.
The sub facets that individuals possess with high openness traits tend to be liberal, creative, curious and aesthetically minded and fantastical. In terms of career, they are more likely to be artists or scientists (Fagan, 2014) They are also characterized as being more willing to have interest novel ideas and interests and experience positive and negative emotions more deeply. In contrast, low scorers tend to behave more conservatively, hold more conformist values, and experience a thinner range of affect than high scorers (Jonassaint et al., 2010)
Unlike Neuroticism and Extraversion, Openness appears to be abstractly directly related to intelligence, rather than merely affect test performance (psychometric intelligence).
Conversely, other researchers have favored to refer to Openness as Intellect or Culture, deciphering this personality trait in terms of introspective reflection and intellectual knowledge (Goldberg, 1994; Johnson, 1994; Saucier, 1994). Openness is consequently linked with intellectual curiosity, vivid imagination, and behavioral flexibility (McCrae & Costa, 1997), but also with understanding ability, knowledge in science, change and autonomy (see Ashton, Lee, Vernon, & Jang, 2000).
Neuroticism
Of all the traits within the Big Five Personality Trait, neuroticism is the trait that is considered to be “negative” or “bad.” Personality researchers habitually reverse it and refer to it as “emotional stability.” Stable people are calm under pressure while neurotic people tend to be anxious, pessimistic, stressed, upset, fearful, and emotionally unstable (Hough et al., 1990).
Neuroticism has a very strong biological basis; the two most fundamental traits are neuroticism and extraversion. They date all the way back to Ancient Greece, where Hippocrates (460-370 BC), a Greek physician labeled people as belonging to one of four personality types depending on how calm/excitable and morose/sanguine they were.
Subsequently, Eysenck (1967) proposed just two personality traits, extraversion and neuroticism, before further research expanded to three and eventually five.
Though conscientiousness and agreeableness may be associated to higher cognitive
functions of inhibition and executive control extraversion and neuroticism are more associated with the older, “system 1” regions. Many studies have found that neuroticism is related to the
“Amygdala,” which is considered to be an old, primal area of the brain that is accountable for sensing emotions, specifically fear.
Gray (1970) proposed that there are two independent regions in the brain: the Behavioral Activation System (BAS) and the Behavioral Inhibition System (BIS). The BAS, theorized as extraversion, which concerns a person’s sensitivity to reward and their probability of approaching desirable stimuli, whereas the BIS (neuroticism) looks at sensitivity to punishment and evading aversive stimuli. A person can be high in both: a neurotic extravert would be delicate to both positive and negative emotions. It is for this reason that researchers have used measurements of BAS/BIS to determine when a bipolar patient is due to undergo a manic or depressive episode.
The con of neuroticism is epitomized by amplified sensitivity to negative emotions. Thus, neurotics are more likely than others to “negative” in a situation, which leads to them becoming stressed and offended by things which most people would consider trivial. This is why research has found that that neurotics are much more sensitive to stressful or anxiety-provoking conditions (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984).
In line with the biopsychological processes previously outlined, both low neuroticism and high extraversion are related to happiness. Shockingly though, neuroticism has strong correlations to depression. In fact, out of the Big Five Personality Traits, neuroticism is the strongest correlate of several psychological conditions, including depression, schizophrenia, obsessiveness, antisocial personality disorder, addiction, negative treatment and family problems (Millon & Davis 1996).
The trait of Neuroticism is also related to poor physical health as well, through two processes. Firstly, neuroticism increases the likelihood of indulging in risky behaviors such as conflict (emotionally and physically) and substance abuse. Secondly, neuroticism can have an effect on the body; it can, for example, increase blood pressure and induce a heart attack.
Personal achievement further falls under the wheels of neuroticism. For example, the trait is consistently related to poor job performance due to its associations with low self-confidence and high anxiety, hostility and vulnerability. Some studies even suggest that emotional stability is as important for job success as conscientiousness (Kendler, Kuhn & Prescott, 2004).
Additionally, it is an important intercessor of exam success, because neurotics tend to feel a lot more stress and anxiety under exam conditions, which disturbs their performance. This is said to occur because neurotic people are very sensitive to internal and external negative stimuli, which escalates “mental noise” and makes it hard to pay attention to the task at hand (Halamandaris & Power, 1999).