Big Five factors and facets and the prediction of behavior.

Abstract

The authors compared the Big 5 factors of personality with the facets or traits of personality that constitute those factors on their ability to predict 40 behavior criteria. Both the broad factors and the narrow facets predicted substantial numbers of criteria, but the latter did noticeably better in that regard, even when the number of facet predictors was limited to the number of factor predictors. Moreover, the criterion variance accounted for by the personality facets often included large portions not predicted by the personality factors. The narrow facets, therefore, were able to substantially increase the maximum prediction achieved by the broad factors. The results of this study are interpreted as supporting a more detailed approach to personality assessment, one that goes beyond the measurement of the Big 5 factors alone.

Multiple Personality Domains in Relation to Occupational Choice and Performance Among Established Teachers

“…Assertiveness, a facet of Extraversion suggesting firm leadership, also was more likely than Extraversion (as a broad trait) to yield meaningful and generalizable relationships with quality of teaching. These two outcomes involving FFM facets are consistent with the view that the facets are more likely than the five broader factors to be predictive of performance outcomes (Borman et al,1997;Hough, 2003;Hough & Schneider, 1996, Murphy, 1996Paunonen, 1998;Paunonen & Ashton, 2001). Indeed, a number of writers have emphasized the heuristic value of a multilevel hierarchical approach to personality (Carroll, 2002;Coan, 1964;Costa & McCrae, 1995;Digman, 1997;Emmerich, 1968;Hough & Schneider, 1996;John, 1990;John & Srivastava, 1999;Saucier & Goldberg, 2003).…”

“…Because each facet measures a somewhat distinctive aspect of personality, the facets that constitute a given FFM dimension need not all relate similarly to a criterion external to the FFM domain. Indeed, this possibility has led researchers to recommend selection of relevant personality characteristics at the facet level when relating the FFM to occupation-relevant criteria (Hough & Ones, 2001;Johnson, 2003;Mount et al, 2003;Paunonen & Ashton, 2001). …”

The P-psychopathy continuum: Facets of Psychoticism and their associations with psychopathic tendencies

“…Recent studies have found up to twice the prediction of variance in antisocial behavior using a facet rather than domain approach, arguably because conceptually relevant facets may have higher criteria-related validity than the broader personality dimensions due to primary trait specific variance they carry (Levine & Jackson, 2004;Paunonen & Ashton, 2001). Therefore, identifying psychopathy-specific facets of P may be more useful in examining affective, cognitive and behavioral deficits in primary and secondary psychopathic tendencies.…”

Personality and Political Attitudes: Relationships across Issue Domains and Political Contexts

“…Others have found that these traits affect outcomes such as behavior in economic games (Ben-Ner, Kramera, and Levy 2008;Koole, Jager, and van den Berg 2001), political tolerance (Marcus et al 1995, ch. 8), job satisfaction (Hogan and Holland 2003;Salgado 1997), alcohol and tobacco consumption (Paunonen and Ashton 2001), and physical and mental health (Goodwin and Friedman 2006). Although the Big Five personality traits have only recently begun to 2 Cognitive ability is the only psychological trait that is more stable through the life cycle than the Big Five (Caspi, Roberts, and Shiner 2005, 466-67). receive attention in political science, existing evidence suggests that they are significant predictors of political outcomes such as ideology and turnout (Gerber et al 2010b;Mondak and Halperin 2008).…”