No abstract

Across 2 studies and 4 samples (Ns = 8,332, 2,136, 4,963, and 753, respectively), we tested whether the relation between conscientiousness and variables associated with important aspects of individuals' lives were curvilinear such that being high on conscientiousness was manifestly negative. Across multiple outcomes including measures of health, well-being, relationship satisfaction, job satisfaction, and organizational citizenship, we found no evidence for a systematic curvilinear relation between conscientiousness and these outcomes. Furthermore, heeding the call to use more sophisticated psychometric modeling of the conscientiousness spectrum, we used different types of scale construction and scoring methods (i.e., dominance and ideal point) and again found no evidence of curvilinear relationships between conscientiousness and the aforementioned variables. We discuss the potential reasons for the inconsistency with past research. (PsycINFO Database Record

The benefits of living a conscientious life have been demonstrated across multiple domains, and yet, few studies have sought to explain how the positive effects in one area may help explain those in another. The current article considers the possibility that conscientious individuals live healthier lives by virtue of having greater success in their relationships. Using both past research and new findings to support our model, we set forth a framework by which to consider how Conscientiousness affects relationship functioning, which in turn leads to better physical, emotional, and psychological health. In so doing, we also provide a new outlook on the health benefits associated with Conscientiousness, and how these may be conferred by relationship success.

Most previous research has focused on the relationships between specific personality traits and specific facets of mental health. However, in reality most of the Big Five are associated at non‐trivial levels with mental health. To account for this broad correlation, we proposed the ‘barometer hypothesis’, positing that behind both ratings of mental health and personality lies a barometer that indicates one's general feelings of positivity or negativity. To the extent that both the general factors of personality and mental health reflect this same barometer, we would expect them to be correlated. We tested alternative models using data from a large longitudinal panel study that includes two cohorts of participants who were assessed every two years, resulting in parallel 4‐year longitudinal studies. Similar results were obtained across both studies. Supporting the ‘barometer hypothesis’, findings revealed that the optimal model included general latent factors for both personality traits and mental health. Compared to the broad raw pairwise correlations, the bi‐factor latent change models revealed that the relation among levels and changes in the specific factors were substantially reduced when controlling for the general factors. Still, some relations remained relatively unaffected by the inclusion of the general factor. We discuss implications of these findings. Copyright © 2016 European Association of Personality Psychology

The present study attempted to closely replicate Roberts, Smith, Jackson, and Edmonds (2009) who found, in part, a compensatory effect such that individuals with spouses higher in conscientiousness reported higher self-rated health and fewer physical limitations in the Health and Retirement Study. Using similarly structured data from the National Social Life, Health, and Aging Project (N = 953), the current study found results largely consistent with the original study such that partner conscientiousness predicted both self-rated health and physical limitations, and husbands’ conscientiousness and neuroticism interacted when predicting wives’ self-rated health. A discussion of the usefulness of statistical significance versus effect size in replication follows.