lecture 21 - can the environment change personality Flashcards
(14 cards)
personality
may be more malleable and less fixed than we think
how malleable are personality traits?
how to summarise papers
Q - question
M - methods
R - results
I - implications
Harris et al 2016 - study we are focusing on
personality stability from age 14 to age 77 years
Harris, Brett, Deary
rationale in their introduction
- Why personality? - they say personality characteristics are associated with lots of important life areas like job performance, criminal behaviour or health behaviour
- What does past research say about
stability? (Hampson & Goldberg, 2006; Leon et al., 1979) - Leon found correlations in personality traits across three decades of later adulthood= 0.3 -0.7 - this suggests a moderate to strong stability from ages 40 to around 70.
- Hampson and Goldberg found six researchers who did personality assessments on kids that were between 6 and 12 years old and followed them up to 40 years later and found low correlations for things like neuroticism and agreeableness but found decent correlations for openness, conscientiousness and extroversion
no one so far has actually looked across almost the whole lifespan
- Has stability been studied over longer
periods? (Haan et al., 1986; Soldz & Vaillant, 1999). - What is the relationship between
personality characteristics and wellbeing
across time? (Friedman et al., 2010; Gale et al., 2013). - What is the relationship between
personality characteristics and IQ across
time? - The study
research question and hypothesis
The study aims to investigate
the stability of personality over
6 decades.
Given that past research shows
some stability for early to
middle adulthood and for
middle to old adulthood, the
authors expected to see small
to moderate stability.
method
In 1947, almost all school children completed the Scottish Mental Survey
(The 6 Day Sample). - over 70,000 children took part and the paper took a subsample of this chosen randomly according to birth dates. these children were studied almost yearly until they were 27 years old
Teachers rated children on 6 personality characteristics at 14 years old which included self-confidence, perseverance, stability of mood, conscientiousness, originality and desire to excel. the author suggested that the correlations between those different personality characters were wrong enough they could be grouped into one overarching personality characteristic they called dependability. this was done before the existence of the big 5.
Some children also completed measures of IQ.
At 77 years old, in 2012, 174 participants completed a booklet of measures, which
included personality - they rated themselves this time and also asked a significant other to rate them on their personality (the same personality measure as before in addition
to the Interpersonal Personality Item Pool), IQ and wellbeing.
the people who took part in this study were found to have higher cognitive ability relative to the average and were more dependable relative to the average sample that was initially tested - means cohort may not be representative as those who are smarter and more dependable agreed to take part in the research later on
Results
There was no relationship
between early and late
personality
characteristics. between aged 14 and 77
Older age self and other
ratings correlated.
Dependability in later life
was correlated to the IPIP,
and to wellbeing. there was no relationship between adolescent dependability. this suggests that your personality at 14 years old will not predict your personality in later life or your levels of well being in later life.
IQ from adolescence correlated with
dependability in
adolescence, and
predicted dependability in
old age. this suggests IQ taken at a younger age was better able to predict what’s going to happen later in life than the ratings of personality at that age.
Implications
What does this all mean?
this is the longest age span study of its kind and dependability maps pretty well onto the big five at age 77
there was a relationship between youth intelligence and later stability of mood and this may be because people who are smarter may have learnt how to emotionally regulate themselves
how did these in Changes in personality take place? - environmental variables - if we knew that we could design intervention that would have environments that would foster more functional personality characteristics
what does this mean from trait theory = personality characteristics are fixed within us and they dictate our behaviour but this research found personality is malleable
critical analysis
There were differences with past research.
Who is right? (Caspi et al., 2005; Roberts &
Delvecchio, 2000). - the differences in experimental design between the studies can account for the differences eg this study collected data at 77 years which is much older than other studies so it could be something happens further on in older adulthood that changes the reliability of these kinds of measures.
Are teacher-led evaluations reliable? can we assume teachers know their students well enough to rate their personality. later on a significant other provided the ratings who would know the person in a lot more detail
is self-report of personality valid and reliable and they would want to report more positive personality characteristics
halo effect - when we tend to attribute positive characteristics to people who are smarter or better looking and teachers ratings of students dependanilty was correlated with IQ so may have had a role in how the teachers rated the children on their personality characteristics. also this happened in 1947 so there are other things like prejudices or opinions about family in question
IQ was measured differently at both time-
points. Is this a problem? is that reliable and are the different measures of IQ comparable and do any changes mean anything
Was the personality measure valid? - the one at the start was not standardised so If used one from start both times would finding be different
Was there an issue with the sample? - the sample was made of people who are of higher than average intelligence and also dependability relative to the average that they had in the sample so the results may not be the same if whole original sample was recruited
Other papers on this
if you wrote an essay on this topic you would want to mention other studies
these other studies also looked at the stability of personality
Helson et al. (2002) provides a literature review of
personality change. - they find that personality changes quite considerably across adulthood and there seems to be some sort of convergence in old age so that means all older people apparently seem become more similar and tend to become more conscientious and more agreeable and adhere more to norms. they say its hard to see a biological basis for this kind of finding so more Likley that the environment and learning experiences that take place make people a certain way.
Spect et al. (2011) looked at Big 5 change across the
lifespan. - they concluded that personality is always changing due to social demands and experiences
Wagner et al. (2020) propose an integrative framework
to account for personality change. - they say that three personality and environmental factors can change someones personality across the lifespan which are work, love and health.
interventions to change personality
Roberts et al. (2016) provide a systematic review and
meta-analysis of research on personality change
through intervention.
But how??
they concluded that emotional stability was the primary trait domain showing changes as a result of intervention followed by extroversion - the trait that is malleable
research on changing personality is very interwoven with research in clinical psychology and research and therapy so a lot of studies mentioned in the Roberts review look into more like how therapy can change not just personality but also certain kinds of mental health problems and they are actually quite successful for some of them eg anxiety
Hudson et al 2019 - you have to follow through - attaining behavioural change goals predicts volitional personality change
they gave people training in the personality characteristics they desired eg if someone was introverted they would be given the task twice a week of going to a stranger and saying hello. they did it for a 15 week period
they found post intervention peoples personalities did change so they changed their personalities by doing the things that were opposite to how they viewed themselves with respect to that personality characteristic
they found that only the people who actually followed through and did that challenges had the personality change eg in agreeableness, emotional stability and extroversion
Intervention
Stieger 2021: Coaching app to change personality (Big 5)
they said to ptps out of the big 5 personality characteristics what will you want to be more of. they coached the ptps through the behaviours that were more in line with being extroverted or being more conscientious and more agreeable
the ptps who did these kind of tasks and trained on these things they actually changed
suggests people personality is more malleable than we might think
“The Growing Evidence for Personality Change in Adulthood” by Helson et al. (2002),
Summary: Personality Change in Adulthood
Key Question:
Does personality remain stable in adulthood, or does it change in meaningful and systematic ways?
Core Thesis:
Contrary to the traditional view of personality stability, personality traits do change during adulthood in systematic, significant, and often non-linear ways. These changes are observed across genders, cultures, and cohorts.
- Theoretical Background
Traditional View: Personality traits are biologically based and stable throughout life (McCrae & Costa).
Developmental View: Life-span theorists (e.g., Erikson, Baltes) emphasize adaptation and transformation in adulthood due to changing goals, resources, and social contexts.
Key Concept: Mean-level (normative) personality change can occur even when rank-order stability (individual differences) remains high.
2. Evidence from Cross-Sectional Studies
Big Five Trends (from large diverse samples):
Increases with age:
Conscientiousness
Agreeableness
Decreases with age:
Neuroticism
Openness
Extraversion (especially social vitality)
Internet Sample (Srivastava et al., 2002):
Over 130,000 participants aged 21–60.
Found continued personality change beyond age 30, contradicting the “plaster hypothesis” (James, 1890).
Noted nonlinear changes (e.g., agreeableness increased most in 30s and 40s).
3. Cultural and Inventory Consistency
Similar age-related patterns found using different tools (e.g., Big Five, California Psychological Inventory [CPI]).
Studies across countries (e.g., US, China, Turkey, Korea) showed consistent developmental trends, suggesting maturational or universally experienced social influences.
4. Longitudinal Evidence: Stronger Proof of Change
Helson et al. (2002) Longitudinal Studies:
Used Hierarchical Linear Modeling (HLM) over 40 years.
Tracked two cohorts:
Mills Study (women from 21 to 61)
Institute of Human Development (IHD) (men and women from 33 to 75)
Findings:
Norm-adherence traits (e.g., self-control, responsibility) increased with age.
Social vitality traits (e.g., empathy, sociability) decreased.
Changes were often curvilinear, peaking or dipping at specific life stages (e.g., middle age).
Individual differences in change were significant — not all adults follow the same trajectory.
5. Alternative Interpretations of Change
Biological Maturation View:
Some researchers argue these consistent trends are due to genetic programming.
Social/Experiential View:
Others (including Helson et al.) argue that social learning and life experiences drive personality change (e.g., learning to be more agreeable, reduced novelty-seeking with age).
Consistency in changes across cultures may reflect universal social demands (e.g., relationships, caregiving).
6. Important Nuances:
Meta-analyses (e.g., Twenge): Show cohort effects like increased anxiety in recent generations, highlighting sociocultural influences.
Not all traits change equally, and not all people change in the same way.
Average changes can obscure meaningful individual variation.
7. Conclusion and Implications
Personality is largely consistent, but it is also adaptable.
Personality change is non-trivial, nonlinear, and influenced by contextual factors.
Understanding these changes requires longitudinal designs, contextual analyses, and attention to individual differences.
Practical implication: Adult development and aging should consider personality as dynamic and responsive to life events.
High-Yield Exam Takeaways
Rank-order stability ≠ mean-level stability
Traits like conscientiousness and agreeableness increase; neuroticism and openness tend to decrease.
Changes persist beyond age 30 and can be curvilinear.
Cross-cultural consistency suggests universal mechanisms.
Individual variation is significant — personality development is not one-size-fits-all
“Personality Stability From Age 14 to Age 77 Years” by Harris, Brett, Johnson, and Deary (2016)
🔍 Overview
This study investigates whether personality traits assessed in adolescence remain stable into old age (63 years later). The authors followed participants from the Scottish Mental Survey of 1947 (age 14) and re-assessed them in 2012–2013 at age 77.
📊 Methodology
Sample: The “6-Day Sample” (N = 1,208) was rated by teachers at age 14 on 6 personality characteristics:
Self-Confidence
Perseverance
Stability of Moods
Conscientiousness
Originality
Desire to Excel
In older age (N = 174), participants completed:
Self-ratings on the same 6 traits
Other-ratings (from someone who knew them)
Measures of wellbeing, Big Five traits, and intelligence
A dependability factor (akin to conscientiousness) was derived from the 6 traits using factor analysis.
🔑 Key Findings
- Low Long-Term Stability
No significant correlations were found between personality ratings at 14 and at 77 for most traits or for the overall dependability factor.
A complex model, adjusting for rater bias, found small but significant or near-significant stability for:
Stability of Moods (r ≈ 0.26, p < .05)
Conscientiousness (r ≈ 0.22, p ≈ .06) - Short-Term Agreement (Older Age)
Moderate agreement was found between self- and other-ratings at age 77 (r = .26 to .48).
This suggests that the personality traits were internally consistent in older age but not stable across the lifespan. - Relationship to the Big Five
Older-age dependability correlated well with:
Conscientiousness (r = .53)
Other Big Five traits (r = .24 to .41)
Wellbeing measures: WEMWBS (r = .54), SWLS (r = .38)
However, adolescent dependability did not predict Big Five traits or wellbeing in later life. - Personality–Intelligence Links
Adolescent dependability correlated with childhood IQ (r ≈ .38–.39)
Later-life dependability (especially other-ratings) showed small correlations with intelligence at age 77
Suggests cognitive ability influences personality ratings, particularly those made by others or teachers.
🧠 Interpretation & Implications
Personality changes gradually but substantially across life.
While personality may appear stable over shorter intervals, across six decades, little continuity was found.
The findings challenge the idea of lifelong personality stability, especially across the full human lifespan.
However, the structure of personality (factor model) remained relatively consistent, supporting the construct of dependability.
Shows the importance of considering life events, maturation, and context in shaping personality.
🧪 Strengths and Limitations
✅ Strengths:
Extremely long follow-up period (63 years)
Use of both self- and informant reports
Comparisons with intelligence and wellbeing
❌ Limitations:
Small follow-up sample size (N = 174)
Single-item measures for each trait
Selective participation: those who lived to age 77 were more intelligent and dependable in childhood
Only two time points—cannot trace gradual change
Possible teacher bias in adolescent ratings (influenced by IQ)
📚 Key Takeaways for Exams
Personality is not fixed across life—gradual changes accumulate, reducing trait stability over time.
Traits like conscientiousness and emotional stability (Stability of Moods) may show more consistency.
Measurement methods and rater biases affect observed stability.
Supports the view that personality is both structured and dynamic, influenced by cognition, social roles, and life events.
