Cited by 215Personality Traits and PsychologyJob Satisfaction and Organizational BehaviorGrit, Self-Efficacy, and Motivation

A century of research on conscientiousness at work

Open access
Wilmot, Michael P., Ones, Deniz S.·2019·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

Significance: Conscientiousness (C) is the most potent noncognitive predictor of occupational performance. However, questions remain about how C relates to a plethora of occupational variables, what its defining characteristics and functions are in occupational settings, and whether its performance relation differs across occupations. To answer these questions, we quantitatively review 92 meta-analyses reporting relations to 175 occupational variables. Across variables, results reveal a substantial mean effect of ρ ¯ M = 20 . We then use results to synthesize 10 themes that characterize C in occupational settings. Finally, we discover that performance effects of C are weaker in high-complexity versus low- to moderate-complexity occupations. Thus, for optimal occupational performance, we encourage decision makers to match C’s goal-directed motivation and behavioral restraint to more predictable environments.

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 · 10.1073/pnas.1908430116

Cites

77 of 77 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

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

1 of the 78 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wilmot, M. P., & Ones, D. S.
Affiliations
  • University of Toronto (CA)
  • Department of Psychology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455
Corresponding author
Wilmot, Michael P.
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2019-10-30
Volume
116
Issue
46
Pages
23004-23010
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W2982332163
Cited by
215
References
78
Citations by year
2026: 39 · 2025: 43 · 2024: 34 · 2023: 38 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 1
FWCI
2.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Job Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Grit, Self-Efficacy, and Motivation
Keywords
conscientiousness, employee behavior, occupational complexity, motivation, perseverance, self-regulation, counterproductive behavior, interpersonal responsibility, employee performance
MeSH terms
Work Performance, Conscience, Humans, Motivation, Occupations

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