Civil Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
TABLE 25.4 Categories of the Five Factor Model and their Descriptions
Factor
Description
Extraversion
Relates to the level of comfort one has with sensory stimulation. Those with high levels of
extraversion tend to prefer larger numbers of relationships and more social interactions,
while low levels (i.e., introversion) reflect a preference for being more independent and
spending time alone
Agreeableness
This trait involves the quality of one's interpersonal communications. Those at one end of
the spectrum on this dimension (sometimes referred to as adapters) select their norms
for behavior from a number of sources. “Challengers” typically are on the other end of
this continuum, as they base their behavior on their own personal beliefs
Conscientiousness
This construct refers to the focus one has on goals. On one end of this spectrum are
individuals who are more self-disciplined and concentrate on fewer goals, while on the
other end are individuals who pursue many goals but are more easily distracted
Neuroticism
Neuroticism is akin to anxiety. Those considered to be more reactive are bothered by a
greater variety of stimuli that may be of lower strength, while more resilient individuals
are affected by fewer types of stimuli that are at more intense levels.
Openness to experience
This factor refers to one's interest level in the unfamiliar. Those with “high” openness tend
to have more interests but less depth of knowledge about them, while those with “low”
openness prefer to focus more in-depth on fewer interests
assessment have been constructed, included the Big Five Marker Scales (taking about 10 min to com-
plete) and the Traits Personality Questionnaire (25 min). The Hogan Personality Inventory, or HPI
(Hogan and Hogan, 1995), was constructed using data from adult workers and is geared toward use
in occupational environments. A complete list and descriptions of inventories, questionnaires, adjective
scales, and other related instruments using FFM methodology has been provided by De Raad and Per-
ugini (2002).
Many researchers have provided evidence of this model's validity. McCrae and Costa (1990) found
considerable agreement between self-ratings using the FFM and those ratings put forth by colleagues
and significant others. Significant associations between self-ratings and observer ratings using the
FFM also were reported by Funder et al. (1995), Riemann et al. (1997), and Watson et al. (2000). De
Raad and Perugini (2002) provided reviews of validity studies for several instruments using the FFM.
25.3 Personality Traits and Physical Outcomes
As reported in the preceding section, a number of personality theories have been put forth in the litera-
ture, and assessment techniques used to measure their associated factors have accepted levels of validity.
Thus, these personality evaluations have been used to assess a variety of human factors, particularly in
medical, psychological, and occupational settings. Their outcomes have allowed clinicians and mental
health professionals to more effectively diagnose and treat individuals. They also have been used to
increase understanding of one's own actions and improve communication among colleagues in occu-
pational environments.
The focus of most efforts regarding personality preferences has been on behavioral outcomes, but
recent research has suggested a link between personality traits and physical effects. These results have
implications for those interested in studying the interaction between people and their work from an
injury perspective. There is evidence to suggest that an individual's personality preferences may relate
to the likelihood of experiencing physical discomfort of the body's soft tissues or to actual MSDs.
There is not an overabundance of research addressing the interactions between personality preferences
and their physical effects in the context of occupational work. However, the results from several studies
suggest that such a link exists.
Search WWH ::
Custom Search