Knowledge of the motivational bases of conscientiousness would be crucial for disentangling competing explanations about the processes underlying this trait. Thereby, building on the results of a previous investigation identifying 21 goal classes connected to conscientiousness, we performed three studies aimed at clarifying the full spectrum of goals and motives underlying this trait. In Study 1 (N = 299), we conceptually replicated the original associations between goal classes and conscientiousness poles, and we identified nine goal classes that individuals ascribe to conscientious profiles more than to other profiles. In Study 2 (N = 329), we examined the associations between the subjective importance of conscientious and unconscientious goal classes and personality traits, as well as the role of goals for the desire to change one's conscientiousness. In Study 3 (N = 432), we developed a 72-item assessment of nine goal classes and explored their connections with the most important facets of conscientiousness, self-control, future orientation, and the consideration of future consequences, using network analysis. We discuss the relevance of our results for research on conscientiousness and its underlying processes. © 2020 European Association of Personality Psychology

Open Research

Open Research Badges

This article earned Open Data badge through Open Practices Disclosure from the Center for Open Science: https://osf.io/tvyxz/wiki. The data are permanently and openly accessible at DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/YWM3R, URL1: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/YWM3R and URL2: https://osf.io/ywm3r/. Author's disclosure form may also be found at the Supporting Information in the online version.

Supporting Information

Filename

Description

per2237-sup-0001-Data_S1.docxWord 2007 document , 1.2 MB

Table S1. Study 1 - Description of goal classes used, both in Italian (the language in which the study was administered) and English.

Table S2. Study 1 - Partially-overlapping t-tests. For each of 21 goals, we report the mean and SD of participants' ratings on the hypothesized pole of conscientiousness, the positive pole (C+) or the negative pole (C-), and on each of the positive (+) and negative (−) poles of the remaining HEXACO traits.

Table S3. Study 2 – Descriptive statistics. For goals, the proportion of participants using the extreme points of the scale, the minimum value one (%min) and the maximum value nine (%max), are also reported to detect potential ceiling and floor effects.

Table S4. Study 2 – Simple Tobit regression models, goal classes predicted by HEXACO personality traits.

Table S5. Study 2 –Multiple Tobit regressions, subjective importance of goal classes predicted by Big Five personality traits.

Table S6. Study 2 – Simple Tobit regression models, goal classes predicted by Big Five personality traits.

Table S7. Study 2 - Principal Component Analyses of the Honesty-humility C-BFI scale.

Table S8. Study 2 - Descriptive statistics, t-test against the midpoint, and multi-trait multi-method matrix for the BF-TGI and C-BFI scales.

Table S9. Study 2 - Correlations between personality traits assessed via BFI2 and HEXACO-60 and the willingness to change traits, assessed via the BF-TGI and the C-BFI

Table S10. Study 2 - Hierarchical multiple regressions. The willingness to become more conscientious according to C-BFI and BF-TGI was regressed on Big Five traits, Positive orientation, and the subjective importance of conscientious and unconscientious goals.

Table S11. Study 3 – Descriptive statistics and correlation matrix.

Table S12. Study 3 - Multiple regressions, goal classes predicted by conscientiousness assessed through the Adjective Checklist of Conscientiousness (Costantini, Richetin, et al., 2015) and by other HEXACO personality traits assessed by the HEXACO-60 (Ashton & Lee, 2009).

Table S13. Study 3 - Network edges with 95% confidence intervals, presented in order of absolute size.

Table S14. Study 3 – Supplementary Study. Average binary and continuous scores for Affective (A), Behavioral (B), Cognitive (C) and Goal (G) content. The last two rows report means (M) and standard deviations (SD) of each score.

Table S15. Study 3 – Supplementary Analyses. Multiple regressions, goal classes predicted by conscientiousness assessed through a subset of nine items of the Adjective Checklist of Conscientiousness (Costantini, Richetin, et al., 2015) and by other HEXACO personality traits assessed by the HEXACO-60 (Ashton & Lee, 2009).

Figure S1. Power simulation for partially overlapping t-tests in Study 1. The orange and the brown horizontal lines correspond to a power of.80 and of.90 respectively. The vertical dashed line corresponds to the final sample of N = 299.

per2237-sup-1002-Open Science Disclosure Form.pdfPDF document, 666.3 KB

Open Science Disclosure Form

Please note: The publisher is not responsible for the content or functionality of any supporting information supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than missing content) should be directed to the corresponding author for the article.

References

Alessandri, G., Caprara, G. V., & Tisak, J. (2012). The unique contribution of positive orientation to optimal functioning: Further explorations. European Psychologist, 17, 44–54. https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040/a000070.
10.1027/1016-9040/a000070
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Allen, T. A., & DeYoung, C. G. (2016). Personality neuroscience and the Five Factor Model. In T. A. Widiger (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of the Five Factor Model (pp. 1–63). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199352487.013.26
Google Scholar
Allgaier, K., Zettler, I., Wagner, W., Püttmann, S., & Trautwein, U. (2015). Honesty-humility in school: Exploring main and interaction effects on secondary school students' antisocial and prosocial behavior. Learning and Individual Differences, 43, 211–217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2015.08.005.
10.1016/j.lindif.2015.08.005
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Angleitner, A., John, O. P., & Löhr, F.-J. (1986). It's what you ask and how you ask it: An itemmetric analysis of personality questionnaires. In A. Angleitner & J. S. Wiggins (Eds.), Personality assessment via questionnaires (pp. 61–108). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-70751-3_5
10.1007/978-3-642-70751-3_5
Google Scholar
Anusic, I., Schimmack, U., Pinkus, R. T., & Lockwood, P. (2009). The nature and structure of correlations among Big Five ratings: The halo-alpha-beta model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 1142–1156. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017159.
10.1037/a0017159
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Ashton, M. C., & Lee, K. (2009). The HEXACO-60: A short measure of the major dimensions of personality. Journal of Personality Assessment, 91, 340–345. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223890902935878.
10.1080/00223890902935878
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Ashton, M. C., Lee, K., Goldberg, L. R., & de Vries, R. E. (2009). Higher order factors of personality: Do they exist? Personality and Social Psychology Review, 13, 79–91. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868309338467.
10.1177/1088868309338467
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Ashton, M. C., Lee, K., Perugini, M., Szarota, P., de Vries, R. E., Di Blas, L., … De Raad, B. (2004). A six-factor structure of personality-descriptive adjectives: Solutions from psycholexical studies in seven languages. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 356–366. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.86.2.356.
10.1037/0022-3514.86.2.356
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The Big Five personality dimensions and job performance: a meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44, 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1991.tb00688.x.
10.1111/j.1744-6570.1991.tb00688.x
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Baumert, A., Schmitt, M., & Perugini, M. (2019). Towards an explanatory personality psychology: Integrating personality structure, personality process, and personality development. Personality and Individual Differences, 147, 18–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2019.04.016.
10.1016/j.paid.2019.04.016
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Baumert, A., Schmitt, M., Perugini, M., Johnson, W., Blum, G., Borkenau, P., … Wrzus, C. (2017). Integrating personality structure, personality process, and personality development. European Journal of Personality, 31, 503–528. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2115.
10.1002/per.2115
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Bélanger, J. J., Schori-Eyal, N., Pica, G., Kruglanski, A. W., & Lafrenière, M. A. (2015). The “more is less” effect in equifinal structures: Alternative means reduce the intensity and quality of motivation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 60, 93–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2015.05.005.
10.1016/j.jesp.2015.05.005
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Bleidorn, W. (2012). Hitting the road to adulthood: Short-term personality development during a major life transition. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38, 1594–1608. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167212456707.
10.1177/0146167212456707
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Bleidorn, W., Kandler, C., Hülsheger, U. R., Riemann, R., Angleitner, A., & Spinath, F. M. (2010). Nature and nurture of the interplay between personality traits and major life goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99, 366–379. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019982.
10.1037/a0019982
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Bleidorn, W., Klimstra, T. A., Denissen, J. J. A., Rentfrow, P. J., Potter, J., & Gosling, S. D. (2013). Personality maturation around the world: A cross-cultural examination of social-investment theory. Psychological Science, 24, 2530–2540. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797613498396.
10.1177/0956797613498396
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Bogg, T., & Roberts, B. W. (2004). Conscientiousness and health-related behaviors: A meta-analysis of the leading behavioral contributors to mortality. Psychological Bulletin, 130, 887–919. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.130.6.887.
10.1037/0033-2909.130.6.887
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Borsboom, D., Mellenbergh, G. J., & van Heerden, J. (2003). The theoretical status of latent variables. Psychological Review, 110, 203–219. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.110.2.203.
10.1037/0033-295X.110.2.203
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Bringmann, L. F., Elmer, T., Epskamp, S., Krause, W., Schoch, D., Wichers, M., & Snippe, E. (2019). What do centrality measures measure in psychological networks? Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 128, 892–903. https://doi.org/10.1037/abn0000446.
10.1037/abn0000446
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Caprara, G. V., Alessandri, G., Eisenberg, N., Kupfer, A., Steca, P., Caprara, M. G., … Abela, J. (2012). The positivity scale. Psychological Assessment, 24, 701–712. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026681.
10.1037/a0026681
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Chen, J., & Chen, Z. (2008). Extended Bayesian information criteria for model selection with large model spaces. Biometrika, 95, 759–771. https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/asn034.
10.1093/biomet/asn034
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
10.1046/j.1526-4610.2001.111006343.x
Google Scholar
Comrey, A. L., & Lee, H. B. (1992). A first course in factor analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Google Scholar
Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Four ways five factors are basic. Personality and Individual Differences, 13, 653–665. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(92)90236-I.
10.1016/0191-8869(92)90236-I
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Costa, P. T., McCrae, R. R., & Dye, D. A. (1991). Facet scales for agreeableness and conscientiousness: A revision of the NEO personality inventory. Personality and Individual Differences, 12, 887–898. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(91)90177-D.
10.1016/0191-8869(91)90177-D
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Costantini, G., Epskamp, S., Borsboom, D., Perugini, M., Mõttus, R., Waldorp, L. J., & Cramer, A. O. J. (2015). State of the aRt personality research: A tutorial on network analysis of personality data in R. Journal of Research in Personality, 54, 13–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2014.07.003.
10.1016/j.jrp.2014.07.003
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Costantini, G., & Perugini, M. (2016). The network of conscientiousness. Journal of Research in Personality, 65, 68–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2016.10.003.
10.1016/j.jrp.2016.10.003
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Costantini, G., & Perugini, M. (2017). Network analysis for psychological situations. ( J. F. Rauthmann, R. Sherman, & D. C. Funder, Eds.), The Oxford handbook of psychological situations (Vol. 1). New York: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190263348.013.16
Google Scholar
Costantini, G., & Perugini, M. (2018). A framework for testing causality in personality research. European Journal of Personality, 32, 254–268. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2150.
10.1002/per.2150
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Costantini, G., Perugini, M., Dentale, F., Barbaranelli, C., Alessandri, G., Vecchione, M., & Caprara, G. V. (2016). Assessing positive orientation with the implicit association test. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 2010, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000362.
Google Scholar
Costantini, G., Richetin, J., Borsboom, D., Fried, E. I., Rhemtulla, M., & Perugini, M. (2015). Development of indirect measures of conscientiousness: Combining a facets approach and network analysis. European Journal of Personality, 29, 548–567. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2014.
10.1002/per.2014
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Costantini, G., Richetin, J., Preti, E., Casini, E., Epskamp, S., & Perugini, M. (2019). Stability and variability of personality networks. A tutorial on recent developments in network psychometrics. Personality and Individual Differences, 136, 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.06.011.
10.1016/j.paid.2017.06.011
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Cramer, A. O. J., van der Sluis, S., Noordhof, A., Wichers, M., Geschwind, N., Aggen, S. H., … Wichers, M. (2012). Dimensions of normal personality as networks in search of equilibrium: You can't like parties if you don't like people. European Journal of Personality, 26, 414–431. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.1866.
10.1002/per.1866
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Denissen, J. J. A., Luhmann, M., Chung, J. M., & Bleidorn, W. (2019). Transactions between life events and personality traits across the adult lifespan. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 116, 612–633. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000196.
10.1037/pspp0000196
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Denissen, J. J. A., van Aken, M. A. G., Penke, L., & Wood, D. (2013). Self-regulation underlies temperament and personality: An integrative developmental framework. Child Development Perspectives, 7, 255–260. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12050.
10.1111/cdep.12050
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Derrick, B. (2018). Partiallyoverlapping: Partially overlapping samples tests. Version 2.0.
Google Scholar
Derrick, B., Russ, B., Toher, D., & White, P. (2017). Test statistics for the comparison of means for two samples that include both paired and independent observations. Journal of Modern Applied Statistical Methods, 16, 137–157. https://doi.org/10.22237/jmasm/1493597280.
10.22237/jmasm/1493597280
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Derrick, B., Toher, D., & White, P. (2017). How to compare the means of two samples that include paired observations and independent observations: A companion to Derrick, Russ, Toher and White (2017). The Quantitative Methods in Psychology, 13, 120–126. Retrieved from. http://eprints.uwe.ac.uk/31765.
10.20982/tqmp.13.2.p120
Web of Science®Google Scholar
DeYoung, C. G. (2015). Cybernetic Big Five theory. Journal of Research in Personality, 56, 33–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2014.07.004.
10.1016/j.jrp.2014.07.004
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Epskamp, S., Borsboom, D., & Fried, E. I. (2018). Estimating psychological networks and their accuracy: A tutorial paper. Behavior Research Methods, 50, 195–212. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-017-0862-1.
10.3758/s13428-017-0862-1
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Epskamp, S., Costantini, G., Haslbeck, J. M. B., Cramer, A. O. J., Waldorp, L. J., Schmittmann, V. D., & Borsboom, D. (2018). qgraph: Graph plotting methods, psychometric data visualization and graphical model estimation. R package version 1.5.
Google Scholar
Epskamp, S., Cramer, A. O. J., Waldorp, L. J., Schmittmann, V. D., & Borsboom, D. (2012). qgraph: Network visualizations of relationships in psychometric data. Journal of Statistical Software, 48, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i04.
10.18637/jss.v048.i04
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Epskamp, S., & Fried, E. I. (2018). A tutorial on regularized partial correlation networks. Psychological Methods, 23, 617–634. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000167.
10.1037/met0000167
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Epskamp, S., Waldorp, L. J., Mõttus, R., & Borsboom, D. (2018). The Gaussian graphical model in cross-sectional and time-series data. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 53, 453–480. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2018.1454823.
10.1080/00273171.2018.1454823
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Foygel, R., & Drton, M. (2010). Extended Bayesian information criteria for Gaussian graphical models. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 22, 2020–2028.
Google Scholar
Friedman, H. S., Kern, M. L., Hampson, S. E., & Duckworth, A. L. (2012). A new life-span approach to conscientiousness and health: Combining the pieces of the causal puzzle. Developmental Psychology, 50, 1377–1389. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030373.
10.1037/a0030373
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Friedman, J., Hastie, T., & Tibshirani, R. (2008). Sparse inverse covariance estimation with the graphical lasso. Biostatistics, 9, 432–441. https://doi.org/10.1093/biostatistics/kxm045.
10.1093/biostatistics/kxm045
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Fujita, K. (2011). On conceptualizing self-control as more than the effortful inhibition of impulses. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 15, 352–366. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868311411165.
10.1177/1088868311411165
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Goldberg, L. R. (1999). A broad-bandwidth, public-domain, personality inventory measuring the lower-level facets of several five-factor models. In I. Merivelde, I. J. Deary, F. Fruyt, & F. Ostendorf (Eds.), Personality psychology in europe (pp. 7–28). Tilburg: Tilburg University Press.
Google Scholar
Goldberg, L. R., Johnson, J. A., Eber, H. W., Hogan, R., Ashton, M. C., Cloninger, C. R., & Gough, H. G. (2006). The International Personality Item Pool and the future of public-domain personality measures. Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 84–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2005.08.007.
10.1016/j.jrp.2005.08.007
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Golle, J., Rose, N., Göllner, R., Spengler, M., Stoll, G., Hübner, N., … Nagengast, B. (2019). School or work? The choice may change your personality. Psychological Science, 30, 32–42. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797618806298.
10.1177/0956797618806298
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Graham, J. W., Taylor, B. J., Olchowski, A. E., & Cumsille, P. E. (2006). Planned missing data designs in psychological research. Psychological Methods, 11, 323–343. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.11.4.323.
10.1037/1082-989X.11.4.323
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Haslbeck, J. M. B., & Waldorp, L. (2017). How well do network models predict future observations? On the importance of predictability in network models. Behavior Research Methods, 50, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-017-0910-x.
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Hennecke, M., Bleidorn, W., Denissen, J. J. A., & Wood, D. (2014). A three-part framework for self-regulated personality development across adulthood. European Journal of Personality, 28, 289–299. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.1945.
10.1002/per.1945
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Henningsen, A. (2010). Estimating censored regression models in R using the censReg Package. R Package Vignettes Collection, 5, 12.
Google Scholar
Heron, K. E., & Smyth, J. M. (2010). Ecological momentary interventions: Incorporating mobile technology into psychosocial and health behaviour treatments. British Journal of Health Psychology, 15, 1–39. https://doi.org/10.1348/135910709X466063.
10.1348/135910709X466063
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Hou, X., Allen, T. A., Wei, D., Huang, H., Wang, K., DeYoung, C. G., & Qiu, J. (2017). Trait compassion is associated with the neural substrate of empathy. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 17, 1018–1027. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13415-017-0529-5.
10.3758/s13415-017-0529-5
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118.
10.1080/10705519909540118
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Hudson, N. W., & Fraley, R. C. (2015). Volitional personality trait change: Can people choose to change their personality traits? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109, 490–507. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000021.
10.1037/pspp0000021
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Hudson, N. W., & Fraley, R. C. (2016). Changing for the better? Longitudinal associations between volitional personality change and psychological well-being. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 42, 603–615. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167216637840.
10.1177/0146167216637840
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Hudson, N. W., & Roberts, B. W. (2014). Goals to change personality traits: Concurrent links between personality traits, daily behavior, and goals to change oneself. Journal of Research in Personality, 53, 68–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2014.08.008.
10.1016/j.jrp.2014.08.008
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Jackson, J. J., Bogg, T., Walton, K. E., Wood, D., Harms, P. D., Lodi-Smith, J., … Roberts, B. W. (2009). Not all conscientiousness scales change alike: A multimethod, multisample study of age differences in the facets of conscientiousness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 446–459. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014156.
10.1037/a0014156
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Jackson, J. J., Wood, D., Bogg, T., Walton, K. E., Harms, P. D., & Roberts, B. W. (2010). What do conscientious people do? Development and validation of the Behavioral Indicators of Conscientiousness (BIC). Journal of Research in Personality, 44, 501–511. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2010.06.005.
10.1016/j.jrp.2010.06.005
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Kelley, K., & Pornprasertmanit, S. (2016). Confidence intervals for population reliability coefficients: Evaluation of methods, recommendations, and software for composite measures. Psychological Methods, 21, 69–92. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0040086.
10.1037/a0040086
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Kenny, D. A. (2015). Measuring Model Fit. Retrieved from http://davidakenny.net/cm/fit.htm
Google Scholar
Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling.
Google Scholar
Kruglanski, A. W., Pierro, A., & Sheveland, A. (2011). How many roads lead to Rome? Equifinality set-size and commitment to goals and means. European Journal of Social Psychology, 41, 344–352. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.780.
10.1002/ejsp.780
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Kruglanski, A. W., Shah, J. Y., Fishbach, A., Friedman, R., Chun, W. Y., & Sleeth-Keppler, D. (2002). A theory of goal systems. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 34, 331–378. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(02)80008-9.
10.1016/S0065-2601(02)80008-9
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Laghi, F., Baiocco, R., Liga, F., Guarino, A., & Baumgartner, E. (2013). Identity status differences among Italian adolescents: Associations with time perspective. Children and Youth Services Review, 35, 482–487. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2012.12.018.
10.1016/j.childyouth.2012.12.018
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Lee, K., & Ashton, M. C. (2004). Psychometric properties of the HEXACO personality inventory. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 39, 329–358. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr3902_8.
10.1207/s15327906mbr3902_8
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Lee, K., & Ashton, M. C. (2008). The HEXACO personality factors in the indigenous personality lexicons of English and 11 other languages. Journal of Personality, 76, 1001–1054. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2008.00512.x.
10.1111/j.1467-6494.2008.00512.x
CASPubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Lee, K., & Ashton, M. C. (2014). The Dark Triad, the Big Five, and the HEXACO model. Personality and Individual Differences, 67, 2–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.01.048.
10.1016/j.paid.2014.01.048
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Little, T. D., & Rhemtulla, M. (2013). Planned missing data designs for developmental researchers. Child Development Perspectives, 7, 199–204. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12043.
10.1111/cdep.12043
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Liu, H., Lafferty, J., & Wasserman, L. (2009). The nonparanormal: Semiparametric estimation of high dimensional undirected graphs. The Journal of Machine Learning Research, 10, 2295–2328. https://doi.org/10.1016/0006-291X(91)91267-G.
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Lodi-Smith, J., & Roberts, B. W. (2007). Social investment and personality: A meta-analysis of the relationship of personality traits to investment in work, family, religion, and volunteerism. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 11, 68–86. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868306294590.
10.1177/1088868306294590
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Lüdtke, O., Trautwein, U., & Husemann, N. (2009). Goal and personality trait development in a transitional period: Assessing change and stability in personality development. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 35, 428–441. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167208329215.
10.1177/0146167208329215
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Maniaci, M. R., & Rogge, R. D. (2014). Caring about carelessness: Participant inattention and its effects on research. Journal of Research in Personality, 48, 61–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2013.09.008.
10.1016/j.jrp.2013.09.008
Web of Science®Google Scholar
McBee, M. (2010). Modeling outcomes with floor or ceiling effects: An introduction to the Tobit model. The Gifted Child Quarterly, 54, 314–320. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986210379095.
10.1177/0016986210379095
Web of Science®Google Scholar
McCabe, K. O., & Fleeson, W. (2012). What is extraversion for? Integrating trait and motivational perspectives and identifying the purpose of extraversion. Psychological Science, 23, 1498–1505. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797612444904.
10.1177/0956797612444904
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
McCabe, K. O., & Fleeson, W. (2016). Are traits useful? Explaining trait manifestations as tools in the pursuit of goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 110, 287–301. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039490.
10.1037/a0039490
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
McCabe, K. O., Van Yperen, N. W., Elliot, A. J., & Verbraak, M. (2013). Big Five personality profiles of context-specific achievement goals. Journal of Research in Personality, 47, 698–707. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2013.06.003.
10.1016/j.jrp.2013.06.003
Web of Science®Google Scholar
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (2008). Empirical and theoretical status of the five-factor model of personality traits. In G. Boyle, G. Matthews, & D. Saklofske (Eds.), Sage handbook of personality theory and assessment (pp. 273–294). London: Sage Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781849200462
10.4135/9781849200462.n13
Google Scholar
McCrae, R. R., & Sutin, A. R. (2018). A five-factor theory perspective on causal analysis. European Journal of Personality, 32, 151–166. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2134.
10.1002/per.2134
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Meade, A. W., & Craig, S. B. (2012). Identifying careless responses in survey data. Psychological Methods, 17, 437–455. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028085.
10.1037/a0028085
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Miller, T. J., Baranski, E. N., Dunlop, W. L., & Ozer, D. J. (2019). Striving for change: The prevalence and correlates of personality change goals. Journal of Research in Personality, 80, 10–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2019.03.010.
10.1016/j.jrp.2019.03.010
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Milojev, P., Osborne, D., & Sibley, C. G. (2014). Personality resilience following a natural disaster. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 5, 760–768. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550614528545.
10.1177/1948550614528545
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Milyavskaya, M., Inzlicht, M., Hope, N., & Koestner, R. (2015). Saying “no” to temptation: Want-to motivation improves self-regulation by reducing temptation rather than by increasing self-control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109, 677–693. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000045.
10.1037/pspp0000045
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Mõttus, R. (2016). Towards more rigorous personality trait-outcome research. European Journal of Personality, 30, 292–303. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2041.
10.1002/per.2041
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Mõttus, R., & Allerhand, M. (2018). Why do traits come together? The underlying trait and network approaches. In V. Zeigler-Hill, & T. K. Shackelford (Eds.), SAGE handbook of personality and individual differences: Volume 1. The science of personality and individual differences. London: Sage.
10.4135/9781526451163.n6
Google Scholar
Mõttus, R., Sinick, J., Terracciano, A., Hřebíčková, M., Kandler, C., Ando, J., … Jang, K. L. (2019). Personality characteristics below facets: A replication and meta-analysis of cross-rater agreement, rank-order stability, heritability, and utility of personality nuances. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 117, e35–e50. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000202.
10.1037/pspp0000202
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Mundfrom, D. J., Shaw, D. G., & Lu Ke, T. (2005). Factorial structure of the French version of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale among the elderly. International Journal of Testing, 5, 159–168. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327574ijt0502.
10.1207/s15327574ijt0502_4
Google Scholar
Nicholls, J. G., Licht, B. G., & Pearl, R. A. (1982). Some dangers of using personality questionnaires to study personality. Psychological Bulletin, 92, 572–580. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.92.3.572.
10.1037/0033-2909.92.3.572
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Ozer, D. J., & Benet-Martínez, V. (2006). Personality and the prediction of consequential outcomes. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 401–421. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.57.102904.190127.
10.1146/annurev.psych.57.102904.190127
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Perugini, M., & Bagozzi, R. P. (2001). The role of desires and anticipated emotions in goal-directed behaviours: Broadening and deepening the theory of planned behaviour. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 79–98. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466601164704.
10.1348/014466601164704
CASPubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Perugini, M., & Conner, M. (2000). Predicting and understanding behavioral volitions: The interplay between goals and behaviors. European Journal of Social Psychology, 30, 705–731. https://doi.org/10.1002/1099-0992(200009/10)30:5<705::AID-EJSP18>3.0.CO;2.
10.1002/1099-0992(200009/10)30:5<705::AID-EJSP18>3.0.CO;2-#
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Perugini, M., Costantini, G., Hughes, S., & De Houwer, J. (2016). A functional perspective on personality. International Journal of Psychology, 51, 33–39. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijop.12175.
10.1002/ijop.12175
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Perugini, M., Gallucci, M., & Costantini, G. (2018). A practical primer to power analysis for simple experimental designs. International Review of Social Psychology, 31, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.5334/irsp.181.
10.5334/irsp.181
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Poropat, A. E. (2009). A meta-analysis of the five-factor model of personality and academic performance. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 322–338. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014996.
10.1037/a0014996
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Pytlik Zillig, L. M., Hemenover, S. H., & Dienstbier, R. A. (2002). What do we assess when we assess a Big 5 trait? A content analysis of the affective, behavioral, and cognitive processes represented in Big 5 personality inventories. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 847–858. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167202289013.
10.1177/0146167202289013
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Quintus, M., Egloff, B., & Wrzus, C. (2017). Predictors of volitional personality change in younger and older adults: Response surface analyses signify the complementary perspectives of the self and knowledgeable others. Journal of Research in Personality, 70, 214–228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2017.08.001.
10.1016/j.jrp.2017.08.001
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Reisz, Z., Boudreaux, M. J., & Ozer, D. J. (2013). Personality traits and the prediction of personal goals. Personality and Individual Differences, 55, 699–704. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2013.05.023.
10.1016/j.paid.2013.05.023
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Revelle, W. (2018). psych: Procedures for psychological, psychometric, and personality research. R package version 1.8.12. Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois, USA. Retrieved from https://cran.r-project.org/package=psych
Google Scholar
Roberts, B. W., Hill, P. L., & Davis, J. P. (2017). How to change conscientiousness: The sociogenomic trait intervention model. Personality Dirsoders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 8, 199–205. https://doi.org/10.1037/per0000242.
10.1037/per0000242
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Roberts, B. W., Lejuez, C., Krueger, R. F., Richards, J. M., & Hill, P. L. (2014). What is conscientiousness and how can it be assessed? Developmental Psychology, 50, 1315–1330. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031109.
10.1037/a0031109
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Roberts, B. W., Luo, J., Briley, D. A., Chow, P. I., Su, R., & Hill, P. L. (2017). A systematic review of personality trait change through intervention. Psychological Bulletin, 143, 117–141. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000088.
10.1037/bul0000088
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Roberts, B. W., O'Donnell, M., & Robins, R. W. (2004). Goal and personality trait development in emerging adulthood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 541–550. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.87.4.541.
10.1037/0022-3514.87.4.541
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Roberts, B. W., & Robins, R. W. (2000). Broad dispositions, broad aspirations: The intersection of personality traits and major life goals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 1284–1296. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167200262009.
10.1177/0146167200262009
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Roberts, B. W., Walton, K. E., & Viechtbauer, W. (2006). Patterns of mean-level change in personality traits across the life course: A meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.132.1.1.
10.1037/0033-2909.132.1.1
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Roberts, B. W., Wood, D., & Smith, J. L. (2005). Evaluating five factor theory and social investment perspectives on personality trait development. Journal of Research in Personality, 39, 166–184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2004.08.002.
10.1016/j.jrp.2004.08.002
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Robinson, O. C., Noftle, E. E., Guo, J., Asadi, S., & Zhang, X. (2015). Goals and plans for Big Five personality trait change in young adults. Journal of Research in Personality, 59, 31–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2015.08.002.
10.1016/j.jrp.2015.08.002
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Rosseel, Y. (2012). lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48, 1–36.
10.18637/jss.v048.i02
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Rueter, A. R., Abram, S. V., MacDonald, A. W., Rustichini, A., & DeYoung, C. G. (2018). The goal priority network as a neural substrate of conscientiousness. Human Brain Mapping, 39, 3574–3585. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.24195.
10.1002/hbm.24195
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Sackett, P. R., & Yang, H. (2000). Correction for range restriction: An expanded typology. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 112–118. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.85.1.112.
10.1037/0021-9010.85.1.112
CASPubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Sanchez-Roige, S., Gray, J. C., MacKillop, J., Chen, C. H., & Palmer, A. A. (2018). The genetics of human personality. Genes, Brain and Behavior, 17, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1111/gbb.12439.
10.1111/gbb.12439
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Schmittmann, V. D., Cramer, A. O. J., Waldorp, L. J., Epskamp, S., Kievit, R. A., & Borsboom, D. (2013). Deconstructing the construct: A network perspective on psychological phenomena. New Ideas in Psychology, 31, 43–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.newideapsych.2011.02.007.
10.1016/j.newideapsych.2011.02.007
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Schoemann, A. M., Boulton, A. J., & Short, S. D. (2017). Determining power and sample size for simple and complex mediation models. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 8, 379–386. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550617715068.
10.1177/1948550617715068
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Sened, H., Lazarus, G., Gleason, M. E. J., Rafaeli, E., & Fleeson, W. (2018). The use of intensive longitudinal methods in explanatory personality research. European Journal of Personality, 32, 269–285. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2143.
10.1002/per.2143
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Sheldon, K. M., & Elliot, A. J. (1998). Not all personal goals are personal: Comparing autonomous and controlled reasons for goals as predictors of effort and attainment. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 546–557. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167298245010.
10.1177/0146167298245010
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Slagt, M., Dubas, J. S., Deković, M., Haselager, G. J. T., & van Aken, M. A. G. (2015). Longitudinal associations between delinquent behaviour of friends and delinquent behaviour of adolescents: Moderation by adolescent personality traits. European Journal of Personality, 29, 468–477. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2001.
10.1002/per.2001
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Soto, C. J., & John, O. P. (2017). The next Big Five Inventory (BFI-2): Developing and assessing a hierarchical model with 15 facets to enhance bandwidth, fidelity, and predictive power. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113, 117–143. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000096.
10.1037/pspp0000096
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Specht, J., Bleidorn, W., Denissen, J. J. A., Hennecke, M., Hutteman, R., Kandler, C., … Zimmermann, J. (2014). What drives adult personality development? A comparison of theoretical perspectives and empirical evidence. European Journal of Personality, 28, 216–230. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.1966.
10.1002/per.1966
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Specht, J., Egloff, B., & Schmukle, S. C. (2011). Stability and change of personality across the life course: The impact of age and major life events on mean-level and rank-order stability of the Big Five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101, 862–882. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024950.
10.1037/a0024950
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Strathman, A., Gleicher, F., Boninger, D. S., & Edwards, C. S. (1994). The consideration of future consequences: Weighing immediate and distant outcomes of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 742–752. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.66.4.742.
10.1037/0022-3514.66.4.742
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Tangney, J. P., Baumeister, R. F., & Boone, A. L. (2004). High self-control predicts good adjustment, less pathology, better grades, and interpersonal success. Journal of Personality, 72, 271–324. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0022-3506.2004.00263.x.
10.1111/j.0022-3506.2004.00263.x
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Thompson, F. T., & Levine, D. U. (1997). Examples of easily explainable suppressor variables in multiple regression research. Multiple Linear Regression Viewpoints.
Google Scholar
Veall, M. R., & Zimmermann, K. (1994). Pseudo-R² measures for some limited dependent variable models. Journal of Economic Surveys, 10, 241–259. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6419.1996.tb00013.x.
10.1111/j.1467-6419.1996.tb00013.x
Google Scholar
Vukasović, T., & Bratko, D. (2015). Heritability of personality: A meta-analysis of behavior genetic studies. Psychological Bulletin, 141, 769–785. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000017.
10.1037/bul0000017
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Wilt, J., & Revelle, W. (2015). Affect, behaviour, cognition and desire in the Big Five: An analysis of item content and structure. European Journal of Personality, 29, 478–497. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2002.
10.1002/per.2002
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Wolf, E. J., Harrington, K. M., Clark, S. L., & Miller, M. W. (2013). Sample size requirements for structural equation models. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 73, 913–934. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164413495237.
10.1177/0013164413495237
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Wood, D., Gardner, M. H., & Harms, P. D. (2015). How functionalist and process approaches to behavior can explain trait covariation. Psychological Review, 122, 84–111. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038423.
10.1037/a0038423
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Wood, D., & Harms, P. D. (2016). On the TRAPs that make it dangerous to study personality with personality questionnaires. European Journal of Personality, 30, 304–340. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.
Google Scholar
Ziegler, M., Booth, T., & Bensch, D. (2013). Getting entangled in the nomological net. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 29, 157–161. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000173.
10.1027/1015-5759/a000173
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Zimbardo, P. G., & Boyd, J. N. (1999). Putting time in perspective: A valid, reliable individual-differences metric. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 1271–1288. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.77.6.1271.
10.1037/0022-3514.77.6.1271
Web of Science®Google Scholar

Citing Literature

Volume34, Issue6

Special Issue:New approaches towards conceptualizing and assessing personality

November/December 2020

Pages 1073-1094

Uncovering the Motivational Core of Traits: The Case of Conscientiousness

Abstract

Open Research

Open Research Badges

Supporting Information

References

Citing Literature

References

Information

About Wiley Online Library

Help & Support

Opportunities

Connect with Wiley

Uncovering the Motivational Core of Traits: The Case of Conscientiousness

Abstract

Open Research

Open Research Badges

Supporting Information

References

Citing Literature

References

Related

Information