The DOI matches its Crossref record; 181 of the 182 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A contrarian view of the five-factor approach to personality description.
Abstract
The 5-factor approach (FFA) to personality description has been represented as a comprehensive and compelling rubric for assessment. In this article, various misgivings about the FFA are delineated. The algorithmic method of factor analysis may not provide dimensions that are incisive. The "discovery" of the five factors may be influenced by unrecognized constraints on the variable sets analyzed. Lexical analyses are based on questionable conceptual and methodological assumptions, and have achieved uncertain results. The questionnaire version of the FFA has not demonstrated the special merits and sufficiencies of the five factors settled upon. Serious uncertainties have arisen in regard to the claimed 5-factor structure and the substantive meanings of the factors. Some implications of these problems are drawn.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“One of the most stinging criticisms of the Five-Factor model is that it is atheoretical (Block [1995]).”
From Personality Psychology and Economics (2011) · cites this paper as Block [1995]
In the citing paper
“This reflects a classic case of the jingle-jangle fallacy [25,26], where different terms are used for the same construct or the same term is used for different ones.”
From Formative assessment and feedback in medical education: A practical guide: AMEE Guide No. 189 (2026) · cites this paper as [25]
Citations
Cites
The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information.
Miller, G. A. (1994) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.101.2.343 · Cited by 17,559
An Introduction to the Five‐Factor Model and Its Applications
McCrae, R. R., & John, O. P. (1992) · Journal of Personality · doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.1992.tb00970.x · Cited by 6,835
Personality Structure: Emergence Of The 5-Factor Model
Digman, J. M. (1990) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.ps.41.020190.002221 · Cited by 6,731
An alternative "description of personality": The Big-Five factor structure.
Goldberg, L. R. (1990) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037//0022-3514.59.6.1216 · Cited by 6,652
Validation of the five-factor model of personality across instruments and observers.
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1987) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.52.1.81 · Cited by 6,404
The development of markers for the Big-Five factor structure
Goldberg, L. R. (1992) · Psychological Assessment · doi:10.1037/1040-3590.4.1.26 · Cited by 5,530
Harman, H. H. (1960) · Cited by 5,148
The structure of phenotypic personality traits.
Goldberg, L. R. (1993) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.48.1.26 · Cited by 4,816
Handbook of Personality : Theory and Research
Pervin, L. A. (1992) · Cited by 4,543
Madison, P., & Mischel, W. (1968) · The American Journal of Psychology · doi:10.2307/1421067 · Cited by 4,395
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 501–600 of 999
Personality, User Preferences and Behavior in Recommender systems
Karumur, R. P., Nguyen, T. T., & Konstan, J. A. (2017) · Information Systems Frontiers · doi:10.1007/s10796-017-9800-0 · Cited by 64
“…grounding of the Big Five Model on Personality Traits (popularly known as the Five Factor Model (FFM)) has occasionally been questioned (Block 1995, 2010), it remains a predominant tool in social psychology studies encompassing personality and human behavior (Costa and MacCrae 1992;…”
BackgroundGreat Minds Don't Think Alike? Person‐Level Predictors of Innovation at Work
Patterson, F. (2002) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9780470696392.ch4 · Cited by 63
Quirin, M., Robinson, M. D., Rauthmann, J. F., Kühl, J., Read, S. J., Tops, M., & DeYoung, C. G. (2020) · European Journal of Personality · doi:10.1002/per.2295 · Cited by 78
“…2019; Shoda, Wilson, Chen, Gilmore, & Smith, 2013; Wood, Gardner, & Harms, 2015), reviving an earlier phase of theoretical development (e.g. Atkinson & Birch, 1970; Block, 1995; Cervone & Shoda, 1999; Kuhl, 1994; Kuhl & Atkinson, 1986; Mischel & Shoda, 1995; Vallacher, Read, & Nowak, 2002).”
Lipnevich, A. A., & Roberts, R. D. (2011) · Learning and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2011.11.016 · Cited by 72
“Part of the reason for such inconsistency may be attributed to research inquiries coming from different domains of study and using disparate terminology to label relevant student-level factors (i.e., the “jingle–jangle fallacy”, see Block, 1995).”
BackgroundPersonality variables as predictors of Facebook usage
Caci, B., Cardaci, M., Tabacchi, M. E., & Scrima, F. (2014) · Psychological Reports · doi:10.2466/21.09.pr0.114k23w6 · Cited by 62
“However, such results are not unusual (e.g., Block, 1995 ).”
BackgroundPersonality traits and the process of store loyalty in a transactional prone context
Bove, L. L., & Mitzifiris, B. (2007) · Journal of Services Marketing · doi:10.1108/08876040710824861 · Cited by 62
“, 1998) as the “Big Five” consist of linear combinations of more specific dimensions within them (Block, 1995).”
BackgroundInfluentialHofer, S. M., Horn, J. L., & Eber, H. W. (1997) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/s0191-8869(97)00025-1 · Cited by 62
Conceptualization and assessment of personality factors in depression
Flett, G. L., Hewitt, P. L., Endler, N. S., & Bagby, R. M. (1995) · European Journal of Personality · doi:10.1002/per.2410090504 · Cited by 63
“Although the usefulness of conceptual schemes such as the five-factor model has been questioned by some authors (Ben-Porath and Waller, 1992; Block, 1995), it cannot be disputed that recent research on depression in this area (e.”
BackgroundVassend, O., & Skrondal, A. (2011) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2011.03.002 · Cited by 64
The Big Five Personality Traits: Psychological Entities or Statistical Constructs?
Franić, S., Borsboom, D., Dolan, C. V., & Boomsma, D. I. (2013) · Behavior Genetics · doi:10.1007/s10519-013-9625-7 · Cited by 75
The General Factor of Personality: The relationship between the Big One and the Dark Triad
Kowalski, C. M., Vernon, P. A., & Schermer, J. A. (2015) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2015.09.028 · Cited by 61
“Despite themany proponents of the FFM, many researchers questioned the fundamentality of these traits, as therewas strong evidence suggesting that they are not orthogonal (Becker, 1999; Block, 1995).”
BackgroundProblem gambling and the five‐factor model of personality: a large population‐based study
Brunborg, G. S., Hanss, D., Mentzoni, R. A., Molde, H., & Pallesen, S. (2016) · Addiction · doi:10.1111/add.13388 · Cited by 61
“Criticism against the five-factor model of personality has been raised [23,24].”
BackgroundExamining the conceptual and empirical distinctiveness of Agreeableness and “dark” personality items
Vize, C. E., Miller, J. D., & Lynam, D. R. (2020) · Journal of Personality · doi:10.1111/jopy.12601 · Cited by 62
Wishes, gender, personality, and well-being.
King, L. A., & Broyles, S. J. (1997) · Journal of Personality · doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.1997.tb00529.x · Cited by 66
Changing Behavior Using Social Cognitive Theory
Łuszczyńska, A., & Schwarzer, R. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108677318.003 · Cited by 81
Trait self-control and self-discipline: Structure, validity, and invariance across national groups
Hagger, M. S., Zhang, C., Kangro, E., Ríes, F., Wang, J., Heritage, B., & Chan, D. K. C. (2018) · Current Psychology · doi:10.1007/s12144-018-0021-6 · Cited by 65
“The presence of ‘jangle’ fallacies in social and personality psychology (Block Table 5 Measurement Invariance and Overall Fit Indexes for Maloney et al.’s (2012) TwoFactorMeasurement Model of the BSCS in the Four National Samples Model χ(2)R df CFI ΔCFI RMSEA RMSEA 90% CI”
Influential(2010) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.48-0567 · Cited by 61
Self-regulation and control in personality functioning
Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (2012) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511596544.027 · Cited by 59
Deep lexical hypothesis: Identifying personality structure in natural language.
Cutler, A., & Condon, D. M. (2022) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/pspp0000443 · Cited by 71
Ferrandi, J., Valette‐Florence, P., & Fine‐Falcy, S. (2014) · Developments in marketing science: proceedings of the Academy of Marketing Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-11885-7_2 · Cited by 59
“As a result, many psychologists are convinced that the best representation of the structure of personality traits is provided by five great factors, commonly called "Big Five" in the American literature (Digman, 1990, see Block, 1995 for a critical vision).”
BackgroundPrior Related Work Experience and Job Performance: Role of personality
Uppal, N., Mishra, S. K., & Vohra, N. (2014) · International Journal of Selection and Assessment · doi:10.1111/ijsa.12055 · Cited by 59
“Therefore, in order to analyze contextual usefulness (Block, 1995), we conducted pilot tests to check reliability.”
Toward the Development of Quasi-Indigenous Personality Constructs
Benet‐Martínez, V., & John, O. P. (2000) · American Behavioral Scientist · doi:10.1177/0002764200044001011 · Cited by 58
Criteria for Selection and Evaluation of Scales and Measures
Boyle, G. J., Saklofske, D. H., & Matthews, G. (2014) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-386915-9.00001-2 · Cited by 58
Temperament-Based Intervention: Re-examining Goodness of Fit
McClowry, S., Rodriguez, E. T., & Koslowitz, R. (2008) · International Journal of Developmental Science · doi:10.3233/dev-2008-21208 · Cited by 58
“Block (1995) referred to this phenomenon as the jingling and jangling fallacy.”
BackgroundAre we witnessing the decline effect in the Type D personality literature? What can be learned?
Coyne, J. C., & de Voogd, J. N. (2012) · Journal of Psychosomatic Research · doi:10.1016/j.jpsychores.2012.09.016 · Cited by 61
“Smith [20] pointed out that even if NA or SI alone or some additive combination predicted mortality, there was the risk of what Block [32] has termed the “jangle fallacy” of assuming that simply assigning a new name to previously studied traits constitute a discovery.”
BackgroundAge differences in adult personality: findings from the United Statesand China
Labouvie‐Vief, G., Diehl, M. K., Tarnowski, A., & Shen, J. (2000) · The Journals of Gerontology Series B · doi:10.1093/geronb/55.1.p4 · Cited by 59
“Some research suggests that patterns of personality change may be gender specific, reflecting the particular roles and adaptations of men and women (e.g., Block, 1995; Maas & Kuypers, 1974).”
BackgroundHough, L. M., & Oswald, F. L. (2005) · Human Performance · doi:10.1207/s15327043hup1804_4 · Cited by 64
“There are many who criticize this approach to personality for both theoretical and practical reasons (e.g., Block, 1995; Hough, 1992, 1997; Schneider & Hough, 1995; Schneider, Hough, & Dunnette, 1996; Tellegen, 1993; Waller & Ben-Porath, 1987).”
BackgroundLay Conceptions of the Five-Factor Model and its Indicators
Sneed, C. D., McCrae, R. R., & Funder, D. C. (1998) · Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin · doi:10.1177/0146167298242001 · Cited by 57
Explanation in personality psychology: “Verbal magic” and the five-factor model
Boag, S. (2011) · Philosophical Psychology · doi:10.1080/09515089.2010.548319 · Cited by 62
Psychometric Properties of the Zuckerman-Kuhlman Personality Questionnaire in a Spanish Sample
Gomà‐i‐Freixanet, M., Valero, S., Puntí, J., & Zuckerman, M. (2004) · European Journal of Psychological Assessment · doi:10.1027/1015-5759.20.2.134 · Cited by 56
““The Big Five” model (Digman, 1990) is currently the most popular model although there is some dissent concerning its superiority to other models (Tellegen 1985; Eysenck, 1992a; Zuckerman, 1992; Block, 1995).”
MethodDimensions and Categories: The "Big Five" Factors and the DSM Personality Disorders
Morey, L. C., Gunderson, J. G., Quigley, B. D., & Lyons, M. J. (2000) · Assessment · doi:10.1177/107319110000700301 · Cited by 56
Structures of Personality Traits
HOFSTEE, W. K. B. (2003) · Handbook of Psychology · doi:10.1002/0471264385.wei0510 · Cited by 56
Adolph, W. S. (2013) · cIRcle (University of British Columbia) · doi:10.14288/1.0073582 · Cited by 56
Of the way we were: On temperament, attachment, and the transmission gap: A rejoinder to Fox (1995).
van IJzendoorn, M. H. (1995) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.117.3.411 · Cited by 58
Giordano, P. J. (2013) · Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science · doi:10.1007/s12124-013-9250-2 · Cited by 55
“But this approach, despite the enthusiastic claims of its adherents, has significant weaknesses as outlined by Block (1995, 2001, 2010), Uher (2013), Arro (2013) and others.”
BackgroundConceptualization and Measurement of Adolescent Prosocial Behavior: Looking Back and Moving Forward
Mallah, S. E. (2019) · Journal of Research on Adolescence · doi:10.1111/jora.12476 · Cited by 62
“:3) a-variable phenomenon (i.e., variables with similar definitions and content referred to by different terms), as well as the jingle fallacy (i.e., the same term used for constructs with different definitions and content; Block, 1995; Hag-ger, 2014).”
The behavioural activation system: challenges and opportunities
Pickering, A. D., & Smillie, L. D. (2008) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511819384.005 · Cited by 56
Leising, D., Thielmann, I., Glöckner, A., Gärtner, A., & Schönbrodt, F. D. (2022) · Personality Science · doi:10.5964/ps.6029 · Cited by 75
“And neither do two scales become non-interchangeable just because they are given different names (the jangle-fal lacy; see above) (Flake & Fried, 2020; Block, 1995).”
BackgroundInfluentialLuqman, A., Zhang, Q., & Hina, M. (2023) · Information & Management · doi:10.1016/j.im.2023.103843 · Cited by 59
How do you feel about your friends? Understanding situational envy in online social networks
Wallace, L. G., James, T. L., & Warkentin, M. E. (2017) · Information & Management · doi:10.1016/j.im.2016.12.010 · Cited by 54
Romero, E., Martín, M. Á. L., Fraguela, J. A. G., & Sobral, J. (2002) · LA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) · Cited by 54
Maladaptive Personality Functioning Within the Big Five and the Five-Factor Model
Coker, L. A., Samuel, D. B., & Widiger, T. A. (2002) · Journal of Personality Disorders · doi:10.1521/pedi.16.5.385.22125 · Cited by 54
“The presence of a trait term in a language does not necessarily suggest that there is in fact a corresponding phenotypic representation of that trait within the population (Block, 1995).”
BackgroundGurtman, M. B. (1995) · Assessment · doi:10.1177/1073191195002004005 · Cited by 54
Schermer, J. A., Krammer, G., & Goffin, R. D. (2018) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2018.08.023 · Cited by 53
Personality Theories and Models: An Overview
Boyle, G. J., Matthews, G., & Saklofske, D. H. (2008) · SAGE Publications Ltd eBooks · doi:10.4135/9781849200462.n1 · Cited by 55
Ypofanti, M., Zisi, V. Z., Comoutos, N., Mouchtouri, B., Tzanne, P., Theodorakis, Y., & Lyrakos, G. N. (2015) · Health Psychology Research · doi:10.4081/hpr.2015.2206 · Cited by 53
Bridging the Idiographic‐Nomothetic Divide in Ratings of Self and Others on the Big Five
Grice, J. W. (2004) · Journal of Personality · doi:10.1111/j.0022-3506.2004.00261.x · Cited by 53
Warner, L. M., & French, D. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108677318.032 · Cited by 62
Personality in sport and exercise psychology: Integrating a whole person perspective
Coulter, T., Mallett, C. J., Singer, J., & Gucciardi, D. (2016) · International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology · doi:10.1080/1612197x.2015.1016085 · Cited by 36
“As useful as this has been, it is proposed that this investment reflects a narrow view of personality and a preemptive definition of this term as a trait science (Block, 1995; Mischel & Shoda, 2008).”
BackgroundPersonality and Social Influence Strategies in the Workplace
Caldwell, D. F., & Burger, J. M. (1997) · Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin · doi:10.1177/01461672972310001 · Cited by 53
The Structure of Personality In Six Cultures
Paunonen, S. V., Keinonen, M., Trzebiński, J., Försterling, F., Grishenkoroze, N., Kouznetsova, L., & Chan, D. W. (1996) · Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology · doi:10.1177/0022022196273006 · Cited by 53
The Big Seven Model of Personality and Its Relevance to Personality Pathology
Simms, L. J. (2006) · Journal of Personality · doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.2006.00433.x · Cited by 57
“However, the Big Five model is not without its critics (e.g., Block, 1995; Waller, 1999), who argue, among other things, that the pool of dictionary descriptors used to derive the Big Five was too limited to yield a comprehensive model of personality.”
BackgroundPersonality Disorders in the 21st Century
Widiger, T. A. (2000) · Journal of Personality Disorders · doi:10.1521/pedi.2000.14.1.3 · Cited by 53
Personality and chronic fatigue syndrome: methodological and conceptual issues
van Geelen, S. M., Sinnema, G., Hermans, H. J. M., & Kuis, W. (2007) · Clinical Psychology Review · doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2007.01.010 · Cited by 52
Wood, D. (2015) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0038343 · Cited by 54
Zyphur, M. J., Bradley, J. C., Landis, R. S., & Thoresen, C. J. (2007) · Human Performance · doi:10.1080/08959280701521967 · Cited by 53
“Although some debate exists regarding the Big Five (see Block, 1995 ), a variety of studies have provided evidence for its validity in a variety of contexts across both time and culture ( John & Srivastava, 1999 ).”
BackgroundTemperament, activity, and expectations for later personality development.
Graziano, W. G., Jensen‐Campbell, L. A., & Sullivan-Logan, G. M. (1998) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037//0022-3514.74.5.1266 · Cited by 53
Block, J. (1995) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.117.2.226 · Cited by 52
Self-citationFive-Factor Model of Personality
Soto, C. J., & Jackson, J. J. (2013) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/obo/9780199828340-0120 · Cited by 73
Personality, Spirituality, Religiousness, and the Personality Disorders
Piedmont, R. L. (2009) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511576843.013 · Cited by 51
Personality in cross-cultural perspective
Dragūns, J. G. (2012) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511596544.035 · Cited by 51
Children’s Behavioral Manifestations of the Five-Factor Model of Personality
Markey, P. M., Markey, C. N., & Tinsley, B. J. (2004) · Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin · doi:10.1177/0146167203261886 · Cited by 51
“Block (1995, 2001) has argued that the FFM is based on empirically driven work with post hoc (if any) theorizing to substantiate this model and questions whether five personality traits are the appropriate number to efficiently describe personality.”
MethodAUTHORS' RESPONSES: "The Emotional Intelligence Bandwagon: Too Fast To Live, Too Young To Die?"
Zeidner, M., Roberts, R. D., & Matthews, G. (2004) · Psychological Inquiry · doi:10.1207/s15327965pli1503_04 · Cited by 51
Pathways of peer relationships from childhood to young adulthood
Lansford, J. E., Yu, T., Pettit, G. S., Bates, J. E., & Dodge, K. A. (2014) · Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.appdev.2013.12.002 · Cited by 59
“P A A uthor M anuscript driven (e.g., Block, 1995); nevertheless, the Big Five have been found to relate in meaningful ways to a wide range of other measures of adaptive and maladaptive functioning (e.g., Costa & McCrae, 1995).”
BackgroundZhang, Y., Wei, X., & Zhou, W. H. (2017) · International Journal of Conflict Management · doi:10.1108/ijcma-06-2016-0052 · Cited by 49
Factorial Invariance of the Five-Factor Model Rating Form Across Gender
Samuel, D. B., South, S. C., & Griffin, S. A. (2014) · Assessment · doi:10.1177/1073191114536772 · Cited by 51
“Although the Five-Factor Model (FFM) has been criticized (Block, 1995) and alternative models exist (Ashton, Lee, & Goldberg, 2004), the FFM has provided a framework that has helped to integrate findings from a variety of subdisciplines such as human development (Caspi, Roberts, & Shiner, 2005), health psychology (Dea…”
MethodBrunstein, J. C. (2008) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511499821.010 · Cited by 49
Changing Behavior Using Ecological Models
Salmon, J., Hesketh, K. D., Arundell, L., Downing, K. L., & Biddle, S. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108677318.017 · Cited by 57
Social cognition theories and behavior change in COVID-19: A conceptual review
Hagger, M. S., & Hamilton, K. (2022) · Behaviour Research and Therapy · doi:10.1016/j.brat.2022.104095 · Cited by 56
“…phenomenon, and it has been recognized as a perennial problem in psychology, often referred to as a ‘jangle’ fallacy: multiple constructs with similar content but differing M.S. Hagger and K. Hamilton Behaviour Research and Therapy 154 (2022) 104095 labels (Block, 1995; Hagger, 2014; Kelley, 1927).”
Item selection, evaluation, and simple structure in personality data
Pettersson, E., & Turkheimer, E. N. (2010) · Journal of Research in Personality · doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2010.03.002 · Cited by 53
“Although there continues to be disagreement about the number of dimensions necessary to account for personality traits (Ashton et al., 2004; Block, 1995; Eysenck, 1992; Goldberg, 1993; Waller, 1999), most researchers would concede that the Five Factor Model (FFM) represents at least a reasonable approximation of the p…”
BackgroundDeluga, R. J., & Masson, S. (2000) · Journal of Research in Personality · doi:10.1006/jrpe.1999.2272 · Cited by 49
Kankaraš, M. (2017) · OECD education working papers · doi:10.1787/8a294376-en · Cited by 87
Structural Divisions of Personality and the Classification of Traits
Mayer, J. D. (2003) · Review of General Psychology · doi:10.1037/1089-2680.7.4.381 · Cited by 61
“There also exist schemas, mental mechanisms, and parts that exert self-control and will (Block, 1995; Loevinger, 1994; McAdams, 1992).”
BackgroundThe Latent Genetic Structure of Impulsivity and Its Relation to Internalizing Psychopathology
Gustavson, D. E., Friedman, N. P., Fontanillas, P., Elson, S. L., Palmer, A. A., & Sanchez‐Roige, S. (2020) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0956797620938160 · Cited by 52
Germain, M., & Tejeda, M. J. (2012) · Human Resource Development Quarterly · doi:10.1002/hrdq.21134 · Cited by 59
Plaisant, O., Srivastava, S., Mendelsohn, G. A., Debray, Q., & John, O. P. (2005) · Annales Médico-psychologiques revue psychiatrique · doi:10.1016/j.amp.2005.02.002 · Cited by 48
van Emmerik, H., Gardner, W. L., Wendt, H., & Fischer, D. (2010) · Group & Organization Management · doi:10.1177/1059601110370782 · Cited by 48
“Although concerns about the number of factors, theoretical underpinnings, and empirical evidence supporting the FFM have been expressed by a number of scholars (Block, 1995; Carroll, 2002; Merenda, 2008), a general consensus has emerged that the FFM provides a useful framework for describing the emotional, interperson…”
BackgroundPersonality and Job Performance in Financial Services Managers
Salgado, J. F., & Rumbo, A. (1997) · International Journal of Selection and Assessment · doi:10.1111/1468-2389.00049 · Cited by 48
Strickland, J. C., & Lacy, R. T. (2020) · Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1037/pha0000358 · Cited by 46
“For example, issues may arise when one invokes a single term for two or more things that are quite different (i.e., the jingle fallacy) or uses different language for two or more things that are quite the same (i.e., the jangle fallacy; Block, 1995; Thorndike, 1904).”
BackgroundPersonality traits, social support, and training transfer
Ng, K. H., & Ahmad, R. (2017) · Personnel Review · doi:10.1108/pr-08-2016-0210 · Cited by 56
Wuepper, D., Zilberman, D., & Sauer, J. (2019) · Climate and Development · doi:10.1080/17565529.2019.1607240 · Cited by 47
“sonality traits are popular but they are strictly speaking only a taxonomy and not a theory (Bandura, 2012; Block, 1995).”
BackgroundThe Impact of Item Characteristics on Item and Scale Validity
Johnson, J. A. (2004) · Multivariate Behavioral Research · doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr3902_6 · Cited by 47
“Although the FFM has its critics (Block, 1995, 2001; Briggs, 1989), factor analyses of personality ratings (Goldberg, 1993) and self-report questionnaire items (Ostendorf & Angleitner, 1992) indicate sufficient redundancy within the realm of personality description such that this realm can be well…”
BackgroundFive-factor model traits and the prototypical image of the effective leader in the Confucian culture
Lim Leung, S., & Bozionelos, N. (2004) · Employee Relations · doi:10.1108/01425450410506904 · Cited by 46
Lenzenweger, M. F., & CASTRO, D. D. (2005) · Development and Psychopathology · doi:10.1017/s0954579405050571 · Cited by 45
“Moreover, it has been subjected to trenchant criticism ~see Block, 1995, 2001; Shedler & Westen, 2004; Westen, 1996! as a substantive approach to understanding personality.”
BackgroundThe General Factor of Personality
Musek, J. (2017) · Psihologijske teme · doi:10.31820/pt.26.1.4 · Cited by 46
“Yet, all these so-called basic dimensions are definitely correlated including the Big Five (Becker, 1999, 2002; Block, 1995; Digman, 1997; John & Srivastava, 1999; Musek, 2007; Ostendorf & Angleitner, 1994; Saucier & Goldberg, 2003; Stankov, 2005; Wiggins & Trapnell, 1996).”
Temperament and personality: the German version of the Adult Temperament Questionnaire (ATQ).
Wiltink, J., Vogelsang, U., & Beutel, M. E. (2006) · PubMed Central · Cited by 46
Wright, J. C., Zakriski, A. L., & Drinkwater, M. (1999) · Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1037//0022-006x.67.1.95 · Cited by 46
The relationship between social problem-solving and personality in mentally disordered offenders
McMurran, M., Egan, V., Blair, M., & Richardson, C. (2001) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/s0191-8869(00)00050-7 · Cited by 46
Introversion, Solitude, and Subjective Well‐Being
Zelenski, J. M., Sobocko, K., & Whelan, A. D. C. (2013) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9781118427378.ch11 · Cited by 46
Revisiting the rigidity-of-the-right hypothesis: A meta-analytic review.
Costello, T. H., Bowes, S. M., Baldwin, M. W., Malka, A., & Tasimi, A. (2022) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/pspp0000446 · Cited by 58
Economic Stress and Occupational Health
Sinclair, R. R., Graham, B. A., & Probst, T. M. (2023) · Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior · doi:10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-091922-020639 · Cited by 53
Changing Behavior Using Self-Determination Theory
Hagger, M. S., Hankonen, N. E., Chatzisarantis, N. L. D., & Ryan, R. M. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108677318.008 · Cited by 67
Mediation of Personality Influences on Physical Activity within the Theory of Planned Behaviour
McEachan, R., Sutton, S. R., & Myers, L. B. (2010) · Journal of Health Psychology · doi:10.1177/1359105310364172 · Cited by 45
“Although criticisms have been noted with this model in terms of its development and depth (e.g. see Block, 1995, McAdams, 1992), it nonetheless remains a pervasive and widely used model in personality research.”
MethodLenzenweger, M. F. (2010) · Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association · doi:10.1177/0003065110386111 · Cited by 48
Nestadt, G., Costa, P. T., Hsu, F., SAMUELS, J. F., Bienvenu, O. J., & Eaton, W. W. (2007) · Comprehensive Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/j.comppsych.2007.05.015 · Cited by 44
PERSONALITY PROFILES OF MALE AND FEMALE POSITIVE ROLE MODELS IN MEDICINE
Magee, M., & Hojat, M. (1998) · Psychological Reports · doi:10.2466/pr0.1998.82.2.547 · Cited by 44
Whiteman, M. C., Bedford, A., Grant, E. K., Fowkes, F. G. R., & Deary, I. J. (2001) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/s0191-8869(00)00134-3 · Cited by 44
Neuroticism and agreeableness differentiate emotional and narcissistic expressions of aggression
Egan, V., & Lewis, M. (2011) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2011.01.007 · Cited by 43
The Impact of Personality Traits on Attitude to Financial Risk
Brooks, C., & Williams, L. (2020) · Research in International Business and Finance · doi:10.1016/j.ribaf.2021.101501 · Cited by 43
Niranjan, S., Gabaldon, J., Hawkins, T. G., Gupta, V. K., & McBride, M. (2021) · Transportation Research Part F Traffic Psychology and Behaviour · doi:10.1016/j.trf.2021.12.001 · Cited by 43
Metadata
- Authors
- Block, J.
- Affiliations
- University of California, Berkeley (US)
- Corresponding author
- Block, Jack
- Venue
- Psychological Bulletin
- Published
- 1995
- Volume
- 117
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 187-215
- ISSN
- 0033-2909 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1455
- OpenAlex
- W2042236540
- Cited by
- 1,682
- References
- 182
- Citations by year
- 2026: 28 · 2025: 32 · 2024: 33 · 2023: 62 · 2022: 38 · 2021: 61 · 2020: 155 · 2019: 56 · 2018: 57 · 2017: 50 · 2016: 53 · 2015: 54 · 2014: 63 · 2013: 60 · 2012: 66
- FWCI
- 75.95
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Psychological Bulletin (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute of Mental Health (MH-16080, R01MH016080)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Psychological Testing and Assessment
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
- Keywords
- Big Five personality traits, personality structure, personality assessment, questionnaire validity
- MeSH terms
- Factor Analysis, Statistical, Humans, Personality Assessment, Personality Development, Personality Disorders, Psychometrics, Reproducibility of Results
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
