Cited by 115Personality Traits and PsychologyPsychological Testing and AssessmentPersonality Disorders and Psychopathology

Replicability and 40-year predictive power of childhood ARC types.

Open access
Chapman, Benjamin P., Goldberg, Lewis R.·2011·Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

Abstract

We examined 3 questions surrounding the undercontrolled, overcontrolled, and resilient-or Asendorpf-Robins-Caspi (ARC)-personality types originally identified by Block (1971). In analyses of the teacher personality assessments of over 2,000 children in 1st through 6th grade in 1959-1967 and follow-up data on general and cardiovascular health outcomes in over 1,100 adults recontacted 40 years later, we found bootstrapped internal replication clustering suggesting that Big Five scores were best characterized by a tripartite cluster structure corresponding to the ARC types. This cluster structure was fuzzy rather than discrete, indicating that ARC constructs are best represented as gradients of similarity to 3 prototype Big Five profiles; ARC types and degrees of ARC prototypicality showed associations with multiple health outcomes 40 years later. ARC constructs were more parsimonious but, depending on the outcome, comparable or slightly worse classifiers than the dimensional Big Five traits. Forty-year incident cases of heart disease could be correctly identified with 67% accuracy by childhood personality information alone and stroke incidence with over 70% accuracy. Findings support the theoretical validity of ARC constructs, their treatment as continua of prototypicality rather than discrete categories, and the need for further understanding the robust predictive power of childhood personality for midlife health.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/a0024289

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • A variation of the theoretically driven approach has derived measures of similarity to theoretically important personality profiles or trait configurations, such as Type D or the 'undercontrolled' personality, using general Big 5 scales, with good success in identifying personality-health links.

    “A variation of this theoretically driven approach has derived measures of similarity to theoretically important personality profiles or trait configurations, such as Type D or the “undercontrolled” personality, using general Big 5 scales, with good success in identifying personality-health links [51, 197].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chapman, B. P., & Goldberg, L. R.
Affiliations
  • University of Rochester Medicine (US)
  • Oregon Research Institute (US)
Venue
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Published
2011
Volume
101
Issue
3
Pages
593-606
ISSN
  • 0022-3514 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1315
OpenAlex
W1998656209
Cited by
115
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 6
FWCI
9.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • US Department of Health and Human Services (R01AG20048)
  • National Institutes of Health (T32MH073452, R21AG023956, K08AG031328)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Psychological Testing and Assessment
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Disorders and Psychopathology
Keywords
child personality, Big Five personality traits, cardiovascular disease, heart disease incidence, stroke incidence, adult health outcomes, midlife health, personality continuity
MeSH terms
Age Factors, Cardiovascular Diseases, Child, Conscience, Extraversion, Psychological, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Hawaii, Health Status, Humans, Internal-External Control, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Middle Aged, Neurotic Disorders, Personality, Personality Inventory, Reproducibility of Results, Principal Component Analysis, Resilience, Psychological

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