Self-report based General Factor of Personality as socially-desirable responding, positive self-evaluation, and social-effectiveness

Beyond metacognition: The dominant role of the general factor of personality in learning adaptation

The notions of metacognition and ego-resilienc seem to commonly represent an ability to adaptively adjust self-control to fit the requirements of environments. The latter presents a general mechanism of adaptive adjustment while the former presents a specific example of learning activity. As ego-resiliency was almost fully indicated by the General Factor of Personality (GFP) as the literature suggested, the present study tested the relationship between the GFP and metacognition and then compared their influences on learning adaptation. As found, the GFP highly overlapped with overall metacognition (r = 0.69). Within the three dimensions of metacognition, metacognitive skills correlated with the GFP much higher than metacognitive knowledge and experience, suggesting that the GFP is more linked with the application of metacognition in learning. By comparison, the GFP displayed much higher correlations with metacognitive skills and experience as well as learning adaptation than any Big Five traits, showing its incremental power in correlation with those variables. More importantly, in the mediation model, the GFP was found to be the root reason for the outcomes of learning adaptation and accounted for most of the impact of metacognition on learning adaptation. With these findings, the limitations of the present study and suggestions for future studies were discussed.

The General Factor of Personality (GFP) is associated with higher salary, having a leadership position, and working in a social job

Previous studies have suggested that a general factor exists at the top of the hierarchal structure of personality. One interpretation of this General Factor of Personality (GFP) is that it reflects social effectiveness. Accordingly, in a large employee sample (N = 1267), we tested whether the GFP relates to several outcomes assumed to be linked with social effectiveness. Specifically, we examine whether the GFP is positively related to salary and to obtaining a leadership position. Additionally, we test whether high-GFP employees more often work in social occupations. Controlling for demographics and background variables, it was found that the GFP is indeed positively related to monthly (gross) salary. Moreover, employees occupying leadership positions in organizations scored higher on the GFP. GFP scores of employees in more social occupations (e.g., education, health care) were higher than of employees in other types of jobs (e.g., construction). GFP scores were also positively associated with the extent to which one has to relate to others in the job. Overall, the pattern of findings is in line with the notion of the GFP as relating to social effectiveness or adaptiveness, which are assumed to play a significant role in occupational outcomes.

The General Factor of Personality as Ego-Resiliency

It was originally hypothesized by Block that what has come to be known as the General Factor of Personality (GFP) reflects ego-resiliency. We test Block's hypothesis in two studies. In Study 1 a meta-analysis (N = 15,609) examining the relationship between the GFP and ego-resiliency/resilience was conducted. In Study 2 (N = 157) archival data from Block and Block was used to examine the association between rater judged ego-resiliency across childhood, adolescence, and into early adulthood and the GFP based on self-report in early adulthood. Using structural equation modeling for the meta-analytic data, the correlation between the GFP and ego-resiliency/resilience was estimated at r = 0.93. Using a trait-state occasion model to test the hypothesis in Study 2, the correlation between the GFP and rated ego-resiliency was estimated at r = 0.85. The results of the two studies offer substantial support for Block's original hypothesis. Given the strength of the associations between the GFP and ego-resiliency/resilience one may conclude that the two constructs largely reflect the same underlying phenomenon.

Is there a Meaningful General Factor of Personality?

Numerous studies and meta-analyses have now confirmed that personality traits tend to correlate such that a general factor of personality (GFP) emerges. Nevertheless, there is an ongoing debate about what these correlations, and therefore the GFP, represents. One interpretation is that the GFP reflects a substantive factor that indicates general social effectiveness or emotional intelligence. Another interpretation is that the GFP merely is an artifact based on measurement or response bias. In the present paper, we elaborate on a selection of topics that are central to the debate about this construct. Specifically, we discuss (a) the GFP in relation to more specific personality dimensions (e.g., Big Five, facets), (b) the validity of the GFP and under what circumstances it seems to 'disappear', and (c) the theoretical and practical relevance of the general factor. Overall, the review should provide insight into the nature of the GFP and whether or not it represents a meaningful factor that can contribute to a better understanding of personality.

The Properties and Utility of Less Evaluative Personality Scales: Reduction of Social Desirability; Increase of Construct and Discriminant Validity

Evaluative neutralization implies rephrasing items such that it is less clear to the respondent what would be a desirable response in the given population. The current research compares evaluatively neutralized scales measuring the FFM model with standard counterparts. Study 1 reveals that evaluatively neutralized scales are less influenced by social desirability. Study 2 estimates higher-order factor models for neutralized vs. standard five-factor scales. In contrast to standard inventories, there was little support for higher-order factors for neutralized scales. Study 3 demonstrates the convergent and discriminant validity for the neutralized scales, e.g., by less inflated correlations to external measures. It is argued that evaluatively neutralized inventories help researchers come to grips with social desirability in personality measurement, and are particularly useful when the factor structure is central to the research question and there is a focus on discriminant validity.

The Motivation and Opportunity for Socially Desirable Responding Does Not Alter the General Factor of Personality

Socially desirable responding may affect the factor structure of personality questionnaires and may be one of the reasons for the common variance among personality traits. In this study, we test this hypothesis by investigating the influence of the motivational test-taking context (development vs. selection) and the opportunity to distort responses (forced-choice vs. Likert response format) on personality questionnaire scores. Data from real selection and assessment candidates (total N = 3,980) matched on gender, age, and educational level were used. Mean score differences were found between the selection and development groups, with smaller differences for the FC version. Yet, exploratory structural equation models showed that the overall factor structures as well as the general factor were highly similar across the four groups. Thus, although socially desirable responding may affect mean scores on personality traits, it does not appear to affect factor structures. This study further suggests that the common variance in personality questionnaires is consistent and appears to be little influenced by motivational pressures for response distortion.

Cross-Sectional and Longitudinal Associations of Temperament and Mental Disorders in Youth

Here we evaluate the cross-sectional and longitudinal associations between temperament and mental disorders in adolescents. Temperament was assessed in a cohort of 1540 youths by the revised self-report Early Adolescence Temperament Questionnaire (EATQ-R) at baseline and confirmatory factor analyses were used to test the best empirical model. Mental disorders were assessed by parental interview using the Development and Well-Being Behavior Assessment at baseline and at 3-year follow-up. Participants were grouped into Typically Developing Comparisons, Phobias, Distress, Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and Disruptive Behavior Disorders (DBD). Logistic regression models tested the effects of temperament on incidence and remission of mental disorders. The bifactor model of EATQ-R presented the best fit. Distress, ADHD and DBD have lower levels of effortful control in baseline. Adjusted longitudinal analysis showed that effortful control predicted lower incidence of Phobias (OR 0.74; p = 0.018), distress (OR 0.74; p = 0.014) and DBD (OR 0.68; p = 0.037). Temperament factors did not predicted remission rates.

How Universal Is the General Factor of Personality? An Analysis of the Big Five in Forager Farmers of the Bolivian Amazon

In various personality models, such as the Big Five, a consistent higher order general factor of personality (GFP) can be identified. One view in the literature is that the GFP reflects general social effectiveness. Most GFP studies, however, have been conducted in Western, educated, industrialized, and rich democracies (WEIRD). Therefore, to address the question of the universality of the GFP, we test whether the GFP can also be identified in a preliterate indigenous sample of Tsimane by using self-reports, spouse reports, and interviewer ratings. In the Tsimane, a viable GFP could be identified and the intercorrelations between personality traits were significantly stronger than in samples from industrial countries. The GFP correlated with the ratings of social engagement. In addition, self and spouse ratings of the GFP overlapped. Overall, the findings are in line with the notion that the GFP is a human universal and a substantive personality factor reflecting social effectiveness.

Impulsivity and Response Latency in Non-Suicidal Self-Injury: The Role of Negative Urgency in Emotion Regulation

Impulsivity is thought to be a contributing factor in non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI), yet the research is limited and inconsistent. In particular, little is known about how impulsivity is associated with response latency between initial urge and later self-injury, emotion regulation processes, or severity of NSSI. In this study, we tested group differences between participants with and without a history of NSSI on a questionnaire measure of impulsivity. In addition, we tested hypothesized correlations between impulsivity and relevant variables within the NSSI sample using questionnaires and self-reported response latency between urge and injury. Participants included 159 undergraduate students, 84 with an NSSI history and 75 without an NSSI history. Results indicated greater impulsivity on facets of Urgency and (lack of) Perseverance for the NSSI group. Within the NSSI sample, facets of impulsivity were associated with difficulties in emotion regulation and NSSI severity, but not response latency. In addition, response latency, a possible behavioral marker of impulsivity, was not associated with emotion regulation processes or NSSI frequency. These results suggest that higher scores on self-report measures of impulsivity, but not behavioral response latency measures, are associated with emotion regulation processes in individuals who self-injure.

Overlap Between the General Factor of Personality and Trait Emotional Intelligence: A Genetic Correlation Study

A previous meta-analysis (Van der Linden et al., Psychol Bull 143:36-52, 2017) showed that the General Factor of Personality (GFP) overlaps with ability as well as trait emotional intelligence (EI). The correlation between trait EI and the GFP was so high (ρ = 0.88) in that meta-analysis that these two may be considered virtually identical constructs. The present study builds on these findings by examining whether the strong phenotypic correlation between the GFP and trait EI has a genetic component. In a sample of monozygotic and dizygotic twins, the heritability estimates for the GFP and trait EI were 53 and 45%, respectively. Moreover, there was a strong genetic correlation of r = .90 between the GFP and trait EI. Additional analyses suggested that a substantial proportion of the genetic correlations reflects non-additive genetic effects (e.g., dominance and epistasis). These findings are discussed in light of evolutionary accounts of the GFP.