|
| |
Frequently
Asked Questions from Experienced Users of the Five-Factor Model of Personality (or, The Big Five)
Note: We will
add to this list as we receive additional "FAQ's."
Last Update: November 1, 2001
- Are we
practicing a covert discrimination if we limit a person's duties according
to how they score on a personality test? For example, if a person does not
fit the ideal "leadership profile," shouldn't we still allow them
to take a try at leadership? Otherwise, aren't we creating a "super
leader race"?
-
- Certainly, if an individual's profile does not perfectly fit the ideal,
and the individual wants to take a whack at leadership, s/he could be
permitted to do so. The value of knowing the discrepancy between one's
personal profile and the ideal lies in being forewarned before taking
on leadership responsibility. For example, a more introverted person who
wishes to be a leader can approach leadership responsibility knowing that
s/he must take special precautions to insure good communications. Over the
long haul, such individuals need to realize the possible costs to their
physical and mental health. As Billy Elliott's mother tells him in the
current film, it is important to "Be who you are." Ideally, in
larger organizations, dual career tracks should be in place to allow a
safety net for those who try leadership positions and who, after a while,
decide they wish to return to the individual contributor role.
Are reliable Big Five
Profiles of any popular personalities available for us to enjoy?
Yes. In the November 1996 issue of the
American Psychological Association's Monitor, results of three
psychobiographical studies are merged in order to profile American presidents
according to the Five-Factor Model. For starters, they peg Clinton at mid N,
high E, high O, mid A, and low C. Dole, they rated as high N, low E, low O,
low A, and low C.
In most
personality tests, the subject fills in what s/he thinks s/he is like.
How can we factor in the degree of self-knowledge (or the lack of it),
self-denial, or self-deception?
When an individual completes a
personality inventory on him/herself, we say that the resulting report
measures the individual's "self-image." When others complete the
same inventory on that same individual, we say that the resulting reports
measure the individual's "reputation." We refer to these two
different uses of a personality inventory as the "self" version and
the "rater," or "other," version. It is through examining
the relationship between these two views of an individual that we are able to
estimate the degree of an individual's self-knowledge, self-denial, or
self-deception.
Will
profiles change over time? Do you have research to document such change, or
the lack thereof?
There is a strong genetic component to
personality that is resistant to change. However, a part of personality is
learned, and that part is changeable. Four kinds of such learned change have
been observed:
- Test-Retest reliability for the
short term is .9, while long term is .7.
- From age 20 to age 30, a
developmental change has been detected in which N, E, and O tend to
decrease, while A and C tend to increase. This has often been described as
the task of "growing up"--becoming less reactive, less
party-minded, less curious, more of a team player, and more ambitious and
disciplined.
- Energy level (E4 on the NEO; E3 on
the WB5P) and ambition (C4 on the NEO; C3 on the WB5P) tend to decrease
during one's grey years.
- Cultural emphases can affect
personality change. For example, in the US, traditional female roles have
scored high on A, and a variety of "consciousness-raising"
experiences tend to bring those A scores down.
The research behind these observations
is available in both the professional manuals for the Big Five tests and in
our book, The Owner's Manual for Personality at Work (Bard Press,
2001).
The Big Five
suggests that personality traits and talents are genetic. Does this mean then
that we take on similar traits as our parents? If so, how do we explain the
differences in traits exhibited by siblings?
Resist thinking in all-or-nothing
terms. Personality originates partly (about 60%) from genes, partly from
environment. The final result--you and me--is an interaction of the two.
Identical twins show remarkably close resemblance in personality traits, and
that is because their genetic material is identical. Yet identical twins will
be more different from either one of their parents than they are from each
other. That is because a child shares only 50% of one parent's genes, and 50%
of the other parent's genes. Thus, there is only a 50% chance that a child
will inherit any one of one parent's genes. Non-twin siblings are even more
different from each other than from their parents, because non-twin siblings
share only 25% of the same genetic material. So, for example, my sister may be
tone-deaf, while I have an excellent sense of pitch. Both are inherited.
However, I probably inherited my sense of pitch from my mother, and my sister
probably inherited her tone-deafness from my father.
If all five
traits are normally distributed normally across all kinds of cultures, how do
you explain differences in cultures? For example, how to you explain the
politeness in several of the Asian cultures? Is Agreeableness/Accommodation
really normally distributed there?
Yes, the trait is normally
distributed. But how it is expressed can differ from culture to
culture. For example, in New York, an A+ might ignore your mistake,
while an A- might say something like, "You have really screwed that
up!" In Asia, an A+ would still ignore your mistake, but, because of a
cultural value place on courtesy, an A- might say something like: "Most
gracious servant thinks honorable associate perhaps was napping while trying
to spell this word!" The latter sounds more like A+, but still serves the
purpose of confrontation.
|
