Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
WE ALL KNOW people who we describe as having ‘lots of personality’, and others who we describe as having ‘no personality’. But what exactly do we mean when we say that? Are we really able to evaluate it?
What actually is a personality?
Psychologists describe it as a relatively enduring predisposition to behave in a characteristic manner that is situationally dependent.
Take anger, for example; some people are very prone to getting angry, some are not and others are fairly average. The person who is very prone to getting angry is liable to ‘fly off the handle’ at the slightest provocation – yet not all the time. The person who is not prone to anger nevertheless can get angry on occasion. In fact, we all have an innate predisposition to getting angry but the occurrence varies widely among people and across situations. We all know those among our acquaintances who are more prone to anger than most, and in that sense we have some crude knowledge of what personality is.
Psychologists have found that a person’s personality has five dimensions and these dimensions can be measured. The five dimensions, or personality traits, are commonly referred to as ‘the Big Five’.
They are:
1. Openness
This trait features characteristics such as imagination and insight, and those high in this trait also tend to have a broad range of interests.
2. Conscientiousness
Common features of this dimension include high levels of thoughtfulness, with good impulse control and goal-directed behaviours. Those high in conscientiousness tend to be organized and mindful of details.
3. Extraversion
This trait includes characteristics such as excitability, sociability, talkativeness, assertiveness and high amounts of emotional expressiveness.
4. Agreeableness
This personality dimension includes attributes such as trust, altruism, kindness, affection, and other pro-social behaviours.
5. Neuroticism
Individuals high in this trait tend to experience emotional instability, anxiety, moodiness, irritability, and sadness.
It is important to bear in mind that all of us have the five dimensions to our personality but the amount of each dimension that we possess varies widely. For instance, a person can be very low in Neuroticism, very high on Agreeableness, average on Conscientiousness, and high on Openness. It is this wide variation in individuals in the five dimensions that makes humans so different from each other.
Shedding more light on an individual’s personality
To get a sense of where you stand on the five dimensions just go to and complete the on-line questionnaire. You will get from this an indication of what your standing on the Big Five.
For a more accurate break-down you would need to undergo a detailed assessment by a qualified psychologist, because each of the broad dimensions has a number of sub-dimensions or facets which shed more light on an individual’s personality.
The Big Five affect outcomes in the different domains of life. Research has shown that people who are low in openness prefer an environment that is stable and predictable. Those who are low in conscientiousness live for the moment and seldom plan ahead. People who are high in neuroticism are more prone than others to stress and anxiety. Extraverts are more stimulated by the external environment, while introverts are more stimulated by their mental internal world. Although the ‘Big Five’ represented a significant advance in understanding personality, it is not the full picture.
Think about it this way: if you know that someone is moderately high on extraversion, moderately low on neuroticism, moderately high on agreeableness, high on conscientiousness, and high on openness, do you really know the person? Not fully, because of the role of situational effects.
For example, you might be very annoyed at your boss over something or other, but you are very unlikely to act out the emotional experience of your anger because of the possible negative consequences. You are more likely to vent your anger elsewhere and to someone else. Yet in a different situation you might vent your anger if the same level of situational constraint is not present.
Although very helpful, the behavioural manifestations of our underlying personalities are more complex than a superficial examination of our trait profile might suggest because of the effect of the context provided by different situations.
A specific case
As an example of the value of understanding an individual’s personality, the case of Ted Bundy, one of the most notorious serial killers in the US, is informative. A total of 245 practising psychologists rated Bundy’s Big Five profile and the average of individual psychologists’ assessments showed that he was extremely low on the dimension of agreeableness; he was very extroverted, so he was well able to charm most people, including many of his victims, and win their trust; he was judged to be above average on conscientiousness, meaning he was well able to plan his killings and cover his tracks; he was just above average on openness and below average on neuroticism – so he didn’t get stressed easily and he didn’t panic when things were not going to plan.
An examination of the facets of each of the Big Five showed that Bundy was a very angry person, full of hostility in general, as well as a highly organised thrill-seeker. Most insightful was the finding that he was very, very low in empathy – to such an extent that he simply saw other people as objects to be used rather than as human beings. These Big Five characteristics of his personality better inform our understanding of Bundy’s behaviour.
Understanding ‘personality’
As the Bundy example shows, the Big Five dimensions have been shown to be of value in understanding personality, and in recent years have provided a far better understanding of human behaviour in relationships, the workplace, and in helping people better deal with unpleasant events in their lives.
If you score high on neuroticism then you should avoid jobs that are highly stressful. If you score high on agreeableness, you would be better suited to work that involves one of the ‘caring’ professions where getting along with people, rather than getting ahead, is important – compared to those that require a more adversarial approach such as the legal professions. High openness would be a prerequisite in jobs requiring creativity, such as the world of advertising. The work of a research scientist would require someone who is high on conscientiousness because of the need for attention to detail. Obviously, jobs that involve dealing with the general public require some degree of extraversion.
With respect to romantic relationships, two people who are both low on agreeableness would not make for a conflict-free romantic relationship, but high openness can be good. Interestingly, successful outcomes in psychotherapy are related to conscientiousness to some extent because of the need to actually apply what is learned in therapy to one’s life.
Gerry Fahey is an occupational psychologist and a graduate of TCD and the University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
The problem with this article is that answers the “who am I?” question with answer “my personality”. Somepeople associate themselves with thier bodies, actions or consciousness it self. “I” is just a concept that doesnt always tranlate 100% from person to person.
I recommend people to sit down and not think about it. Instead try directly experince the object in the room that you call “I”.
This is the most important sentence of an otherwise boring & inconsequential article…
“…Most insightful was the finding that he (serial killer Ted Bundy) was very, very low in empathy – to such an extent that he simply saw other people as objects to be used rather than as human beings…. ”
Yes indeed, this ‘very, very low in empathy’ is what defines psychopaths, with a test for them that produces a ‘score’ out of 40. Over 30 is considered clinically ‘psychopathic’ but people with near scores are also potentially a serious problem for society.
But what Gerry doesn’t say, that would be far more interesting and informative… is that the vast majority of the likely 1 in 100 to 1 in 50 ‘psychopathic’ (very low in empathy) of the general population not only do not become killers, but usually evade any interaction with police or courts.
A recent test among a group of approx 200 Wall St banking executives suggested that 9 of them were clearly psychopathic, scoring over 30. But also highly significant was the fact that a further 20% scored close to 30 & over 25 points on the test.
That gives a total of around 25% with highly psychopathic traits… near entirely self focussed, living life as some sort of human robot where ‘winning the game’ is all that matters…. viewing ordinary citizens who are not as capable (psychopaths near always score very on intelligence) or ruthless as mere fools to be used as pawns or even slaves…
And as for ordinary citizens… almost none of us have any idea usually that we are being used by a psychopath until it’s too late. The psychopath will only ever reveal themselves when you are no longer needed by them. Until then, most of them will use their highly developed ability to charm & persuade.
So… the idea that Wall St. executives would somehow act responsibly following the last few decades of rampant Financial sector deregulation is laughable. But in the US at least, authorities were told about this by people like former regulator (credited with jailing 100s of bankers from the late 80s US ‘S&L’ scandal), now Professor, Bill Black, where he defined much of the sector as an inherently ‘criminogenic’ envrionment prone to ‘control fraud’ pyramid like operations… which precisely describes the entire (liars loans, sub-prime) Mortgage Backed Securities fraud which created the 2008 crash.
And there are other rather obvious areas of psychopaths at work… historically in 1930s Germany, especially after Hitler’s accession to the Chancellry in 1933. Whilst none of the Nazis were formally tested of course, I think we may reasonably conclude that Hitler, and equally importantly his propaganda minister Goebbels, were both 100% psychopathic. (Goebbels and his wife killed their 3 young children in Hitler’s bunker rather than let them grow up in some non-Nazi post war society..)
Present day Israel, showing enormous parallels to Nazi Germany, I think shows every characteristic of being run by clinical psychopaths. Blowing to bits many hundreds of children in Gaza in a matter of weeks and media propaganda so powerful that such acts receive not just 80%+ ‘approval’ but many within that cohort who believe that ‘insufficient force’ was used recently in Gaza.
The fact is, as with the sample of results from Wall St. executives, that psychopaths (& those very close on the scale) are inherently very well equipped to reach high office in whatever career they choose. Intelligent, high levels of learned ‘charm’ and utterly ruthless. Even where their activities do break laws, very capable of planning very carefully to evade detection & legal consequences.
What better place to hide, as a paedophile, than within the auspices of the Church, where their staus in society would place them above suspicion and also engage the enormous power & desire of such an institution to avoid any public revelations…
But what of other positions of high office in society? Politics and roles in senior public service for example…
I think we are seeing extraordinary levels of ruthless self-serving behaviour and lack of ‘empathy’ among political institutions and many ‘leaders’.
The adoption and near total control of ‘neo liberal’ jackboot economics over the last 40yrs, culminating in 7 yrs and continuing, of conscience-free, totally unnecessary & counter productive Austerity policy… Counter productive and devastating, thru’ mass unemployment and falling net incomes, in the ‘real’ economy of ordinary citizens…
….But not for the Capital owning elites…benefitting from distresed sale low asset prices of all kinds & forced privatisations of public services, especially those that are both life essential & a natural monopoly, like Water Supply.
Have actual psychopaths, or those with similarly low levels of human empathy, taken over at the highest positions of power in the EU, Euro and even many national political and administrative institutions?
In my opinion, YES, 100%. If it walks like a duck, looks like a duck… as the saying goes… it probably is… a duck.
How can citizens regain their rightful ‘primacy’ in a supposed ‘democracy’ that has utterly failed, arguably cumulatively taken over or completely dominated by empathy & conscience free psychopathic behaviour, and press the ‘reset’ or ‘reboot’ button?
We actually have no formal means whatever… so that is another thing – the absolute right by referendum to sack any and all public officials, whenever – that we must include in the reforms demanded…. demanded that is by the only viable (and necessarily non-violent) means we have left to assert the ‘rule for people’… a complete General Strike, continuing as long as takes for the incumbent authorities to resign & commit to a proper process of radical reform.
Or try the magnetic codes at Starcode.me instead
have your say