Which of the Big 5 personality traits are thought to increase in middle adulthood?

Conscientiousness

One of the Big Five traits most consistently linked to self-regulation is conscientiousness. Conscientiousness involves a variety of characteristics, including adherence to goals, careful selection of choices, ambition, and organization. Studies have consistently linked higher conscientiousness with greater self-regulation. Higher conscientiousness is associated with self-regulated processes such as decreased impulsivity and increased self-regulated learning (Aslan & Cheung-Blunden, 2012; Dörrenbächer & Perels, 2016).

Conscientiousness may comprise several processes that facilitate this increase in self-regulation (McCrae & Löckenhoff, 2010). The NEO-PI-R indicates six different facets to this trait: competence, order, dutifulness, achievement striving, self-discipline, and deliberation (Costa & McCrae, 1995). While recent work has suggested alternative categorizations of these facets (e.g., industriousness, order, self-control, responsibility, traditionalism, and virtue; Roberts, Chernyshenko, Stark, & Goldberg, 2005), most research on self-regulation and conscientiousness has used the NEO-PI-R model when addressing facets. Prior work has revealed links between specific conscientiousness facets with traits that affect self-regulation.

One such trait is impulsivity. Two conscientiousness facets in particular, deliberation and self-discipline, have been linked to impulsivity (Whiteside & Lynam, 2001). Specifically, deliberation has been linked to the impulsivity facet of premeditation, whereas self-discipline has been linked to the impulsivity facet of perseverance. Premeditation consists of thinking and planning carefully before engaging in action, and a lack of premeditation is associated with negative outcomes such as increased problematic drinking behaviors (Adams, Kaiser, Lynam, Charnigo, & Milich, 2012). Perseverance, on the other hand, involves persistently engaging in and focusing on a task until a goal has been reached, despite boredom or obstacles. Conscientiousness may thus promote good self-regulation in part via these specific links to the premeditation and perseverance aspects of impulsivity.

Conscientiousness may also foster effective self-regulation via enhancing grit. Grit describes the quality of exhibiting passion and perseverance during pursuit of long-term goals (Duckworth, Peterson, Matthews, & Kelly, 2007). Grit, particularly the perseverance aspect of it, has a strong positive correlation with conscientiousness (Duckworth et al., 2007; Fite, Lindeman, Rogers, Voyles, & Durik, 2017). Furthermore, it appears that the perseverance aspect, rather than the passion aspect, is what may be predictive of positive outcomes such as academic achievement (Muenks, Wigfield, Yang, & O’Neal, 2017). Thus, conscientiousness may also promote good self-regulation via its connections to perseverance and grit.

Conscientiousness appears to be also linked to procrastination. Procrastination involves delaying or putting off an action or decision. A metaanalysis found that higher trait conscientiousness was associated with decreased procrastination tendencies, and that four constructs related to conscientiousness (high self-control, high organization, high achievement motivation, low distractibility) were particularly strong predictors of decreased procrastination (Steel, 2007). This connection between increased conscientiousness and decreased procrastination is seen early on, with children in third- to fifth-grade exhibiting the link (Lay, Kovacs, & Danto, 1998).

Overall, higher conscientiousness is linked to better self-regulation, and depending on the requirements of the self-regulatory task, specific facets of conscientiousness (e.g., self-discipline or achievement-striving) may be particularly relevant in driving successful self-regulation. These examples of impulsivity, grit, and procrastination, each with connections to conscientiousness in general and stronger connections to specific facets of conscientiousness, suggest that conscientiousness is certainly a relevant trait for self-regulation, such that greater conscientiousness is associated with greater self-regulation.

Summary

Out of the Big Five traits, Openness (O) was most strongly and positively linked to measures of creative thinking, with conscientiousness (C) also positively linked to a lesser degree. Eysenck's Psychoticism factor (P) has also been linked to creativity. This disposition breaks down into sub-factors, such as schizotypy. Schizotypy typically involves unusual experiences (hallucinations, magical thinking), cognitive disorganization (difficulty concentrating, anxiety), and impulsive nonconformity. Schizotypy itself can be divided into “positive” traits (eccentricity and nonconformity) and “negative” traits (cognitive disorganization). A meta-analysis (Acar and Sen, 2013) found that creativity was associated with high “positive schizotypy” but with low “negative schizotypy.”

The effects of psychoticism, schizotypy, openness on creativity may be mediated by defective attentional processes that fail to block out irrelevant stimuli, and so let more varied ideas to enter consciousness and be available to form new creative combinations and serendipitous discoveries.

Possible associations of creativity with the dark triad traits (narcissism, Machiavellianism and psychopathy) have been found, particularly with “malevolent” creativity.

It has often been suggested that “madness” is closely linked to creativity, and there are many examples of acknowledged “Big C” creative contributors who have displayed signs of clinically significant psychotic conditions. The widespread assumption that highly creative individuals are likely to be mentally ill may complicate research into the validity of that view, in that people in creative occupations may try to live up to the stereotype. Cultural “gate-keepers” may also be influenced by the stereotype and give greater acceptance to works by artists exhibiting signs of psychopathology.

Famous creatives who may have had schizophrenia did not produce high-quality work during schizophrenic episodes (Carson, 2018) but rather before onset, after recovery or during periods of remission. Kyaga (2018) concluded that empirical studies have not demonstrated increased creative performance or potential in patients diagnosed with schizophrenia. Furthermore, Kyaga et al. (2013) found no association between having a schizophrenia diagnosis and being a member of a creative profession. However, Kyaga et al. (2011) did find that those whose siblings had schizophrenia were over-represented in the creative professions. As schizophrenia has a strong genetic basis, these findings suggest that some but not all of the schizophrenia genotype enhances creativity. This is consistent with the links between schizotypy (which indicates a susceptibility to schizophrenia) and creativity. Overall, it appears that the popular belief regarding madness and creativity does not hold up for full schizophrenia, but some propensity toward schizophrenia, short of the full condition, may be helpful.

Early studies of authors and artists found elevated rates of affective disorders. Kyaga et al. (2011) found that those with bipolar disorder and those who were first-degree relatives of people with bipolar disorder were more likely to be in creative occupations. In a related study, Richards et al. (1988) found that people who showed a less severe form of bipolar (cyclothymia) exhibited greater creativity than healthy controls or than people with full bipolar diagnoses. Baas et al.'s (2016) meta-analysis found a positive relationship between bipolar disorder and creativity.

Hypomania (a mild form of mania) has also been implicated in real-world creativity. Mania and hypomania have features linked to creative thinking. One criterion for hypomania is “sharpened and unusually creative thinking and increased productivity.” Hypomanic individuals often speak using rhymes, other sound associations and unusual words. The condition involves a speeding of thought and unusual associations and ideas which could facilitate novel combinations of ideas as are needed for creativity. The manic person is highly energized and confident which should facilitate productivity. A depressive period would be less immediately productive than a manic period but may provide “low” experiences that can later be drawn on to help make novel combinations with other experiences.

Carson (2018) suggested that the results linking creativity to depressive disorders indicate that mild forms of mood disorder or a genetic risk of such disorders may enhance creativity but full blown bipolar disorder tends to interfere with creativity. This fits the “inverted U” hypothesis of the psychopathology-creativity linkage to the effect that milder psychopathological symptoms are facilitative of creativity but more severe psychopathology is detrimental to creativity.

Autism is a very broad developmental disorder that affects social communication and social behavior and is often referred to as ASD. People with ASD often have lasting intense interests in a limited set of topics. High-functioning people with ASD (Asperger's syndrome) score well on standard intelligence tests and perform well in areas with definite rules such as mathematics and science subjects. Baron-Cohen (2021) argues that people with Asperger's syndrome tend to be extreme systemizers, or hyper-systemizers, with a deficient Theory of Mind leading to difficulties in social interactions. The condition has a markedly higher rate in males as against females.

Turner (1999) found that people with autism showed reduced fluency in creativity tasks; but, Best et al. (2015) found that high levels of autistic traits were associated with higher rates of unusual responses.

People with autism were not found to be overrepresented in creative occupations, but siblings of people with autism were overrepresented, particularly in scientific and technical domains (Kyaga et al., 2013). Again, an inverted U hypothesis seems to hold for links between autism and creativity—mild autistic traits (e.g., toward systemizing) can be helpful, but the full version of autism is impairing of creativity.

Signs of ADHD have been noted in a number of Big-C contributors, and studies have reported links between ADHD and performance on creativity tests. Kyaga et al. (2013) found higher than expected rates of ADHD in members of the writing profession. Supporting the “inverted U” approach to the link between psychopathology and creativity, Healey and Rucklidge (2006) found that a high-creative group showed a higher than average rate of ADHD symptoms, without exceeding the threshold for an ADHD diagnosis.

Moderate doses of alcohol seem to have a beneficial effect on performance on creative thinking tasks. Use of alcohol may be expected to occur among creative professionals with frequent use shading into alcohol abuse and alcoholism. Studies have shown excess rates of alcoholism in creative workers compared to the general population, especially among writers, but also among, poets, composers, and artists.

Sub-clinical levels of traits associated with a range of psychopathologies are associated with higher creative performance and this has led to the “inverted U” hypothesis. Carson (2018) has proposed a shared neurocognitive vulnerability model linking psychopathology and creativity. In this model, creative people may display vulnerabilities also manifest in various mental disorders. These vulnerabilities (e.g., being in a manic state) may help access novel and unusual associations. To make use of the unusual associations, the creative person also needs strengths in the form of high-working memory capacity, high-fluid intelligence, and cognitive flexibility.

Early studies of mood effects considered the impact of mood valence, that is, whether the mood is positive (e.g., happy) as against negative (e.g., sad). Overall, positive moods were linked to increased creativity. However, results on negative states were mixed.

In a large-scale meta-analysis, Baas et al. (2008) found that positive moods produced higher creativity than neutral moods, but no significant differences were found between negative moods and neutral moods or between positive and negative moods. Creativity was enhanced most by positive mood states that were activating and associated with an “approach” motivation (e.g., happiness), rather than by those that are deactivating and associated with an “avoid” motivation (e.g., relaxed). Negative, deactivating moods with an approach motivation (e.g., sadness) did not affect creativity, but negative, activating moods with an avoidance motivation (fear, anxiety) impaired creativity. It was also found that angry moods (i.e., negative, activating, with approach motivation) promoted creativity.

Overall, the strongest and best established effect of mood is that of the positive effect of happiness on creative performance.

Change in Agreeableness over the lifespan across cultures

Cross sectional studies of Big Five traits consistently demonstrate higher scores on Agreeableness, Conscientious, and Emotional Stability, and sometimes lower scores on Extraversion and Openness for older adults compared to younger ones (e.g., Donnellan, Hill, & Roberts, 2015). A meta-analysis of longitudinal studies replicated these findings, showing that individuals increase in Conscientiousness, Emotional Stability, and social dominance (Extraversion) in young adulthood, then later increase in Agreeableness and decrease in social vitality (Extraversion) and Openness (Roberts, Walton, & Viechtbauer, 2006). Bleidorn et al. (2013) replicated these findings in 62 countries using the BFI. Across nations, Emotional Stability, Extraversion, Openness, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness tended to increase from early to middle adulthood. Consistent with social investment theory, the team found that personality maturation occurred earlier in cultures with an earlier onset of adult-role responsibilities. Interestingly, the authors found that it was transition to the labor force, rather than family-role transitions such as marriage or parenthood, that predicted “maturation.” They note that while this is contrary to some assumptions of social investment theory, it is consistent with lay beliefs. For example, Arnett (2001) found that American adolescents and adults considered becoming financially independent a stronger indicator of adult status than marriage or parenthood. These results suggest that opportunities for young people to integrate into meaningful social roles and economic independence can foster an increase in Agreeableness and presumably reduce disorders related to antagonism.

Conscientiousness

When we consider the other Big Five traits, deeper consideration is needed regarding why these dispositions could serve as moderators of well-being trajectories. Although personality traits do not appear to moderate the effect of life events on well-being (Yap, Anusic, & Lucas, 2012), these traits could still serve moderating roles by virtue of motivating the events that influence well-being. For instance, one potential route for personality is through predicting which individuals are more likely to attain those accomplishments that might coincide with greater well-being, such as marital or job success. Or conversely, personality traits may predict an attenuated likelihood to experience the events that can dampen well-being, such as poor health or unemployment.

In both cases, conscientiousness should prove valuable to maintaining or promoting adaptive patterns of well-being over time. Conscientious individuals are likely to achieve higher levels of education (Poropat, 2009), job success (Barrick & Mount, 1991; Judge, Higgins, Thoresen, & Barrick, 2006), and in turn income (e.g., Sutin, Costa, Miech, & Eaton, 2009). In addition, conscientiousness predicts a diminished likelihood of divorce, unemployment, and poor health (Roberts et al., 2007). Given the strong stability of well-being over time (Diener & Lucas, 1999), it is worth noting that none of these effects in and of themselves is likely to change well-being trajectories much. However, it is the cumulative benefit of being conscientious that makes it a likely candidate as a well-being moderator, likely acting more as a stabilizer that allows individuals to immunize themselves against the risks for ill-being that befall others (see also Hill, Nickel, & Roberts, 2013). This largely remains a topic for future inquiry, though, because little research thus far has considered the role of conscientiousness as a well-being moderator.

1.3.6 Changes in Personality Traits

Although personality traits such as the Big Five traits of Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness change over the lifespan, the overall ranking on traits among individuals tends to remain approximately the same (Lerner, Easterbrooks, & Mistry, 2013). For example, almost everybody becomes more emotionally stable as they age, but the same people who were more emotionally stable than others at a younger age remain more emotionally stable than them at a later age. Thus throughout the lifespan one would expect the mean differences between scientists, engineers and members of norm groups on these traits to be in the same direction. Learning styles can be malleable, reflecting preferences for learning dimensions at different points in time and undergoing accentuation or other changes dependent on learning experiences.

Conclusion and future directions

In summary, while describing the Big Five traits in childhood, it becomes clear that child personality is more than temperament and not quite adult personality. This might suggest developmental progression/maturational processes at play, but more work is needed before we can be confident how much of the perceived differences are due to differences in measurement versus developmental changes. For example, although personality and temperament literatures have historically been studied in separation, current research generally agrees that personality and temperament are more alike than different. Nevertheless, there are important distinctions between personality and temperament and both capture common and unique variance in important outcomes. Similarly, there are also important distinctions between child and adult personality content that are crucial to take into account when studying personality development across the life span. Some examples include the greater content overlap among traits (e.g., Neuroticism and Agreeableness) and the greater salience of certain characteristics (e.g., Activity Level in child Extraversion; Intellect in child Openness-to-Experience). Some of these distinctions among child and adult personality traits may be due to differences in approaches to measurement. Greater reliance on informant reports is a unique issue in child research that offers great opportunities to develop strategies for combining multiple informants on a construct of interest. A hierarchical structure of personality in childhood could help organize the historically separate literatures on child temperament and personality across the life span.

A significant challenge for longitudinal research concerns the potential for personality assessment instruments to change across subsequent study waves. For example, different scales have been developed and validated for measuring dispositional traits during limited developmental windows (e.g., the Children’s Behavior Questionnaire for 3- to 7-year-old children versus the Temperament in Middle Children Questionnaire for 7- to 10-year-old children; Rothbart et al., 2001; Simonds & Rothbart, 2004). Likewise, researchers may have greater reliance on parent informants at earlier waves, and greater reliance on self-report at later waves of the study. As such, it becomes challenging to conclude whether an observed change is due to true changes in personality, changes in the measure, or changes in the informant (see Göllner et al., 2016, for an example of how informants affect observed changes in mean levels of personality traits). A “thin-slice” approach to measurement of personality in early life may at least partially address these challenges. As noted previously, this approach involves observers’ snap judgments about children’s personality based on thin slices of their behavior and has recently been shown to be an efficient, reliable, and valid indicator of children’s personalities (Tackett et al., 2016). Given their reliance on random observers, a thin-slice approach would be in the unique position to hold the informant on the individual’s personality consistent across waves of a longitudinal study even into adulthood, when parents may have less insight into their children’s functioning compared to when their children were young. Other future directions include establishing optimal approaches to combining multiple informant reports for child behavior broadly and child personality specifically (De Los Reyes et al., 2015; Tackett, 2011). Such research would likewise benefit from thin-slice measures of personality, which would provide a consistent backdrop against which to compare different informant reports. Such a comparison would illustrate common as well as unique variance in different informants’ reports, thereby contributing to efforts toward uncovering optimal strategies for combining multi-informant data.

In conclusion, the development of the Big Five personality traits not only begins early in childhood but already shows its predictive validity for later adulthood at an early age. Longitudinal studies beginning in early life are needed to understand the full extent of the impact of early personality on life outcomes. This work may benefit from thin-slice measures of child personality, which may ultimately help to overcome challenges inherent in multi-informant data.

The Big Five Personality Traits

Some theoretical work has suggested that the Big Five trait of Openness to Experience, which includes a proclivity for variety and acceptance of unconventional norms, should be associated with the perception of a wider range of potential partners as being physically attractive. Such a possibility has been raised as one potential explanation of the attraction of ‘fat admirers’ to overweight or obese targets. The Big Five trait of Agreeableness, which measures the tendency of individuals to have positive interpersonal interactions, has also been suggested as a trait that might result in the perception of a wider range of potential partners as physically attractive. To date, however, only a few studies have examined these possibilities and their results have tended to be equivocal.

For example, in one study of over 4000 participants, Wood and Brumbaugh reported that each of the Big Five traits was associated with revealed preferences for a target, where the latter was operationalized through ratings of photographs of women and men. Among other findings, Openness to Experience was associated with a stronger preference for targets that “appeared trendy and thin” and a lower preference for targets that “appeared conventional” (p. 1239); Agreeableness was associated with a stronger preference for targets who “were smiling” (p. 1238) and Extraversion was associated with a preference for targets “who looked seductive, shapely (curvaceous or toned), confident, sex-typic (i.e., feminine female targets and masculine male targets) [… and] who appeared well-groomed” (p. 1238). Nevertheless, the authors also acknowledged that there was a high degree of consensus among their participants in terms of who they found physically attractive and less attractive.

Another online study by Swami and colleagues gathered personality information from almost 1000 participants and had them rate a series of photographic images of women varying in body size. Results of the study showed that participants’ Openness to Experience was associated with the perception of a wider range of body sizes as being physically attractive. However, other similar work has failed to replicate this finding and has instead reported a significant association between preferences for body size and Extraversion. In short, then, although there appear to be significant associations between some of the Big Five personality traits and body size perceptions, specific associations appear to be equivocal and require more in-depth investigations.

A small body of work has also examined associations between the Big Five personality traits and height preferences in a potential partner. In most Western societies, there remains a marked preference to be in relationships where the male is taller than the female. Such a preference has typically been examined from the perspective of feminist theory or evolved psychologies, but recent work has suggested that there may also be individual differences in height preferences. Specifically, individuals who score highly on the Big Five trait of Neuroticism appear to show a stronger preference to form relationships where the male is taller than the female. This has been explained as a function of individuals high on Neuroticism wanting to avoid any negative effects of entering romantic relationships that contravene social or gendered norms, such as where the female is taller than the male.

Personality traits

Several studies have sought to predict the Big Five trait standings of individuals using machine learning techniques that are applied to behavioral data collected from smartphones (e.g., from social interactions derived from phone logs; Chittaranjan et al., 2011, 2013; de Montjoye et al., 2013; Mønsted, Mollgaard, & Mathiesen, 2018; Stachl et al., 2020; Wang et al., 2014). In these studies, personality traits are assessed through validated self-report questionnaires, which are completed by participants at some point during the study period and are used as the ground truth for the prediction models. Some of these studies have created a binary or ternary classification (e.g., “high” vs “low”; “high” vs “medium” vs “low,” respectively) of the personality scores, using a central-tendency-based threshold (i.e., mean, median). Participants’ standing on these classifications are then predicted using supervised machine learning models (Chittaranjan et al., 2011, 2013; de Montjoye et al., 2013; Mønsted et al., 2018; Wang et al., 2014). In most cases, 50% accuracy is treated as the baseline accuracy, as binary classifications created around the median tendency of the sample necessarily result in 50% “high” ratings and 50% “low” ratings of participants. Similarly, unless reported otherwise, the baseline accuracy for three-class problems can be considered as 33.3%. Hence, for binary classifications, trait-specific prediction accuracies of 50% or below are accuracies that are “worse than chance,” whereas trait-specific prediction accuracies higher than 50% are accuracies that are “better than chance” (see Table 2). These studies have reported varying accuracies in predicting Big Five trait standings, with accuracies across traits maximizing at 75.9%, and minimizing in the range between 50% and 60% (see Table 1 for more details).

While studies have reported high accuracy in classifying Big Five personality traits, more recent research with larger sample sizes collected over longer durations of time have yielded mixed results, finding that only Extraversion can be predicted robustly, followed by Agreeableness and Neuroticism (Mønsted et al., 2018). Conversely, Conscientiousness and Openness appear to be more difficult to predict with higher levels of accuracy (see Table 1 for more details: Mønsted et al., 2018). Similarly, Stachl et al. (2020) used a sample of 743 participants, who participated in a 30-day long smartphone study, to predict participants’ standing on the Big Five personality framework. Specifically, instead of predicting whether individuals were “high” or “low” on specific personality traits, the researchers were specifically focused on predicting the raw personality score at the factor and facet level. The researchers found mixed results, with Extraversion, Openness, and Conscientiousness being accurately predicted above the baseline. By computing correlations between predicted personality scores and actual personality scores, the authors found medium-sized effects for three of the Big Five Traits (r values: 0.37 for Extraversion, 0.29 for Openness, 0.31 for Conscientiousness; see Table 4 of Stachl et al., 2020). Single facets of Neuroticism were successfully predicted above chance with low to medium effect size (r values ranging from 0.20 for the self-control facet to 0.32 for the self-consciousness facet; see Table 4 of Stachl et al., 2020). Conversely, Agreeableness could not be predicted accurately from the dataset (r-value: 0.05, see Table 4 of Stachl et al., 2020).

Collectively, the recent literature has emphasized the use of large and diverse samples using standardized methodologies of machine learning analysis in order to produce personality sensing findings with greater replicability as past work has typically relied on small, homogenous samples to train predictive algorithm (Mønsted et al., 2018). Two factors might be influencing levels of accuracies with which Big Five personality traits can be predicted: (1) the extent to which a specific trait result in behavioral differences, and (2) the extent to which a specific trait results in behavioral differences that can be detected by smartphones. For example, higher levels of extraversion should result in more engagement in sociability behaviors that are easily detected by smartphone sensors and metadata logs. In contrast, agreeableness and neuroticism are traits that may better reflect patterns of thinking and feeling (more so than observable behaviors), which may lead to less signal between smartphone data and these survey measures.

While most of the automatic personality prediction literature is focused on using smartphone data to predict traits of the Big Five model, a recent study attempted to diversify the sources of data used to include other forms of digital media use (e.g., websites visited, patterns of emailing behavior) and the types of predicted individual differences (i.e., demographics, values, and moral tendencies; Kalimeri et al., 2019). Specifically, the researchers collected data pertaining to websites visited and applications used across the smartphone and desktop computers, and also collected self-reported assessments measuring moral traits and human values from a large sample of participants (n = 7633). The researchers then used supervised machine learning approaches to predict the moral trait and human value tendencies from data capturing website visits and application usages across the desktop computer and smartphones of all the participants. The researchers found that individuals’ high/low standing on various traits of morality could be predicted with low-to-medium accuracy from digital behavior data, ranging from a maximum of 0.67 for purity and a minimum of 0.58 for fairness. All reported accuracies were compared to a baseline accuracy of 0.5. Different moral foundations and values were predicted by increased usage of different websites and applications. For instance, purity (moral foundation) was positively predicted by the usage of the Bible application, the Yelp application, and Google use, whereas loyalty (moral foundation) was positively predicted by the use of americanexpress.com, Gmail, and Instagram. Values such as benevolence were predicted by the use of eBay and the Weather application, whereas other values such as openness were predicted by the usage of Snapchat, Instagram, and Facebook. Similarly, the demographic characteristics of the users could be predicted with high accuracies: ranging from age (0.71), marital status (0.67) to having weight issues (0.62), relying on features such as LinkedIn use (for education), Map applications (for political party affiliation), Youtube use (for wealth) and Gmail (for marital status: Kalimeri et al., 2019). Collectively, emerging research suggests that a variety of individual differences, extending beyond the popular Big Five Model and including demographic characteristics, can be predicted using data obtained from computing devices such as smartphones and desktop computers (Al-Zuabi, Jafar, & Aljoumaa, 2019; Kalimeri et al., 2019; Qin et al., 2014; Seneviratne, Seneviratne, Mohapatra, & Mahanti, 2014; Wang, Harari, Hao, Zhou, & Campbell, 2015).

Narcissistic ideation in adolescent development

Though several studies have focused on personality types or the Big Five traits, additional specific traits are worth mentioning when discussing personality research with adolescent samples. Among these specific traits, perhaps none has received more attention than those associated with narcissistic self-perceptions. Similar to the discussion earlier, the development of adolescent narcissism also appears tied to the ongoing identity crisis during adolescence. Theoretical literatures in fact suggest that inflated self-perceptions, to an extent, could prove valuable and even normative during the adolescent years (Blos, 1962; Hill & Lapsley, 2011; Lapsley, 1993). This argument builds from the notion that the adolescent years are particularly important for self- and identity formation, as well as for beginning to make important life decisions absent parental safeguards. Accordingly, individuals will necessarily make mistakes during these initial attempts at autonomous decision-making. If true, then adolescents have an increased susceptibility for self-doubt and self-esteem issues.

Theoretical traditions point to the potential for adolescents then to form “personal fables” about their personal uniqueness, importance, or invulnerability (Elkind, 1967; Lapsley, 1993), which may be viewed as adolescence-specific forms of narcissistic ideation (Hill & Lapsley, 2011). These inflated self-perceptions may serve to support adolescents’ self-worth during their initial trial-and-error stage, and during the difficult travails of identity formation. Consistent with this idea, adolescents who report higher levels of either subjective omnipotence or invulnerability against psychological concerns tend also to report greater well-being (Aalsma, Lapsley, & Flannery, 2006; Hill, Duggan, & Lapsley, 2012; Lapsley & Hill, 2010). However, not all of these self-perceptions appear valuable, as evidenced by the negative psychological consequences that appear to present for those who perceive a profound sense of uniqueness and peculiarity from others (Hill & Lapsley, 2011). In other words, adolescents who believe others cannot understand them may be at greatest risk for psychological concerns. Similarly, research has delineated between more adaptive and maladaptive forms of narcissistic traits in adolescent samples (Barry & Kauten, 2014; Barry & Malkin, 2010; Barry, Frick, Adler, & Grafeman, 2007), based on the distinction that adaptive narcissism reflects perceived authority and self-sufficiency, while maladaptive facets include entitlement, exploitativeness, and exhibitionism (Barry, Frick, & Killian, 2003). This work suggests that the link between adolescents who report higher levels of pathological narcissism is more likely to experience self-esteem and internalizing issues, while nonpathological (adaptive) forms may negatively associate with these concerns.

Narcissism has received extensive research attention over the past decade mostly as a result of examinations into whether cultural changes through the years have encouraged adolescents and emerging adults into greater narcissistic tendencies, leading some to claim an “epidemic” of narcissism (Twenge, 2013; Twenge & Campbell, 2009; Twenge & Foster, 2010). Empirical research into cohort differences has suggested a fairly modest increase on narcissism levels over time (Donnellan, Trzesniewski, & Robins, 2009), with studies finding little to no cohort difference (Roberts, Edmonds, & Grijalva, 2010). Moreover, longitudinal work also has failed to show significant increases in narcissism among adolescents over time (Barry & Lee-Rowland, 2015). The inconsistent evidence for cohort or longitudinal differences in narcissism has led some to suggest research should focus on whether adolescence is a developmental period associated with normative increases on narcissism paired with later declines, possibly due to maturation (Roberts et al., 2010). Longitudinal research is needed to investigate these self-perceptions into adulthood, but if holding specific varieties of narcissistic self-perceptions can serve to benefit individuals during the identity travails of adolescence, one would predict these characteristics are only normative during this period (Blos, 1962; Lapsley, 1993).

Inflammatory Markers and Personality Traits

Quite recently, a number of studies have pointed to the potential for the Big Five traits to predict markers of inflammation. For instance, multiple studies now point to consistent relationships between traits and interleukin-6 (IL-6) levels (Sutin, Terracciano, et al., 2010; Turiano, Mroczek, Moynihan, & Chapman, 2013). Increased levels of IL-6 lead to greater inflammation in reaction to an injury, which while beneficial in acute cases, becomes problematic when its production is more chronic in nature. This marker is of particular interest for aging researchers, given its propensity to increase with age (Maggio, Guralnik, Longo, & Ferrucci, 2006).

Across multiple samples, research suggests that conscientious and emotionally stable (less neurotic) individuals tend to exhibit lower levels of IL-6, even when controlling for an array of health behaviors and other control variables (Chapman et al., 2011; Sutin, Terracciano, et al., 2010; Turiano et al., 2013). These significant relations have been exhibited across multiple facets, or lower-order traits, for each broader domain trait (Sutin, Terracciano, et al., 2010). Moreover, research suggests that it may be valuable to examine the interaction between these two traits (Turiano et al., 2013). Interestingly, while neuroticism in general positively predicts IL-6 levels, those findings suggest that being moderately neurotic may be adaptive in the context of high conscientiousness. These findings point to the potential for a “healthy neurotic” (Friedman, 2000), or the possibility that having some anxiety may be a good thing when it comes to health, otherwise one might miss health concerns or symptoms when they become present.

Another outcome that has been targeted in personality research is C-reactive protein (CRP), another variable for which elevations can be valuable in cases of acute injuries, though chronically elevated levels have been associated with a greater risk of cardiovascular disease (Lagrand et al., 1999). Although fewer studies have examined CRP, the results again often suggest a beneficial role for conscientiousness (Mõttus, Luciano, Starr, Pollard, & Deary, 2013; Sutin, Terracciano, et al., 2010), although this is not always the case (Armon, Melamed, Shirom, Berliner, & Shapira, 2013). Additionally, studies have suggested a positive role for openness to experience (Armon et al., 2013; Mõttus et al., 2013), but maladaptive effects for neuroticism (Armon et al., 2013; Sutin, Terracciano, et al., 2010).