Background: How flexible people react to changes, and adapt their behavior and plans, seems to be crucial in modern society. Nevertheless, there has been no common conceptualization of flexibility in the psychological literature. We ran two studies to contribute to the scientific understanding of flexibility as a personality trait and to offer a validated and easy-to-use flexibility questionnaire. Methods & Results: The first explorative study (N = 279) examined three individual-differences concepts of flexibility. Results suggested that flexibility consists of predictability, adaptability, and orderliness, and can be assessed with a 24-item Flexibility Scale (FS-24). The second, confirmatory study (N = 188) replicated the three components. The FS-24 had a good test-retest reliability. Further results provided initial support for the convergent and discriminant validity of FS-24. Conclusions: FS-24 was found to have sufficient psychometrical properties as well as suggested applications in different fields, such as organizational development, or counseling.

This study compares the original measure to assess character strengths (VIA-IS) with its latest revision (VIA-IS-R) regarding reliability and convergent, discriminant, and criterion validity. A sample of 499 German-speaking adults (79.4% women, mean age: 33.3 years) provided self-reports of character strengths (VIA-IS, VIA-IS-R) and several criteria: Core virtues, thriving, and moral behaviors. Results suggested that both measures showed satisfactory internal consistency and converged well in a multitrait-multimethod analysis. Further, both measures were comparable regarding their relationships with the criteria. Overall, the results of the current study suggest that both questionnaires are reliable and valid instruments and findings based on these instruments can be considered highly comparable.

Allport’s (1927) distinction of personality devaluated (personality) and personality evaluated (character) can still be found in today’s psychological landscape. The present study compares the Five-Factor Model of personality and the VIA-classification of character strengths across two methods (self- and peer-reports) and across two levels of abstraction (domains/factors and scales/facets). A sample of 152 participants and 152 peer-raters completed the NEO-Personality Inventory Revised and the VIA Inventory of Strength. Personality and character were found to strongly overlap, yet the different operationalizations were rarely redundant (except for 3 personality facets). Multitrait-multimethod analyses mostly supported the convergent and discriminant validity of personality and character. Interpersonal strengths (e.g., teamwork) and abstract character factors lacked discriminant validity to personality facets. The present investigation contributes to a better understanding of the interplay between personality and character and provides an impetus for future research on the “virtue gap” between devaluated and evaluated personality traits.

The adaptation of own plans and behaviors to new circumstances seems to be a desirable personal quality in the modern world. However, Lavy (2020) argues that adaptability cannot be transferred to a single character strength. The present research examines this assumption using typical and daily behaviors of three aspects of flexibility (predictability, adaptability and orderliness) and 24 character strengths. Across two studies (N1=283, N2=188), flexibility showed a consistent and large overlap with character strengths. Adaptability was positively related to most of the strengths. Predictability was positively related to humility and prudence, and orderliness to perseverance, prudence, and self- regulation. These results support Lavy`s assumption and build a strong basis for further examining the relationships and interplay between flexibility and character strengths. They also constitute an important first step toward integrative positive interventions that target relevant aspects of flexibility and character.

No abstract