Transcript Personality Trait Change in Adulthood

Personality Trait Change
in Adulthood
Brent W. Roberts
Daniel Mroczek
FULL DISCLOSURE
Review
• Focus
– Average change over a sample or population
– Individual differences in the rate of change
Cross-sectional Studies
• Reviews Srivastava et al. (2003)
– Large internet-based study (N = 132,515)
– Results
• Size and direction of differences consistent with
previous findings, but interpreted as change
• Roberts and Mroczek’s claim that “60-year-old
participants scored higher than 40-year old
participants on most dimensions…” (no basis for
this claim!)
Longitudinal Studies
• Reviews 2006 Roberts et al. paper
– 92 longitudinal studies covering ages 10-101
– Found significant change in 75% of traits in
middle (40-60) and old (60+) age
– Figures (Figure 2 from meta-analysis)
• Standardized measure of mean differences
• How much of a standard deviation
– Costa and McCrae (2006) noted that these
are the same modest changes they had been
reporting for some time
Individual Differences in Change
• Two levels of change
– Mean levels of change
– Individual differences in change
• Do some individuals change faster?
• Do some individuals change in a different
direction?
• Multiple ways to assess
– RCI
– Growth models
Individual Differences in Change
• Used to illuminate why people change or
what change is related to
– People who experience satisfying careers
show greater declines in N and increases in C
– Long-term increases in N are related to
mortality (Mroczek & Spiro, 2007)
– Increases in Ho are related to mortality
(Siegler et al., 2003)
Personality Plasticity After Age
30
Antonio Terracciano
Paul T. Costa, Jr.
Robert R. McCrae
Main Study Question
• Longitudinal data suggest that
– Personality is relatively stable
– Stability is greater in adulthood than in prior
years
• When, if at all, does rank order stability
plateau?
Differential Predictions
0.82
0.80
0.78
0.76
30-50
0.74
50-65
0.72
65+
0.70
0.68
0.66
0.64
Costa & McCrae
Roberts et al.
Ardelt
Methods
• Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging
– Large sample for part of a multidisciplinary
study
– Recurring assessment
• Measures
– GZTS
– NEO and NEO-PI-R
– California Adult Q-Set
Rank Order Stability Results
• Across domains
– NEO: rank order stability did not differ
between age groups
– GZTS: rank order stability did not differ
between age groups
• At scale level
– Extraversion domain showed more stability in
50-65 than > 65 group
– Not replicated in similar GZTS scales
Personality Trait Development From
Age 12 to Age 18: Longitudinal,
Cross-Sectional, and Cross-Cultural
Analyses
Robert R. McCrae and others
Purpose
• To assess mean-level personality change
in adolescence
• Also…
– Compare longitudinal results to crosssectional data from the U.S.
– Examine factor invariance
– Rank-order stability
Methods
• Participants
– 521 boys and 249 girls
– Scored above 97th percentile in academic
ability
– 230 students were assessed four years later
• Instrument
– NEO-FFI
– Short version of the NEO-PI-R
Factor Invariance
• Compared structure of first and second
ratings
– CFA simple structure model
• CFI suggested poor fit
• RMSEA suggested good fit
• Constraining factor loadings to be identical across
intervals caused decreases in fit, but no change in
CFI or RMSEA
– Procrustes rotation
• Coefficients for N, E, and C greater than .90
• Coefficients for O and A greater than .85
Retest Reliabilities
• Considerably lower than in older samples
– Boys
• Range: .31 for A to .49 for C
• Median: .39
– Girls
• Range: .30 for N to .63 for C
• Median: .34
Mean Level Differences
• MANOVA
– DVs: Five NEO-FFI domain T-scores
– IVs: Gender, Time
– Interaction: Gender × Time
• Results
– No main effects of Time for N, E, or A
– O increased and C decreased
– Gender × Time effect on N
Differences for boys
Differences for girls