Are g and the General Factor of Personality (GFP) correlated?

The General Factors of Personality Disorder, Psychopathology, and Personality

There is considerable interest in the study of the general factors of personality disorder (g-PD), psychopathology (p factor), and personality (GFP). One prominent interpretation of the g-PD is that it is defined by the self-interpersonal impairments of Criterion A of the DSM-5 Section III. However, no study has directly tested this hypothesis as no prior g-PD study has included a measure of Criterion A. The current study provides a direct test of this hypothesis, along with comparing g-PD with the general factors of psychopathology and personality. Also extracted was a common general factor across all three domains. Suggested herein is that the g-PD, the p factor, and the GFP reflect the impairments (e.g., social and occupational dysfunction) that are secondary to the traits and disorders rather than the traits and/or disorders themselves.

Testing an Adaptationist Theory of Trait Covariation: Relative Bargaining Power as a Common Calibrator of an Interpersonal Syndrome

This article provides the first test of an adaptationist ‘common calibration’ theory to explain the origins of trait covariation, which holds that (i) personality traits are often facultatively calibrated in response to cues that ancestrally predicted the reproductive payoffs of different trait levels and (ii) distinct traits that are calibrated on the basis of common input cues will exhibit consistent patterns of covariation. This theory is applied to explain the covariation within a ‘personality syndrome’ encompassing various interpersonal trait dimensions (e.g. extraversion, emotionality and attachment styles). Specifically, it is hypothesized that these traits are inter–correlated because each is calibrated in response to relative bargaining power (RBP)—a joint function of one's ability to benefit others and harm others. Path analyses from a correlational study compellingly supported this theoretical model: Objective and self–perceived measures of RBP–enhancing phenotypic features (physical attractiveness and physical strength) influenced an internal regulatory variable indexing RBP (i.e. self–perceived RBP), which in turn had robust effects on each of the focal personality traits. Moreover, in support of the theory's core postulate, controlling for self–perceived RBP greatly reduced the covariation within the interpersonal syndrome. These novel findings illustrate the promise of an evolutionary psychological approach to elucidating trait covariation. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Criterion A of the AMPD in HiTOP

The categorical model of personality disorder classification in the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed. [DSM-5]; American Psychiatric Association, 2013 ) is highly and fundamentally problematic. Proposed for DSM-5 and provided within Section III (for Emerging Measures and Models) was the Alternative Model of Personality Disorder (AMPD) classification, consisting of Criterion A (self-interpersonal deficits) and Criterion B (maladaptive personality traits). A proposed alternative to the DSM-5 more generally is an empirically based dimensional organization of psychopathology identified as the Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP; Kotov et al., 2017 ). HiTOP currently includes, at the highest level, a general factor of psychopathology. Further down are the five domains of detachment, antagonistic externalizing, disinhibited externalizing, thought disorder, and internalizing (along with a provisional sixth somatoform dimension) that align with Criterion B. The purpose of this article is to discuss the potential inclusion and placement of the self-interpersonal deficits of the DSM-5 Section III Criterion A within HiTOP.

The General Factor of Personality Is Stronger and More Strongly Correlated With Cognitive Ability Under Instructed Faking

Abstract. A General Factor of Personality (GFP) can be derived by extracting one factor from a broad range of personality dimensions. Researchers are divided on whether the GFP represents social desirability or an evolved trait with survival value. The current paper tests a social desirability interpretation of the GFP by comparing one-factor models of the HEXACO under standard versus fake-good instructions (N = 185 undergraduates). Analyses include both principal components analyses (PCA) and a comparison of factorial invariance of a hierarchical one-factor model. Compared to standard instructions, fake-good instructions showed: (a) significantly higher correlations between domain scale scores for 10 of 15 cases; (b) significantly higher component loadings in the PCA; (c) significantly more variance explained by the GFP (in both principal components and invariance analyses); and (d) significantly higher correlations with a cognitive g factor derived from six indicators. Results support a social desirability interpretation of the GFP.

Knowing What to Do in Social Situations

Two studies examined the general factor of personality (GFP) in relationship to performance on video-based situational tests measuring social knowledge and skills. Study 1 (N = 180 candidates of an assessment center) showed that high-GFP individuals were better able to indicate the appropriate social behavior in a situational judgment test. Moreover, in that study, high-GFP participants were also rated higher by others on leadership skills. Study 2 (N = 153 psychology students) showed that the GFP was related to actual display of social behavior in a situational webcam test. In both studies, high-GFP individuals reported more leadership experience in organizations. These findings support the idea of the GFP as a substantive personality factor that may also be relevant for personnel selection.