Intelligence–personality associations reconsidered: The importance of distinguishing between general and narrow dimensions of intelligence

Relationship Between the Big-Five Personality Dimensions and Speed of Information Processing Among Adolescents

“…A secondary cause of the obtained correlation is Eysenck's (1967) prediction of higher extraverts results in exterior conditions of heightened arousal, which are to a certain extent present in our research due to the competitive atmosphere of testing in groups and the optimal time of the day for the testing. These findings are consistent with the ones of Reeve et al (2006) and they slightly vary from the results provided by Sočan and Bucik (1998), which got correlations of the same sign, although somewhat higher. However, the findings are clearly different from the zero correlation in the research of Stough et al (1996), Luciano et al (2004) and Bates and Rock (2004), probably due to an essential difference of the SIP measures.…”

“…Nevertheless, the obtained results are mostly consistent with the findings from the previous research because Sočan and Bucik (1998) did not establish a Neuroticism-SIP relationship in any of the pencil and paper SIP tests, while Stough et al (1996), Luciano et al (2004) and Bates and Rock (2004) confirmed these zero correlations by using IT measures of SIP. On the other hand, Reeve et al (2006) found a correlation between Emotional Stability and three measures of SIP in the range from 0.07 to 0.1, but believed that the percentage of the explained variance did not indicate any meaningful relationship. Regarding the Conscientiousness-SIP relationship the only comparable research is the one by Reeve et al (2006), resulting in very low and positive Conscientiousness-Gs correlations, but it is necessary to treat this finding with caution.…”

“…The results showed: (1) a modest negative correlation between Extraversion and response time in most of SIP tests; (2) a modest positive correlation only between Neuroticism and decision time in the reaction time test, whereas the correlations between Neuroticism, movement time and all response times in pencil and paper SIP tests were zero; (3) curvilinear correlations between Extraversion scales and response times in SIP tests were not significantly higher than associated linear correlations; (4) only two curvilinear correlations between Neuroticism scales and response speed in SIP tests were significantly higher than associated linear correlations; (5) error rate in different SIP tests was not correlated significantly with any of the Neuroticism scales, and it was correlated significantly with only one Extraversion subscale (Sočan & Bucik, 1998). Reeve et al (2006) analyzed the relationship between personality traits and SIP as a part of a larger study of the relationship between personality, general intelligence (g) and specific dimensions of intelligence. An important aspect of their study was testing the hypothesis that correlations between personality scales and measures of specific intelligence factors change significantly after removing the g variance from them.…”

“…They used three pencil and paper measures of SIP and ten personality scales, from which they extracted the Big-Five personality dimensions. Among others, the results of their study were: (1) correlations between all five personality dimensions and all three SIP tests were low positive and significant; (2) average correlations between all SIP tests and every personality scale were lower than correlations between cognitive speed factor (Gs) and personality scales; (3) Gs showed the highest correlations with Extraversion, Conscientiousness and Intellect (0,15<r<0,19); (4) curvilinear correlations between personality scales and SIP tests did not show any significant difference in regard to linear correlations (Reeve et al, 2006). Bates and Shieles (2003) examined the relationship between SIP and Openness to experience (O) (from the FFM theory by McCrae & Costa, 1999) indirectly, by using a crystallized intelligence model (Gc) based on Cattell's investment theory (Schweizer & Koch, 2002) and found no significant correlation.…”

Psychological Predictors of Job Performance and Career Success in Professional Sport

“…Bonaccio and Reeve (2006) and Reeve, meyer, and Bonaccio (2006) removed the common variance contributing to the correlates supporting the findings of Ackerman and Heggestad and suggested the relationships between personality and GmA were mis-estimated. therefore, there is apparent overlap between measures of intelligence and personality, so new theories should be encouraged.…”