Cited by 1,682Personality Traits and PsychologyPsychological Testing and AssessmentPsychometric Methodologies and Testing

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.

Block, Jack·1995·Psychological Bulletin

DOI 10.1037/0033-2909.117.2.187

Open this paper in CoChat — free account

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.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0033-2909.117.2.187

Cites

181 of 181 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

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
Modern factor analysis
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
Personality and Assessment
Madison, P., & Mischel, W. (1968) · The American Journal of Psychology · doi:10.2307/1421067 · Cited by 4,395

Show all 182 references

Sorted by citations

Items 701–800 of 999

The Misinformation Susceptibility Test (MIST): A psychometrically validated measure of news veracity discernmentPreprint
Maertens, R., Götz, F. M., Golino, H. F., Roozenbeek, J., Schneider, C. R., Kyrychenko, Y., Kerr, J. R., Stieger, S., McClanahan, W. P., III, Drabot, K., et al. (2021) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/gk68h · Cited by 31
Personality and gang embeddedness
Egan, V., & Beadman, M. (2011) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2011.06.021 · Cited by 37
“One way to avoid reifying ‘jangle’ constructs in psychology (which happen when ostensibly different measures measure the same underlying constructs; Block, 1995) is to use established measures to structure these other constructs.”
Method
Approach temperament, anger, and evaluation: Resolving a paradox.
Pettersson, E., & Turkheimer, E. N. (2013) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0033046 · Cited by 30
Assessing the Evaluative Content of Personality Questionnaires Using Bifactor Models
Biderman, M. D., McAbee, S. T., Chen, Z. J., & Hendy, N. T. (2018) · Journal of Personality Assessment · doi:10.1080/00223891.2017.1406362 · Cited by 30
“…were estimated in a model in which evaluative content was accounted for by the general and keying factors, this result supports the contention of Block (1995) that the often-found result of generally positive correlations between the factors of these questionnaires is because of evaluative item…”
BackgroundMethodResultInfluential
Psychopathic Personality Disorder
Cooke, D. J. (2018) · European journal of analytic philosophy · doi:10.31820/ejap.14.1.1 · Cited by 30
“Given that linguistic terms are inherently fuzzy (Block 1995) we “triangulated” the meaning of each symptom using three synonymous adjective or adjectival phrases.”
Background
Changing Behavior Using the Health Belief Model and Protection Motivation Theory
Orbell, S., Zahid, H., & Henderson, C. J. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108677318.004 · Cited by 35
The Big-5±2? The impact of cognitive complexity on the factor structure of the five-factor model
Bowler, M. C., Bowler, J. L., & Phillips, B. C. (2009) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2009.08.002 · Cited by 30
Defense Mechanisms: Current Approaches to Research and Measurement
Hentschel, U., Dragūns, J. G., Ehlers, W., & Smith, G. J. W. (2004) · Advances in psychology · doi:10.1016/s0166-4115(04)80026-8 · Cited by 30
A Comparison of Big-Five structures of personality traits in Dutch, English, and German
HOFSTEE, W. K. B., Kiers, H. A. L., Raad, B. D., Goldberg, L. R., & Ostendorf, F. (1997) · European Journal of Personality · doi:10.1002/(sici)1099-0984(199703)11:1 · Cited by 145
Unknown Words in Self-Reported Personality: Lethargic and Provincial in Texas
Graziano, W. G., Jensen‐Campbell, L. A., Steele, R. G., & Hair, E. C. (1998) · Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin · doi:10.1177/0146167298248008 · Cited by 30
Five Factors in Sentence Completion Test Categories: Toward Rapprochement between Trait and Maturational Approaches to Personality
Hogansen, J. M., & Lanning, K. (2001) · Journal of Research in Personality · doi:10.1006/jrpe.2001.2331 · Cited by 29
CURRENT DIRECTIONS AND ISSUES IN PERSONNEL SELECTION AND CLASSIFICATION
Borman, W. C., Hedge, J. W., Ferstl, K. L., Kaufman, J. D., Farmer, W. L., & Bearden, R. M. (2004) · Research in personnel and human resources management · doi:10.1016/s0742-7301(03)22007-7 · Cited by 30
Comparing factor analytical and circumplex models of brand personality in brand positioning
Bao, J. Y. E., & Sweeney, J. (2009) · Psychology and Marketing · doi:10.1002/mar.20306 · Cited by 29
The PIAAC longitudinal study in Germany: rationale and design
Rammstedt, B., Martin, S., Zabal, A., Carstensen, C. H., & Schupp, J. (2017) · Large-scale Assessments in Education · doi:10.1186/s40536-017-0040-z · Cited by 29
“Central constructs assessed in each of the three PIAAC-L waves: Wave 1 • Household questionnaire (based on the SOEP core questionnaire) • Living situation and costs • Income, benefits, and wealth • Children and other household members • Person questionnaire (based on the SOEP core questionnaires): • Family situation,…”
BackgroundInfluential
Personality Neuroscience
DeYoung, C. G., & Blain, S. D. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108264822.026 · Cited by 34
Measuring the Big Five in Self-Report and Other Ratings
Barbaranelli, C., & Caprara, G. V. (2000) · European Journal of Psychological Assessment · doi:10.1027//1015-5759.16.1.31 · Cited by 29
Six Basic Dimensions of Personality and a Seventh Factor of Generalized Dysfunctional Personality: A Diathesis System Covering all Personality Disorders
Andresen, B. (2000) · Neuropsychobiology · doi:10.1159/000026628 · Cited by 29
Individual Differences in Approach and Avoidance
Strauman, T. J., & Wilson, W. A. (2010) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9781444318111.ch20 · Cited by 29
Development of a Short Form of the Abridged Big Five-Dimensional Circumplex Model to Aid with the Organization of Personality Traits
Bucher, M. A., & Samuel, D. B. (2018) · Journal of Personality Assessment · doi:10.1080/00223891.2017.1413382 · Cited by 28
“Although criticisms of this model have been raised (Block, 1995) and alternatives exist (Lee & Ashton, 2004), the FFM has succeeded well in providing a common language for personality description across areas of psychology.”
Method
Mindreading measures misread? A multimethod investigation into the validity of self-report and task-based approaches.
Wendt, L. P., Zimmermann, J., Spitzer, C., & Müller, S. (2024) · Psychological Assessment · doi:10.1037/pas0001310 · Cited by 37
The alternative five-factor model of personality, nicotine dependence and relapse after treatment for smoking cessation
Nieva, G., Valero, S., Bruguera, E., Andión, Ó., Trasovares, M. V., Gual, A., & Casas, M. (2011) · Addictive Behaviors · doi:10.1016/j.addbeh.2011.05.008 · Cited by 28
Changing Behavior by Changing Environments
Marteau, T. M., Fletcher, P. C., Hollands, G. J., & Munafo, M. R. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108677318.014 · Cited by 32
Methods of personality assessment
Boyle, G. J., & Helmes, E. (2012) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511596544.010 · Cited by 28
“The various issues on this topic were reviewed by Velicer and Jackson (1990) and an extensive series of comments and rebuttals followed in that issue of Multivariate Behavioral Research that suggested that no clear consensus among experts was evident on several basic matters.”
BackgroundInfluential
From extraordinary invulnerability to ordinary magic: A literature review of resilience
Winders, S. (2014) · Journal of European Psychology Students · doi:10.5334/jeps.bk · Cited by 28
“Traditionally, models of resilience portray resilience as a personality trait that is stable over time (Block, 1995).”
Background
Spurious Results in the Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Organizational Research
Braun, M. T., Kuljanin, G., & DeShon, R. P. (2013) · Organizational Research Methods · doi:10.1177/1094428112469668 · Cited by 32
Personality theories and models
Boyle, G. J., Matthews, G., & Saklofske, D. H. (2008) · Sage eBooks · Cited by 29
Exploring the Cross-Cultural Generalizability of the Five-Factor Model of Personality
Ispas, D., Iliescu, D., Ilie, A., & Johnson, R. E. (2014) · Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology · doi:10.1177/0022022114534769 · Cited by 34
“personality, five-factor model, NEO PI-R, Romania, psychometrics Although not without its critics (e.g., Block, 1995), the Five-Factor Model (FFM) of personality is the most established and validated model of personality (Caspi, Roberts, & Shiner, 2005; John, Naumann, & Soto, 2008; John &…”
Method
Trait Theories of Motivation
Scheffer, D., & Heckhausen, H. (2018) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-65094-4_3 · Cited by 32
Jingle–Jangle Fallacies in L2 Motivational Self System Research: A Response to Al-Hoorie et al . (2024)
Henry, A., & Liu, M. (2024) · Applied Linguistics · doi:10.1093/applin/amae041 · Cited by 31
Cross‐modal personality attributions in synaesthetes and non‐synaesthetes
Simner, J., Gärtner, O., & Taylor, M. D. (2011) · Journal of Neuropsychology · doi:10.1111/j.1748-6653.2011.02009.x · Cited by 27
Reliability and Validity of the Interpersonal Guilt Rating Scale-15: A New Clinician-Reporting Tool for Assessing Interpersonal Guilt According to Control-Mastery Theory
Gazzillo, F., Gorman, B. S., Bush, M., Silberschatz, G., Mazza, C., Faccini, F., Crisafulli, V., Alesiani, R., & Luca, E. D. (2017) · Psychodynamic Psychiatry · doi:10.1521/pdps.2017.45.3.362 · Cited by 27
“However, apart from some limitations specific to this tool that we will discuss later, self-reports alone may be questionable for a thorough assessment of psychological variables not accessible to introspective awareness, namely, unconscious (Block, 1995; McAdams, 1992; Westen, 1998).”
THE BIG FIVE PERSONALITY OF THE SME MANAGER AND THEIR COMPANY’S PERFORMANCE
Antončič, J. A., Antončić, B., Grum, D. K., & Ruzzier, M. (2018) · Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship · doi:10.1142/s1084946718500218 · Cited by 35
The Properties and Utility of Less Evaluative Personality Scales: Reduction of Social Desirability; Increase of Construct and Discriminant Validity
Bäckström, M., & Björklund, F. (2020) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.560271 · Cited by 27
“Unfortunately, however, many of the inventories reveal rather high correlations between the factors (Block, 1995).”
Background
Geography, psychology and the ‘Big Five’ personality traits: Who moves, and over what distances, in the United Kingdom?
Shuttleworth, I., Stevenson, C., Bjarnason, Þ., & Finell, E. (2020) · Population Space and Place · doi:10.1002/psp.2418 · Cited by 27
Predicting social identification over time: The role of group and personality factors
Bizumić, B., Reynolds, K. J., & Meyers, B. (2012) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2012.04.009 · Cited by 27
O problema da avaliação das habilidades socioemocionais como política pública: explicitando controvérsias e argumentos
Smolka, A. L. B., de Laplane, A. L. F., Magiolino, L. L. S., & Dainêz, D. (2015) · Educação & Sociedade · doi:10.1590/es0101-73302015150030 · Cited by 35
“Autores como Block (1995a, 1995b, 2001, 2010) e Boyle (1997) apresentaram argumentos contrários ao uso da abordagem fatorial que originou os agrupamentos que decorreram da síntese dos cinco fatores que descreveriam a estrutura da personalidade humana: abertura a novas experiências, extroversão,…”
Background
The Brand Personality Metaphor and Inter-product Stability of a Specific Barometer
Ambroise, L., & Valette‐Florence, P. (2010) · Recherche et Applications en Marketing (English Edition) · doi:10.1177/205157071002500201 · Cited by 27
“It is widely accepted that the structure of an individual’s personality, stimulated by his motivations, dynamically organizes his perceptions, beliefs, attitudes and behaviors in order to achieve certain goals (Ozer and Reise, 1994; Block, 1995).”
Background
Chronological Examination of Insider Threat Sabotage: Preliminary Observations.
Claycomb, W. R., Huth, C. L., Flynn, L., McIntire, D., & Lewellen, T. (2012) · Cited by 27
Likeableness and meaningfulness ratings of 555 (+487) person-descriptive words
Chandler, J. (2016) · Journal of Research in Personality · doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2016.07.005 · Cited by 31
Substance or Style? An Investigation of the NEO-PI-R Validity Scales
Morey, L. C., Quigley, B. D., Sanislow, C. A., Skodol, A. E., McGlashan, T. H., Shea, M. T., Stout, R. L., Zanarini, M. C., & Gunderson, J. G. (2002) · Journal of Personality Assessment · doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa7903_11 · Cited by 27
“Although the Five-factor model has been criticized (Block, 1995; Butcher & Rouse, 1996; Davis & Millon, 1993), the NEO–PI–”
Method
Developing a short form of the IPIP Abridged Big Five-Dimensional Circumplex (AB5C) congruent with the AB5C circumplex locations
Bucher, M. A., & Samuel, D. B. (2020) · Journal of Research in Personality · doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2020.104007 · Cited by 26
Real estate and personality
Ben‐Shahar, D., & Golan, R. (2014) · Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics · doi:10.1016/j.socec.2014.08.008 · Cited by 27
“See Block (1995), Waller and Benorath (1987), and Eysenck (1991).”
Studying spirituality scientifically: reflections, considerations, recommendations
MacDonald, D. A. (2011) · Journal of Management Spirituality & Religion · doi:10.1080/14766086.2011.599145 · Cited by 28
“Block 1995 ), as has been noted by Costa and McCrae ( 1995 ), the benefits of such approaches, which include most notably the provision of a framework for systematic research and the integration of divergent theories, seemed to me to outweigh its liabilities.”
Identifying the Personality Characteristics of Healthy Eaters and Exercisers
Adams, T. B., & Mowen, J. C. (2005) · Health Marketing Quarterly · doi:10.1300/j026v23n01_03 · Cited by 26
“In a comprehensive review, Block (1995a) identified a number of issues, including the definition and operationalization of the measures, the analysis procedures, incorrect assumptions regarding the resulting five dimensions, and the presence of “unrecognized” influences on the variables.”
Background
A Provisional Taxonomy of Subjectively Experienced Positive Emotions
Weidman, A. C., & Tracy, J. L. (2020) · Affective Science · doi:10.1007/s42761-020-00009-7 · Cited by 33
“…have shown a particular affinity for challenging the Big Five structure and proposing potential revisions or modifications, all of which has created a vibrant research environment in the area of personality structure (e.g., Ashton & Lee, 2007; Block, 1995; DeYoung, Quilty, & Peterson, 2007).”
Background
Design, Implementation, and Evaluation of Behavior Change Interventions: A Ten-Task Guide
Abraham, C., & Denford, S. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108677318.019 · Cited by 27
Changing Behavior Using the Reflective-Impulsive Model
Deutsch, R., & Strack, F. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108677318.012 · Cited by 30
Structural models of personality
Raad, B. D. (2012) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511596544.011 · Cited by 26
The relationship between attributional style, gender and the Five-Factor Model of personality
Poropat, A. E. (2002) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/s0191-8869(02)00008-9 · Cited by 31
A “Tower of Babel”? – interrelations and structure of leadership constructs
Rowold, J., Borgmann, L., & Diebig, M. (2015) · Leadership & Organization Development Journal · doi:10.1108/lodj-01-2013-0009 · Cited by 30
Virtual communication, transformational leadership, and implicit leadership
Salter, C., Green, M., Duncan, P. A., Berre, A., & Torti, C. (2010) · Journal of Leadership Studies · doi:10.1002/jls.20164 · Cited by 26
An Application of Belief-Importance Theory with Reference to the Big Five and Trait Emotional Intelligence
Petrides, K. V. (2010) · Social Behavior and Personality An International Journal · doi:10.2224/sbp.2010.38.5.697 · Cited by 28
“What is more, their strictly empirical construction (Block, 1995) probably rules out the discovery of explicit processes underpinning the entire spectra of these dimensions.”
Personality at the hub: Extending the conception of personality psychology
Morf, C. C. (2002) · Journal of Research in Personality · doi:10.1016/s0092-6566(02)00517-2 · Cited by 26
Psychometrics and Psychometricians in the 20th and 21st Centuries: How it was in the 20th Century and How it is Now
Merenda, P. F. (2007) · Perceptual and Motor Skills · doi:10.2466/pms.104.1.3-20 · Cited by 26
“…to automatic application of the "Kaiser Rule" and select varimax for rotation of the reference axes (Kaiser, 1958, 19 61) when such procedures as MAP (Velicer, 19761, PA (Horn, 19651, and Promax (Henderson & White, 1964) are the appropriate ones to use for retention and rotation (see Block, 1995).”
BackgroundMethod
Does personality provide unique explanations for behaviour? Personality as cross-person variability in general principles
Higgins, E. T. (2000) · European Journal of Personality · doi:10.1002/1099-0984(200009/10)14:5 · Cited by 70
Personality and Work Behaviour: Exploring the Linkages
Adler, S. (1996) · Applied Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.1464-0597.1996.tb00765.x · Cited by 26
Big Five Personality Traits and Academic Performance in Russian UniversitiesPreprint
Nye, J. V. C., Орел, Е. А., & Kochergina, E. (2013) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.2265395 · Cited by 26
“Though the Big Five model has been criticized as not being theory-driven and for its inability to explain all of personality (Block, 1995), it is still commonly used in a wide rage of research in psychology and education.”
Method
The psychology of worldviews: Toward a non-reductive science of personality
Nilsson, A. (2013) · Lund University Publications (Lund University) · doi:10.13140/2.1.1913.2803 · Cited by 27
Descriptive, predictive and explanatory personality research: Different goals, different approaches, but a shared need to move beyond the Big Few traitsPreprint
Mõttus, R., Wood, D., Condon, D. M., Back, M. D., Baumert, A., Costantini, G., Epskamp, S., Greiff, S., Johnson, W., Lukaszewski, A. W., et al. (2020) · PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/hvk5p · Cited by 28
Cultural, Contextual, and Measurement Challenges for the Paradigm of Personality Science
Saucier, G., & Thalmayer, A. G. (2015) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203526910.ch36 · Cited by 25
“Although it is debatable whether these lexicon-inspired structures are sufficient as models of personality (e.g., Block, 1995, 2010), and whether the cross-cultural replicability standard they imply is too strict (e.g., Rolland, 2002), there is little debate that they provide a central…”
Background
Birds of a feather: Students’ preferences for lecturers’ personalities as predicted by their own personality and learning approaches
Chamorro‐Premuzic, T., Furnham, A. F., Christopher, A. N., Garwood, J., & Martin, G. N. (2008) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2007.10.032 · Cited by 27
“The fact that, unlike other traits, Neuroticism levels were not significantly correlated in students and lecturers is not surprising, but consistent with Furnham and Chamorro-Premuzic’s (2005) results. Indeed, Neuroticism was the least desired trait in a lecturer and there is no reason to expect less emotionally stabl…”
BackgroundResultInfluential
Personality and suicidal ideation in the elderly: factorial invariance and latent means structures across age
Iliceto, P., Fino, E., Sabatello, U., & Candilera, G. (2014) · Aging & Mental Health · doi:10.1080/13607863.2014.880404 · Cited by 29
“More recently, theorists have focused on the association between personality traits and relevant behavioral and biological characteristics (Block, 1995; Zuckerman, 1992), going beyond the descriptive analysis of personality, toward a causal and psychobiological approach.”
Background
Team dynamics feedback for post-secondary student learning teams: introducing the “Bare CARE” assessment and report
O’Neill, T., Pezer, L., Solis, L., Larson, N., Maynard, N. E., Dolphin, G., Brennan, R. W., & Li, S. (2020) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2020.1727412 · Cited by 25
Influence of childhood trauma and post-traumatic stress symptoms on impulsivity: focusing on differences according to the dimensions of impulsivity
Kim, J. H., & Choi, J. Y. (2020) · European Journal of Psychotraumatology · doi:10.1080/20008198.2020.1796276 · Cited by 26
Unravelling the proximate causes of the aggression-boldness behavioural syndrome in zebrafish
Norton, W., & Bally‐Cuif, L. (2012) · Behaviour · doi:10.1163/1568539x-00003012 · Cited by 25
Five-factor trait instability in borderline relative to other personality disorders.
Hopwood, C. J., & Zanarini, M. C. (2010) · Personality Disorders Theory Research and Treatment · doi:10.1037/a0018230 · Cited by 25
“…BPD individuals are also less stable in terms of FFM traits extends investigations of BPD instability into the domain of personality, and extends investigations of FFM traits in BPD by suggesting that the disorder can be characterized by both trait levels and trait variabilities (see Block, 1995).”
Background
Higher order factors of personality in Jamaican young adults
Hull, D. M., & Beaujean, A. A. (2011) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2011.01.013 · Cited by 25
Explaining Differences in Identity Styles: Possible Roles of Personality and Family Functioning
Dunkel, C. S., Papini, D. R., & Berzonsky, M. D. (2008) · Identity · doi:10.1080/15283480802365338 · Cited by 25
“One widely adopted approach to investigating personality traits is the Big Five model (see McCrae & John, 1992, but compare Block, 1995).”
Method
A comparison between three and five factor models of Pakistani personality data
Aziz, S., & Jackson, C. J. (2001) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/s0191-8869(00)00223-3 · Cited by 25
Gone too far—or not far enough? Comments on the article by Ashton and Lee (2001)
Saucier, G. (2002) · European Journal of Personality · doi:10.1002/per.432 · Cited by 25
The role of Gray's impulsivity in anxiety-mediated differences in resistance to extinction
Avila, C., & Parcet, M. A. (2000) · European Journal of Personality · doi:10.1002/1099-0984(200005/06)14:3 · Cited by 42
Learning Agility: Many Questions, a Few Answers, and a Path Forward
DeRue, D. S., Ashford, S. J., & Myers, C. G. (2012) · Industrial and Organizational Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.1754-9434.2012.01465.x · Cited by 24
“A ‘‘jingle’’ fallacy involves conflating constructs that superficially appear similar but are fundamentally distinct, whereas a ‘‘jangle’’ fallacy involves the presumption that similar constructs with different names are actually different (Block, 1995; Kelley, 1927; Marsh, 1994).”
Background
Three-dimensional structural representation of the sleep-wake adaptability
Putilov, A. A. (2016) · Chronobiology International · doi:10.3109/07420528.2015.1125362 · Cited by 24
“However, the factor-analytic method tends to overestimate dimensionality of the structure of individual variation (e.g. Block, 1995).”
Deep-level diversity in entrepreneurial teams and the mediating role of conflicts on team efficacy and satisfaction
Schoss, S., Urbig, D., Brettel, M., & Mauer, R. (2020) · International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal · doi:10.1007/s11365-020-00654-1 · Cited by 31
“There are, however, forceful calls to expand the range of deep-level diversity to include behavioral styles, values, motives, and beliefs (Mathieu et al. 2008; Bell 2007; Block 1995; Jackson et al. 1995; Mohammed and Angell 2003; Bell 2007).”
Background
Dyadic Behavior Change Interventions
Scholz, U., Berli, C., Lüscher, J., & Knoll, N. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108677318.043 · Cited by 26
Developing Behavior Change Interventions
Hankonen, N. E., & Hardeman, W. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108677318.021 · Cited by 28
Is all nonhomeostatic eating the same? Examining the latent structure of nonhomeostatic eating processes in women and men
Racine, S. E., Hagan, K. E., & Schell, S. E. (2019) · Psychological Assessment · doi:10.1037/pas0000749 · Cited by 23
The Moderating Influence of Personality and Culture on Social Loafing in Typical versus Maximum Performance Situations
Klehe, U., & Anderson, N. (2007) · International Journal of Selection and Assessment · doi:10.1111/j.1468-2389.2007.00385.x · Cited by 39
“Although not without criticism (e.g., Block, 1995; Eysenck, 1992; Hough, 1992), the Big Five model has been a relatively well-accepted taxonomy in the field of personality psychology (Goldberg, 1992; John & Srivastava, 1999; McCrae & Costa, 1999; Wiggins & Trapnell, 1997).”
Kurzversion des Big Five Inventory für Kinder und Jugendliche (BFI-K KJ)
Kupper, K., Krampen, D., Rammstedt, B., & Rohrmann, S. (2019) · Diagnostica · doi:10.1026/0012-1924/a000216 · Cited by 24
Personality and Emotion
Reisenzein, R., Hildebrandt, A., & Weber, H. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108264822.009 · Cited by 26
Personality and learning processes underlying maverickism
Gardiner, E., & Jackson, C. J. (2015) · Journal of Managerial Psychology · doi:10.1108/jmp-07-2012-0230 · Cited by 23
“First, unlike the FFM which is widely criticized as being atheoretical (see Block, 1995), the HMLP is strongly grounded in theory and has overlap with the well-established clinical model of REBT.”
Method
Where is the Personality in Personality Disorder Assessment? A Comparison Across Four Sets of Personality Disorder Scales
Trobst, K. K., Ayearst, L. E., & Salekin, R. T. (2004) · Multivariate Behavioral Research · doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr3902_5 · Cited by 22
“The FFM is, however, not without its critics (for example, see Block, 1995, for a “contrarian” view), in part based on the notion that there is more to personality than traits (Epstein, 1994; McAdams, 1992; Westen, 1996), and particularly with respect to its potential application to maladaptive…”
Background
Inhibitory Control and Drug Abuse Prevention
Bardo, M. T., Fishbein, D. H., & Milich, R. S. (2011) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-1268-8 · Cited by 66
The Role of Social Goals in Academic Success: Recounting the Process of Conducting a Systematic Review
Goagoses, N., & Koglin, U. (2019) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-658-27602-7_9 · Cited by 52
“The déjà-variable (Hagger 2014) and the jangle fallacy (Block 1995) are phenomena in which similar constructs are referred to by different names; this presents a particular challenge for systematic reviews, as entire literatures may be neglected if only a surface approach is taken to identify…”
Background
Moving from Theoretical Principles to Intervention Strategies: Applying the Experimental Medicine Approach
Rothman, A. J., Klein, W. M. P., & Sheeran, P. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108677318.020 · Cited by 26
Métaphore de la personnalité de la marque et stabilité inter-produits d'un baromètre spécifique
Ambroise, L., & Valette‐Florence, P. (2010) · Recherche et Applications en Marketing (French Edition) · doi:10.1177/076737011002500201 · Cited by 23
“Il est admis que la structure de la personnalité d’un individu, stimulée par ses motivations, organise de façon dynamique les perceptions, les croyances, les attitudes et les comportements de l’individu de façon à atteindre certains objectifs (Ozer et Reise, 1994 ; Block, 1995).”
Background
TEMPEST in a Gallimaufry: Applying Multilevel Systems Theory to Person‐in‐Context Research
Peck, S. C. (2007) · Journal of Personality · doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.2007.00470.x · Cited by 25
“Two of the biggest obstacles to distinguishing between things and terms for things have been referred to as the ‘‘jingle and jangle’’ fallacies (Block, 1995; Roeser et al., 2006).”
Influential
Article Commentary: Response to “Research on the Dark Side of Personality Traits in Entrepreneurship: Observations from an Organizational Behavior Perspective”
Miller, D. (2015) · Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice · doi:10.1111/etap.12216 · Cited by 22
“The Big Five fails to reflect manipulativeness, Machiavellianism, egotism, risk taking, and other characteristics that may be quite relevant to entrepreneurial behavior (Block, 1995; McAdams & Pals; Paunonen & Jackson, 2000; Thayer, 1989; van der Linden, te Nijenhuis, & Bakker, 2010).”
Background
Generalizability Crisis Meets Heterogeneity Revolution: Determining Under Which Boundary Conditions Findings Replicate and GeneralizePreprint
Moeller, J., Dietrich, J., Neubauer, A. B., Brose, A., Kühnel, J., Dehne, M., Jaehne, M. F., Schmiedek, F., Bellhäuser, H., Malmberg, L., et al. (2022) · PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/5wsna · Cited by 26
Validity of evaluative factors from Big Five and HEXACO questionnaires
Biderman, M. D., McAbee, S. T., Hendy, N. T., & Chen, Z. J. (2019) · Journal of Research in Personality · doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2019.04.010 · Cited by 22
“For example, Block (1995) noted that “…the empirical research findings indicate that the five factors are frequently and importantly correlated with each other, usually to reflect an overriding evaluative component” (p. 199).”
Background
Self-reported impulsivity does not predict response caution
Hedge, C., Powell, G., Bompas, A., & Sumner, P. (2020) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2020.110257 · Cited by 22
Participating in the sharing economy: The role of individual characteristics
Bäro, A., Toepler, F., Meynhardt, T., & Velamuri, V. K. (2022) · Managerial and Decision Economics · doi:10.1002/mde.3624 · Cited by 25
Personality and paths to successful development: an overview
Pulkkinen, L., & Caspi, A. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511489761.001 · Cited by 22
“Some developmental researchers have noted that this Five-Factor Model of personality does not provide a theory of personality (Block, 1995), which is correct to the extent that most personality taxonomies are focused on describing regularities in behavior © Cambridge University Press…”
Background
A personality model for animating heterogeneous traffic behaviors
Lu, X., Wang, Z., Xu, M., Chen, W., & Deng, Z. (2014) · Computer Animation and Virtual Worlds · doi:10.1002/cav.1575 · Cited by 22
“More importantly, the CANOE model has been criticized for losing the full orthogonality among those five factors [27].”
Method
Peeking into Personality Test Answers: Inter- and Intraindividual Variety in Item Interpretations
Arro, G. (2012) · Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science · doi:10.1007/s12124-012-9216-9 · Cited by 22
“Items used in personality inventories may be understood differently by different respondents (Block 1995; see also Schwarz 2009; and Stam 2010), and there may be more than one interpretional trajectory for the respondents in answering process (Wagoner and Valsiner 2005).”
Method
Occupational Stressors and Resilience in Critical Occupations: The Role of Personality
Meadows, M. P., Shreffler, K. M., & Mullins‐Sweatt, S. N. (2011) · Research in occupational stress and well being · doi:10.1108/s1479-3555(2011)0000009006 · Cited by 22
“The FFM is not without its critics (Block, 1995; Westen, 1995).”
Background
HOW DOES PERSONALITY MATTER? INVESTIGATING THE IMPACT OF BIG-FIVE PERSONALITY TRAITS ON CYBERLOAFING
Krishnan, S., Lim, V. K. G., & Teo, T. S. H. (2010) · National University of Singapore · Cited by 22
Imagery, Visualization, and Mental Simulation Interventions
Hagger, M. S., & Conroy, D. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108677318.033 · Cited by 23
Changing Behavior Using the Common-Sense Model of Self-Regulation
Cameron, L. D., Fleszar‐Pavlović, S. E., & Khachikian, T. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108677318.005 · Cited by 29
Implicit and Explicit Motives
Brunstein, J. C. (2018) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-65094-4_9 · Cited by 22

Authors: Block, J.
Affiliations: University of California, Berkeley (US)
Corresponding author: Block, Jack
Venue: Psychological Bulletin
Publisher: American Psychological Association (APA)
Published: 1995
Volume: 117
Issue: 2
Pages: 187-215
ISSN: 0033-2909 (ISSN-L)
1939-1455
DOI: 10.1037/0033-2909.117.2.187
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

A contrarian view of the five-factor approach to personality description.

Abstract

Overview

Integrity signals

Verification

Claims the paper makes

Claims other papers make about this one

Citations

Cites

Cited by

Related

Metadata

Record

About these checks