47 research outputs found

    Establishing the substantive interpretation of the GFP by considering evidence from research on personality disorders and animal personality

    Get PDF
    In research on individual differences, various structural models aim at providing a comprehensive description of personality. These models assume multiple, mostly independent personality dimensions. More recently, the so-called General Factor of Personality (GFP) has become a proliferous, but contentious, topic. The notion of the GFP is based on the observations that personality dimensions are not independent, but in fact show consistent inter-correlations, leading to a relevant proportion of shared variance among them (Figueredo et al., 2006). The GFP seems to capture the socially desirable ends of personality scales, and, in terms of the Big Five model, high-GFP individuals score relatively high on openness, conscientiousness, extraversion (mainly the sociability-facet), agreeableness, and emotional stability (Rushton and Irwing, 2009; van der Linden et al., 2010a). Some authors have suggested that the GFP simply reflects methodological artifacts (Ashton et al., 2009; Backstrom et al., 2009; Hopwood et al., 2011b; Pettersson et al., 2012). However, much of this criticism has been addressed (Rushton and Erdle, 2010; Loehlin, 2012; Dunkel and van der Linden, 2014; van der Linden et al., 2014a). The objective of the present work is not to reiterate these issues, as they have been discussed extensively elsewhere (Irwing, 2013; van der Linden et al., 2016). Instead, we contend that criticism mostly offered within the specialty of personality psychology misses the bigger picture. More specific, evidence in favor of the GFP as a substantive and theoretically coherent construct has been provided in other research fields long before it became a contentious issue in personality psychology. Here we introduce two lines of evidence that may further corroborate the substantive interpretation of the GFP, specifically, findings from personality pathology as well as from animal personality. Looking at the GFP from a different perspective may help to overcome the current debates within personality psychology. In the following we will first briefly introduce work on the GFP and its theoretical foundation as social effectiveness. Afterwards we outline research from psychiatric nosology and animal ecology and discuss these in context

    Overlap between general factors of psychopathology and personality : they share associations with daily life functioning and communication style

    Get PDF
    Erworben im Rahmen der Schweizer Nationallizenzen (http://www.nationallizenzen.ch)Previous studies have shown that specific personality dimensions, -e.g., the Big Five-, consistently intercorrelate, such that they form a general factor of personality (GFP). It has been hypothesized that the GFP reflects social effectiveness. Similarly, in the clinical domain, overlap between various psychopathological symptoms has also been reported, leading to a general factor of Psychopathology, or p factor. The aim of this study was to test the overlap between the higher order factors in personality and psychopathology, and how they relate to daily life functioning and communication style. We tested a sample of 165 outpatients of a psychological therapy institute, using a multi-source approach that included self-reports and other ratings. The outpatients’ self-reports of personality, general psychological problems, and interpersonal problems were available. Psychotherapists rated the outpatients’ functioning in daily life with the well-known Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) scale. A spouse or friend also rated the impact of the patient’s communication/social behavior. Patients with lower GFP scores and higher scores on general psychopathology, displayed more distress and daily functioning deficits (i.e., lower GAF scores) and, in terms of communication styles, were also rated as being less dominant, less in control socially, and more submissive and aggressive. We proposed that part of the overlap between the general factors (GFP, psychopathology factors) may relate to a lower general life functioning and less social effectiveness

    The Effect of Individual Differences and Manipulated Life Expectancies on the Willingness to Engage in Sexual Coercion

    No full text
    The role of the individual difference variables of mate value, short-term and long-term mating preferences, and life history strategy along with the manipulated variable of life expectancy were used to predict differences in the willingness to engage in sexually coercive behaviors. Short-term preferences and long-term preferences were correlated with the willingness to engage in sexual coercion at all life expectancies. Life history strategy was correlated with the willingness to engage in sexual coercion at only the shortest and longest life expectancies. Most importantly short-term and long-term mating preferences interacted with life expectancy to predict the willingness to engage in sexually coercive behaviors. Short life expectancies increased willingness in individuals with high short-term and low long-term preferences. The results are discussed in terms of the varying theories of sexual coercion with emphasis put on a life history approach

    The Effect of Life Expectancy on Aggression and Generativity: A Life History Perspective

    No full text
    Following a model that is inclusive of both dispositional and situational influences on life-history behaviors and attitudes, the effect of life expectancies on aggression and generativity was examined. Consistent with the hypotheses it was found that shorter life expectancies led to an increase in the desire to aggress and a decrease in the desire to engage in generative behaviors. The results are discussed in terms of how life history theory can be used to frame research on person-situation interactions

    Measures of flow proneness mainly assess the general factor of personality

    Get PDF
    The hypothesis that the association between flow proneness and the Big Five personality traits is primarily at the level of the general factor of personality (GFP) was tested. By reanalyzing data from a previous study, and analyzing data collected from a convenience sample, support was found for the hypothesis. The results suggest that flow proneness may be an additional construct that could be added to the nomological network of constructs that are strongly associated with the GFP
    corecore