Military Personality Research: A Meta-Analysis of the Self Description Inventory

Abstract

The generalizability of personality-outcome relationships in military settings, argued to be a strong situation in the present research, was examined using metaanalysis. Effects based on the Self Description Inventory (SDI) gathered from 20 independent military samples (k = 117, total N = 34,217) were analyzed. Overall, findings concerning conscientiousness and neuroticism provide evidence for the validity of personality in military samples. However, a few constrained associations (e.g., openness-training performance) were obtained, providing some support for the exploration of the military context as a moderator of certain associations. The results are useful to militaries seeking to incorporate personality in selection decisions.It is well known that personality is related to important job outcomes such as performance and training. Barrick, Mount, and Judge (2001) consolidated findings from 15 meta-analytic studies to demonstrate the validity of the five factors of personality. However, the effects are generally small, prompting researchers to question the generalizability of personality findings and to suggest the exploration of moderators. One such moderator is the situation in which personality-outcome relationships are examined Schneider, 1996). Indeed Tett, Jackson, andRothstein (1991) demonstrated that certain situational characteristics (e.g., occupational group) attenuated the validity of personality.Among the many situational moderators Tett et al. (1991) examined in their meta-analysis, the type of sample (military versus civilian) emerged as a potential Correspondence should be addressed to

Introducing the OCEAN.20: A 20-Item Five-Factor Personality Measure Based on the Trait Self-Descriptive Inventory

“…O' Keefe (1998) found that Neuroticism (and no other Big Five factor) of the TSD was related to performance in NCM basic recruiting training (r = −.40). This finding is consistent with Barrick et al's (2001) meta-analysis that reported that Neuroticism had a significant and negative association with teamwork, and with the literature that associates Neuroticism with anxiety, depression, irritability, and ability to perform effectively in a stressful environment (see Darr, 2011). Darr's (2011) meta-analysis of the TSD found that Neuroticism and Conscientiousness had a significant association with NCM training performance.…”

“…Although the correlation coefficients were lower than those reported by O'Keefe (1998; r = −.41), they are similar to Darr's (2011) meta-analysis (r = −.12) and suggest that Neuroticism is useful in distinguishing between success and failure in basic military training. Moreover, the 15-and 20-item TSD were psychometrically sound and were as good as the 75-item TSD-PI in determining between success and failure in BRT.…”

“…However, as argued by Darr (2011), basic military training is seen as a transformation from civilian to soldier. Thus, one's level of Openness, Agreeableness, and Extraversion may be temporarily constrained in a training environment where NCM recruits are expected to unquestionably follow orders, be less of an individual and more of a team member, and incorporate and internalize certain military attitudes and behaviors.…”

“…Thus, one's level of Openness, Agreeableness, and Extraversion may be temporarily constrained in a training environment where NCM recruits are expected to unquestionably follow orders, be less of an individual and more of a team member, and incorporate and internalize certain military attitudes and behaviors. Moreover, although Darr (2011) reported that Conscientiousness was related to training performance, it could be argued that even people low in Conscientiousness could be motivated to perform effectively in a short, team-oriented training course, such as basic training. For this reason, we expected that Neuroticism (and no other Big Five factor) should distinguish between success and failure on basic recruit training.…”

Big Five traits: Predictors of retesting propensity and score improvement

“…This test produced scores for conscientiousness and emotional stability that were used to test our hypotheses, as well as scores on agreeableness, extraversion, and openness to experience to allow for more exploratory analyses. The five‐factor structure of the instrument has been supported in an analysis of 66,982 officer applicants, with coefficient alphas for Big Five factor scores ranging from .89 to .97 (Manley, ), and the SDI Big Five scale content has been well‐validated as a predictor of job and training performance across many contexts (meta‐analysis: Darr, ). Test–retest reliability estimates of the SDI+ scores are presented in Table .…”