Does personality predict responses to the COVID-19 crisis? Evidence from a prospective large-scale study

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly disrupted people’s daily routines and infused their lives with considerable insecurity and uncertainty. However, individuals’ responses to the pandemic vary widely. The present study investigates the role of personality traits for key aspects of people’s responses to the COVID-19 crisis. In a prospective design using a large-scale panel study ( N = 2217) that represents the heterogeneity of the adult population in Germany, we examined whether Big Five domains and facets measured prior to the pandemic predicted individuals’ responses to the pandemic in terms of: (a) perceptions of infection risks; (b) behavioral changes to prevent infection; (c) beliefs in the effectiveness of policy measures to combat the further spread of coronavirus; and (d) trust in relevant policymakers and institutions regarding the handling of coronavirus. Results revealed that personality explained only a small portion (between 0.6% and 3.8%) of the variance in the four outcomes. Nonetheless, several Big Five domains and facets had at least small-to-moderate, and theoretically plausible, associations with the outcomes. Overall, Agreeableness and its Trust facet showed the most robust associations with the four outcomes. Most trait–outcome associations were also robust to controlling for three possible confounders (sex, age, and risk-group membership).

Risk perception, treatment adherence, and personality during COVID‐19 pandemic: An international study on cancer patients

“… 11 , 18 A few recent cross‐sectional studies support the hypothesis that specific personality traits are associated with specific psychosocial responses to COVID‐19 in the general population. 19 , 20 …”

Attachment, Personality and Locus of Control: Psychological Determinants of Risk Perception and Preventive Behaviors for COVID-19

“…Heterogeneity in the assesment measures and the theoretical frameworks adopted in previous studies might explain incongruent findings. For instance, Rammstedt et al (2021) found that risk perception was not uniformly related to all the facets of agreeableness since it was correlated mainly with the trust facet. However, the questionnaire we used did not allow such refined profiling of personality facets.…”

“…However, the questionnaire we used did not allow such refined profiling of personality facets. Yet, research on the role of personality traits in perceiving the risk for COVID-like diseases is limited (Commodari, 2017;Commodari et al, 2020;Oljača et al, 2020;Rammstedt et al, 2021).…”

“…In Italy, risk perception for influenza pandemic was reported to be higher in those individuals who scored lower in "dynamicity, " and "imagination" and higher in "vulnerability" (i.e., feeling sad, guilty, worried) and "conscientiousness" (Commodari, 2017); also, empathy and imagination positively predicted the perceived risk for infectious diseases in general (Commodari et al, 2020). Concerning COVID-19, people who scored higher on agreeableness perceived lower risk (Rammstedt et al, 2021); conversely, higher emotionality predicted higher risk perception (Oljača et al, 2020). Higher neuroticism was associated with higher concerns (Aschwanden et al, 2021).…”

Profiling lockdown adherence and poor coping responses towards the COVID-19 crisis in an international cross-sectional survey

“…This, combined with the finding that clustering appears to be more viable than demographics as a determinant of adversity responses, suggests that nuances in personality and environmental factors should be considered for identifying predictors of coping and adherence in future research. For example, individuals with high scores on the "Big Five" personality domain "Agreeableness" may be more inclined to comply with policy measures against COVID-19, while individuals with lower emotional stability tend to hoard supplies and fear financial [45,46].…”