![]() ![]() As an illustration, the direct correlations between general factors from different personality models/instruments is around r = 0.60 (e.g., Loehlin & Horn, 2012 Van der Linden et al., 2011). Thus, the principle of the “indifference of the indicator” (Jensen, 1998) also applies to the GFP. The only condition is that a sufficiently broad range of personality traits is taken into account so that the GFP truly reflects a mix of different traits. It does not really matter which personality model (e.g., Big Five, HEXACO, PEN) or instrument (NEO, BFI, CPI) one uses to extract a GFP, because the resulting general factors will be highly similar (e.g., Loehlin & Horn, 2012 Rushton & Irwing, 2011 Van der Linden et al., 2016). Moreover, a GFP even emerges when using a personality type approach (Gerlach et al., 2018). ![]() The general factor has not only been identified in the Big Five, but also in virtually every other personality model, such as Eysenck’s three-factor model, the six-factor HEXACO, or in the California Personality Inventory (Loehlin, 2012). For example, in terms of the Big Five, a general factor emerges that implies that high-scoring individuals seem to be relatively open-minded, hard-working and reliable, sociable, friendly, and emotionally stable. This shared variance captures the socially desirable ends of the underlying scales (e.g., Musek, 2017 Rushton & Irwing, 2011 Van der Linden et al., 2010a, 2016). ![]() Yet, meta-analyses have clearly confirmed that these dimensions consistently correlate, indicating that they share a relevant proportion of their variance. Most currently known personality models, such as the Big Five, the Giant Three, or the HEXACO model, assume multiple, independent personality dimensions. Notwithstanding some variation in findings across the different studies, the overall pattern seems to be in line with the notion that the GFP is positively associated with the preference for more socially laden jobs. This association was present at the phenotypical as well as genetic level. In study 3, the GFP only showed a consistent relation with social interests. In study 2, the GFP related to interest in working with people and was also associated with a range of occupational scales involving social aspects. In study 1a and 1b, the GFP particularly related to interest in social and enterprising occupations. In each sample, we presented the direct associations as well as the results after using control variables (gender and cognitive ability). To test this, we used four large data sets: the Professional Worker Career Experience Survey (study 1a N = 752), (study 1b, N = 108,209), Project Talent (study 2 N = 81,130), and the National Merit Twin Study (study 3: N = 1536 in 768 twin pairs). ![]() Based on this interpretation, we predicted that the GFP is particularly related to interest in social jobs because people generally tend to be attracted to activities in which they perform well. One interpretation of the GFP is that it reflects social effectiveness. We adopt a novel approach by testing the associations between personality and vocational interests from the perspective of the general factor of personality (GFP). Previous studies have examined how personality models (e.g., Big Five, HEXACO) relate to vocational interests. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |