Personality Psychology and Economics

This paper explores the power of personality traits both as predictors and as causes of academic and economic success, health, and criminal activity. Measured personality is interpreted as a construct derived from an economic model of preferences, constraints, and information. Evidence is reviewed about the "situational specificity" of personality traits and preferences. An extreme version of the situationist view claims that there are no stable personality traits or preference parameters that persons carry across different situations. Those who hold this view claim that personality psychology has little relevance for economics. The biological and evolutionary origins of personality traits are explored. Personality measurement systems and relationships among the measures used by psychologists are examined. The predictive power of personality measures is compared with the predictive power of measures of cognition captured by IQ and achievement tests. For many outcomes, personality measures are just as predictive as cognitive measures, even after controlling for family background and cognition. Moreover, standard measures of cognition are heavily influenced by personality traits and incentives. Measured personality traits are positively correlated over the life cycle. However, they are not fixed and can be altered by experience and investment. Intervention studies, along with studies in biology and neuroscience, establish a causal basis for the observed effect of personality traits on economic and social outcomes. Personality traits are more malleable over the life cycle compared to cognition, which becomes highly rank stable around age 10. Interventions that change personality are promising avenues for addressing poverty and disadvantage.personality, behavioral economics, cognitive traits, wages, economic success, human development, person-situation debate

Personality Psychology and Economics

This paper explores the power of personality traits both as predictors and as causes of academic and economic success, health, and criminal activity. Measured personality is interpreted as a construct derived from an economic model of preferences, constraints, and information. Evidence is reviewed about the “situational specificity” of personality traits and preferences. An extreme version of the situationist view claims that there are no stable personality traits or preference parameters that persons carry across different situations. Those who hold this view claim that personality psychology has little relevance for economics. The biological and evolutionary origins of personality traits are explored. Personality measurement systems and relationships among the measures used by psychologists are examined. The predictive power of personality measures is compared with the predictive power of measures of cognition captured by IQ and achievement tests. For many outcomes, personality measures are just as predictive as cognitive measures, even after controlling for family background and cognition. Moreover, standard measures of cognition are heavily influenced by personality traits and incentives. Measured personality traits are positively correlated over the life cycle. However, they are not fixed and can be altered by experience and investment. Intervention studies, along with studies in biology and neuroscience, establish a causal basis for the observed effect of personality traits on economic and social outcomes. Personality traits are more malleable over the life cycle compared to cognition, which becomes highly rank stable around age 10. Interventions that change personality are promising avenues for addressing poverty and disadvantage.

Personality Psychology and Economics

This paper explores the power of personality traits both as predictors and as causes of academic and economic success, health, and criminal activity. Measured personality is interpreted as a construct derived from an economic model of preferences, constraints, and information. Evidence is reviewed about the situational specificity of personality traits and preferences. An extreme version of the situationist view claims that there are no stable personality traits or preference parameters that persons carry across different situations. Those who hold this view claim that personality psychology has little relevance for economics. The biological and evolutionary origins of personality traits are explored. Personality measurement systems and relationships among the measures used by psychologists are examined. The predictive power of personality measures is compared with the predictive power of measures of cognition captured by IQ and achievement tests. For many outcomes, personality measures are just as predictive as cognitive measures, even after controlling for family background and cognition. Moreover, standard measures of cognition are heavily influenced by personality traits and incentives. Measured personality traits are positively correlated over the life cycle. However, they are not fixed and can be altered by experience and investment. Intervention studies, along with studies in biology and neuroscience, establish a causal basis for the observed effect of personality traits on economic and social outcomes. Personality traits are more malleable over the life cycle compared to cognition, which becomes highly rank stable around age 10. Interventions that change personality are promising avenues for addressing poverty and disadvantage

Holding a foster child’s mind in mind: study protocol for a cluster-randomized controlled trial of mentalization-based therapy (MBT) for foster families

BACKGROUND: Children in foster care are psychologically vulnerable and show more social, developmental, and behavioral problems than those living with their family of origin. Many foster parents struggle to care for these children, some of whom have experienced severe adversity. Research and theory suggest that developing a strong and supportive foster parent-child relationship is essential for foster children to become more well-adjusted and experience a decrease in behavioral problems and emotional maladjustment. Mentalization-based therapy (MBT) for foster families aims at increasing the reflective functioning of the foster parents, thus promoting the development of more secure and less disorganized child attachment representations, which is subsequently proposed as a factor that reduces behavioral problems and emotional maladjustment in children and promotes their overall well-being. METHODS: This is a prospective cluster-randomized controlled trial with two conditions: (1) the intervention group participating in MBT, and (2) the control group who receive usual care. Participants are 175 foster families with at least one foster child aged 4-17 years with emotional or behavioral problems. The intervention will be offered to foster families by 46 foster care consultants from 10 municipalities in Denmark. The foster care consultants will be randomized to MBT training (n = 23) or usual care (n = 23). The primary outcome is the psychosocial adjustment of the foster child measured by the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) as reported by foster parents. Secondary outcomes include child well-being, parental stress, parent mental health, parent reflective function and mind-mindedness, parent/child relations, child attachment representations, and placement breakdown. In order to explore implementation fidelity as well as practitioner experiences, we will administer questionnaires designed for this study and conduct qualitative research exploring the practice of the MBT therapists. DISCUSSION: This trial is the first experimental study of a family therapeutic intervention based on attachment theory for foster families within the Scandinavian context. This project will contribute with novel knowledge on attachment representations in foster children and the effects of an attachment-based intervention on essential outcomes for foster families and children. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05196724. Registered on January 19, 2022

Thought for Food: Understanding Educational Disparities in Food Consumption

__Abstract__ \n \nHigher educated individuals are healthier and live longer than their lower educated peers. One reason is that lower educated individuals engage more in unhealthy behaviours including consumption of a poor diet, but it is not clear why they do so. In this paper we develop an economic theory of unhealthy food choice, and use a Discrete Choice Experiment to discriminate between the theoretical parameters. Differences in health knowledge appear to be responsible for the greatest part of the education disparity in diet. However, when faced with the most explicit health information regarding diet, lower educated individuals still state choices that imply a lower concern for negative health consequences. This is consistent with a theoretical prediction that part of the education differences across health behaviours is driven by the "marginal value of health" rising with education

Life Satisfaction, Household Income and Personality Theory

We show that personality traits mediate the e ect of income on Life Satisfaction. The e ect is strong in the case of Neuroticism, which measures the sensitivity to threat and punishment, in both the British Household Panel Survey and the German Socioeconomic Panel. Neuroticism increases the usually observed concavity of the relationship: Individuals with higher Neuroticism score enjoy income more than those with lower score if they are poorer and enjoy income less if they are richer. When the interaction between income and neuroticism is introduced, income does not have signi cant e ect on his own. To interpret the results, we present a simple model where we assume that (i) Life Satisfaction is dependent from the gap between aspired and realized income, and this is modulated by Neuroticism and (ii) income increases in aspirations with a slope less than unity, so that the gap between aspired and realized income increase with aspirations. From the estimation of this model we argue that poorer tend to overshoot in their aspiration, while rich tend to under-shoot. The estimation of the model also shows substantial effect of traits on income