Five Factor Model - Coursework Example

Introduction: In this paper we will discuss the Big five factor Model proposed by Costa & McCrae in 1992. In the starting we will discuss the big five factor model and explain the history of the big five factor theory and explain all the factors. Afterwards we will discuss the different critiques on the issue of big five factor model as by reviewing six (6) peer-reviewed scholarly articles that would show the evaluation of the big five factor model as the main purpose of this paper is to critique on the big five factor model and in the end we will draw a conclusion about are the future directions of the big five factor model. Big five factor Model: The big five factor model (FFM) of personality is also known as the big five factors of personality (Costa & McCrae, 1992) and Global Factors of personality (Russell & Karol, 1994). This model is proposed by Costa & McCrae in 1992. This model explains the five dimensions of personality that are used to describe a personality. These big five factors provide a concept for all the research findings and theory in personality psychology. Many researchers have found that the big five factor model has a biological origin. The big five factor model is also used as a personality test. History: The original factors of big five factor model of personality were proposed by Ernest Tupes and Raymond Cristal. They advanced the initial model based on work done at the US Air Force Personnel Laboratory in 1950. Then J M Digman proposed the five factor model of personality in 1990 and Goldman advanced it to the highest level of organizations in 1993. Factors: There are five different types of traits found in big five factor model of personality, the factors can be summarized by the name “ocean”, they are explained in respect to people and they are as follows: Openness: People who are opened to experiences in their lives are included in the trait openness. Conscientiousness: The people who have high discipline and those people who can be trusted are included in the trait conscientiousness. Extraversion: The people who get their energy from interacting others are called extraverts and the people who get their energy from within themselves. Agreeableness: The people who are very friendly, cooperative and concerned are included in this trait. Neuroticism: Neuroticism is also called Emotional Stability. The people who feel tense and become moody are included in this trait. Description of the Factors/Traits: 1. Openness to experience: In general, openness means appreciation for art, emotion, adventure, usual ideas and variety of experience. The people who are open to experiences appreciate art and are sensitive to beauty. As compare to the closed people, those people are more creative and are more aware of their feelings. Another characteristic of the open people is the facility of thinking in symbols and abstractions; they consider the simple thing over the complex thing. The close people are conservative and resistant to change. 2. Conscientiousness: Showing self-discipline, acting dutifully and aim for achievement against measures is the tendency of conscientiousness. The people included in this factor have a planned behavior rather than the spontaneous behavior. This factor influences the way in which we control, regulate and direct our impulses. 3. Extraversion: The characteristics of extraversion are positive emotions, and the tendency to seek out stimulation. The extraverts enjoy being with other people and they perceive it as full of energy. The extraverts tend to be enthusiastic, action orientated individuals who always “Yes” to any answer. In groups, they like to other attention to themselves. 4. Agreeableness: The tendency to be compassionate and cooperative is called agreeableness. It reflects individual differences in general concern for social harmony. The people included in this trait are very considerate, friendly, generous, helpful and willing to compromise their interests with others. These people also have an optimistic view of human nature. But agreeableness is a positively connected with good team skills and it is negatively connected with leadership skills. The people, who voice their opinion in a team environment, tend to move up the corporate rankings, whereas the one who don’t voice up remains in the same position and they are usually labeled as the followers of the team. 5. Neuroticism: Neuroticism is a tendency to experience negative emotions e.g. anger, anxiety or depression. It is also called as emotional stability. “According to Eysenk (1967) theory of personality, neuroticism is interlinked with low tolerance for stress or aversive stimuli”. These people often interpret ordinary situation as threatening and minor frustrations as hopelessly difficult. This problem in emotional regulation can finish the ability of a person to think clearly, make decisions and cope effectively with stress. Lacking satisfaction in life can connect to neuroticism and the person can fall into clinical depression. On the other hand, the individuals who do not have neuroticism are less emotionally reactive and they tend to be calm and emotionally correlated. Researches and Conclusions from Different Research Papers: According to Distel A. Marijn, Trull J. Timothy, Willemsen G., Vink M. Jacqueline, Derom A. Catherine, Lynskey M., Martin G. Nicholas, & Boomsma I. Dorret, in the research paper “The Five Factor Model of Personality & Borderline Personality Disorder: A Genetic Analysis of Co-morbidity”. They examined the phenotypic and genetic association between the borderline personality and FFM personality traits. And they found that borderline personality shares all genetic variation with neuroticism, agreeableness, conscientiousness and extraversion. Environmental influence specific to borderline personality may cause individuals with a specific pattern of personality traits to cross an entrance and develop borderline personality. Poropat E. Arthur in the research paper about “A Meta Analysis of the Five Factor Model of Personality and Academic Performance” conducted a research on academic performance and they found that academic performance has connection with agreeableness, conscientiousness and openness. And when it was tested, correlations between conscientiousness and academic performance were largely independent of intelligence. Kendler K. S. & Myers J. wrote in the research paper named “The Genetic and Environmental Relationship between Major Depression and the Five Factor Model of Personality” that he had examined the relationship between major depression (MD), neuroticism (N) and extraversion (E). And he found that the largest amount of major depression (MD) that is expressed through personality is captured by neuroticism (N), the medium amount was captured from conscientiousness (C) and the minimum amount was captured by openness (O), extraversion (E) and agreeableness (A). Penke L., Denissen J.A.Japp in the research paper named “Motivational individual reaction norms underlying the Five-Factor model of personality: Five steps towards a theory-based conceptual framework” wrote that many researches believed that the theory of five-factor model (FFM) is being too descriptive so they constructed a conceptual model of FFM as stable individual differences in people’s motivational reactions to restricted classes of environmental stimuli. And they found that the theory of FFM, in order to become a truly scientific model of personality, needs substantial theoretical elaboration and conceptual refinement. Littlefield K. Andrew, Sher J. Kenneth & Wood K. Phillip in the research paper named “Is “Maturing Out” of Problematic Alcohol Involvement Related to Personality Change?” wrote that they tested the results of both normative and individual changes in alcohol involvement and they found that the changes between the normative and individual in alcohol involvement are associated with changes in the personality constructs of impulsivity and neuroticism. Allik, J., Realo, A., Mottus, R., Borkenau, P., Kuppens, P., & Hrebickova, M. in the research paper named “Person-Fit to the Five Factor Model of Personality” wrote about a five factor test in which it was checked that how many people are fitted in the big five factor model (FFM) through using many different types of the samples. And they found that only some type of individual fits exactly to the big five factor model. Critiques on the Big Five Factor Model of Personality: Many researchers have been conducted on the big five factor model of personality and the critiques found are both in the favor of the model and not in favor of the model. The researches that have been conducted are done by using some different tests and theories. There are many limitations to the scope of big five model. Some researches argue that the big five model does not explains the human personality. Another argues that big five model is not a theory-driven model. The big five factor model (FFM) has been criticized for being too descriptive to provide a theoretical model of personality. The main lack of this big five factor model (FFM) is the theory does not apply to all the individuals. And the methodology used in FFM is often challenged for not having a universally-recognized basis for choosing different numbers of factors. Further explaining the big five factor model criticism into different parts: Limited Scope: The most common criticism is that the big five model does not explain all of human personality. Correlations have been found for inverse relationship between political conservatism and openness. Although variation in these traits is not well explained by the big five factor themselves. McAdams has called the big five model as “psychology of the stranger”. Negative correlations often appear between neuroticism and extraversion. So the big five factor model is not easily understood by everyone. Research has suggested that the methods used in the administering personality tests are inadequate in length and provide insufficient detail to truly evaluate personality. And more detailed questions will give more accurate portrayal of personality. Methodological Issues: The methods used in the big five factor model that are used to identify the dimensional structure of personality traits are challenged for not having universally recognized basis. The big five factor model depends on interpretation. The criticism is directed at the methodology of the big five factor model (FFM) because of self report questionnaires. The self report questionnaires are considered when the scores of the results differ between the individuals and groups of people. Theoretical Status: A criticism is that the big five model (FFM) is not based on any underlying theory. It is an empirical finding that certain descriptors cluster together under factor analysis. Sensation seeking and cheerfulness are not linked to extraversion because this theory is still unknown and this underlying theory should be explained. Jack Block critiqued the model in terms of: Theoretical nature of big five factors Model’s inappropriateness for studying early childhood Use of factor analysis for conceptualizing personality Continuing non-consensual understanding of the big five factors Existence of various unrecognized but successful efforts to specify aspects of character not included by the big five factors theory (FFM). Conclusion: The big five factor model (FFM) is a model for measuring different types of personalities. There are five (5) types of personality mentioned in the theory itself but there are many critiques done on this model. Some researches critique that the model is not lengthy, some researches critique that the theory is not write for all the people; it only fits to some people. While some researchers say that the methods used for inquiring all the information is inadequate. These were all the critiques for the big five factor model but the future of the big five factor model will be very helpful for all the people as the big five factor model will be used in offices. It will be used in the social daily life. So that’s all the future research directions for the big five factor model (FFM). REFERENCES Allik, J., Realo, A., Mottus, R., Borkenau, P., Kuppens, P., & Hrebickova, M. (2012). Person-Fit to the Five Factor Model of Personality. Swiss Journal of Psychology, Vol. 71, No.1, 2012, pp.35-45. Retrieved from http://www.psych.ut.ee/~jyri/en/Allik_Person-Fit_SwissJPsychol2012.pdf Distel A. Marijn, Trull J. Timothy, Willemsen G., Vink M. Jacqueline, Derom A. Catherine , Lynskey M., Martin G. Nicholas, & Boomsma I. Dorret. (2009). The Five Factor Model of Personality & Borderline Personality Disorder: A Genetic Analysis of Co-morbidity. Society of Biological Psychiatry, Vol. 66, No.1, 2009, pp. 1131-1138. Retrieved from http://www.tweelingenregister.org/nederlands/verslaggeving/NTR-publicaties_2009/Distel_BP_2009.pdf Poropat E. Arthur. (2009). A Meta Analysis of the Five Factor Model of Personality and Academic Performance. American Psychological Association, Vol. 135, No. 2, 2009, pp.322-338. Retrieved from http://edci6300introresearch.pbworks.com/f/poropat+2009+metaanalysis+FFM.pdf Kendler K. S. & Myers J. (2010). The Genetic and Environmental Relationship between Major Depression and the Five Factor Model of Personality. Journal of Psychological Medicine, Vol. 40, No. 1, 2010, pp. 801-806. Retrieved from http://psych.colorado.edu/~carey/Courses/PSYC5112/Readings/psnDepr_Kendler01.pdf Penke L., Denissen J.A.Japp. (2008). Motivational individual reaction norms underlying the Five-Factor model of personality: Five steps towards a theory-based conceptual framework. Journal of Research in Psychology, Vol. 42, No. 1, 2010, pp. 1285-1302. Retrieved from http://www.psy.ed.ac.uk/people/lpenke/publications/Denissen_Penke_2008_-_FIRNI.pdf Littlefield K. Andrew, Sher J. Kenneth & Wood K. Phillip. (2009). Is “Maturing Out” of Problematic Alcohol Involvement Related to Personality Change? Journal of Abnormal Psychology, Vol. 118, No. 2, 2009, pp. 360-374. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2742487/ Cherry K. (2010). The Big Five Personality Dimensions. About.com. Retrieved from http://psychology.about.com/od/personalitydevelopment/a/bigfive.htm Rentfrow J. The Big Five (5) Model of Personality. Retrieved from http://psychcentral.com/blog/archives/2009/11/10/the-big-5-model-of-personality/ Read More