Measurement and research using the Big Five, HEXACO, and narrow traits: A primer for researchers and practitioners

Abstract

Objective: Personality traits influence human behaviour across a broad range of situations and are consequently relevant to many theoretical and applied disciplines. In this perspective piece, we provide an overview of the logic underpinning personality measurement and review major personality taxonomies. We provide an extensive set of recommendations for researchers and practitioners on when and how to use measures of personality traits. Method: We overview a range of taxonomic representations of personality structure focusing particularly on hierarchical representations and five and six factor models such as the Big Five and HEXACO models. We review the various strengths and weaknesses of each approach. Results: The review outlines the major reasons for the dominance of the Big Five model, and suggests it is a good descriptive framework for studying personality in general. However we suggest that researchers and practitioners also consider alternative taxonomic personality representations such as the HEXACO. We provide a range of scenarios whereby alternative frameworks will be more appropriate than the Big Five and offer recommendations both for choosing measures in general and for implementing studies examining personality facets. Conclusion: Whilst the Big Five represents an excellent general personality framework that is appropriate across multiple situations, researchers and practitioners should be aware of alternative measures and utilise them where appropriate.

Five-Factor Personality Traits and RIASEC Interest Types: A Multivariate Meta-Analysis

“…However, the FFM is the most extensively accepted model of relations among traits (Barrick, Mount, & Gupta, 2003; McCrae & Costa, 2008), and according to Widiger (2017), it is the “predominant dimensional model of general personality structure” (p. 564). Anglim and O’Connor (2018) suggest that the FFM is preferred when measuring a broad set of personality traits. In addition, there have been few studies examining the relationship between the HEXACO model and vocational interests.…”

Self and other ratings of problematic smartphone use: The role of personality and relationship type

“…Kim et al, 2016;Roberts, Pullig, & Manolis, 2015;Takao, 2014). In particular, of the Big Five (Anglim & O'Connor, 2019;John & Srivastava, 1999), high neuroticism and low conscientiousness are the strongest predictors of problematic smartphone use. The combination of high neuroticism and low conscientiousness is associated with many negative life outcomes including poorer health and well-being (Anglim, Horwood, Smillie, Marrero, & Wood, 2020;Roberts, Jackson, Fayard, Edmonds, & Meints, 2009).…”

Predicting trait emotional intelligence from HEXACO personality: Domains, facets, and the general factor of personality

“…Personality traits describe relatively stable individual differences in how people think, feel, and behave. They are typically conceptualized hierarchically whereby broad traits can each be understood in terms of narrower facets (for reviews, see Anglim & O'Connor, 2019;Saucier & Srivastava, 2015). The most popular conceptualization of broad traits in recent history has been the "Big Five" (Costa & McCrae, 1995), but various other representations have been proposed.…”

“…There is much less agreement about the precise number and nature of narrow traits (for reviews see, Anglim & O'Connor, 2019;Paunonen & Jackson, 2000). Nonetheless, most long-form measures of personality adopt a hierarchical orientation of facets, typically nested within domains.…”

“…A growing body of research has also come to recognize the utility of facet-level analysis for the prediction of various life and work outcomes (Anglim & Grant, 2014;Anglim, Lievens, Everton, Grant, & Marty, 2018;Hough & Oswald, 2008;Paunonen & Jackson, 2000). The facet-level approach typically involves examining the degree to which personality facets provide incremental prediction of a criteria and assessing facet-criteria correlations (both zero-order and also potentially correcting for overlap with personality domains) (Anglim & Grant, 2014;Anglim & O'Connor, 2019).…”