CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 198Health disparities and outcomesPersonality Traits and PsychologyPsychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction

Personality, Socioeconomic Status, and All-Cause Mortality in the United States

Open access
Chapman, Benjamin P., Fiscella, Kevin, Kawachi, Ichiro, Duberstein, Paul R.·2010·American Journal of Epidemiology
DOI 10.1093/aje/kwp323PMC PMC2800299
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The authors assessed the extent to which socioeconomic status (SES) and the personality factors termed the "big 5" (neuroticism, extraversion, openness to experience, agreeableness, conscientiousness) represented confounded or independent risks for all-cause mortality over a 10-year follow-up in the Midlife Development in the United States (MIDUS) cohort between 1995 and 2004. Adjusted for demographics, the 25th versus 75th percentile of SES was associated with an odds ratio of 1.43 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.11, 1.83). Demographic-adjusted odds ratios for the 75th versus 25th percentile of neuroticism were 1.38 (95% CI: 1.10, 1.73) and 0.63 (95% CI: 0.47, 0.84) for conscientiousness, the latter evaluated at high levels of agreeableness. Modest associations were observed between SES and the big 5. Adjusting each for the other revealed that personality explained roughly 20% of the SES gradient in mortality, while SES explained 8% of personality risk. Portions of SES and personality risk were explained by health behaviors, although some residual risk remained unexplained. Personality appears to explain some between-SES strata differences in mortality risk, as well as some individual risk heterogeneity within SES strata. Findings suggest that both sociostructural inequalities and individual disposition hold public health implications. Future research and prevention aimed at ameliorating SES health disparities may benefit from considering the risk clustering of social disadvantage and dispositional factors.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

In the MIDUS cohort, lower socioeconomic status (SES) and higher neuroticism predicted higher 10-year all-cause mortality, while conscientiousness was protective at high agreeableness. Personality explained about 20% of the SES mortality gradient, and SES explained about 8% of personality risk, suggesting modest correlated risk rather than fully independent or fully confounded effects.

Key findings

  • Adjusted for demographics, the 25th versus 75th percentile of SES was associated with an odds ratio for mortality of 1.43 (95% CI: 1.11, 1.83).
  • The 75th versus 25th percentile of neuroticism was associated with an odds ratio of 1.38 (95% CI: 1.10, 1.73); conscientiousness at high agreeableness had an odds ratio of 0.63 (95% CI: 0.47, 0.84), while at low agreeableness it was 1.02 (95% CI: 0.78, 1.35). Agreeableness at low conscientiousness had an odds ratio of 1.51 (95% CI: 1.09, 2.09).
  • Personality explained roughly 20% of the SES gradient in mortality; SES explained about 8% of the risk associated with neuroticism and conscientiousness (at high agreeableness) and 10% of the risk associated with agreeableness (at low conscientiousness).
  • Health behaviors explained roughly 59% of SES risk, 26% of neuroticism risk, 9% of conscientiousness risk, and 2% of agreeableness risk; after correcting for random measurement error, these became 92%, 43%, 21%, and 6%, respectively. Population-attributable fractions were 15.9% for low SES, 11% for high neuroticism, and 8.6% for low agreeableness plus conscientiousness; mutually adjusted fractions were 13.3%, 9.1%, and 8.6%.

Methods

  • Prospective cohort study using the Midlife Development in the United States (MIDUS) national cohort, baseline in 1995 and 10-year all-cause mortality follow-up through 2004–2005 via the National Death Index. Participants were noninstitutionalized, English-speaking adults aged 25–74 years recruited by random digit dialing; the analysis sample included 2,998 individuals with complete data, among whom 179 deaths occurred.
  • SES was measured with a factor score from annual household income, total assets, education, and Duncan’s socioeconomic index. The “big 5” personality factors were measured with the Midlife Development Inventory. Health behaviors included current/former smoking, lifetime heavy drinking, obesity, and physical inactivity; demographics included age, female sex, and nonwhite race.
  • Analyses used ordinal logit models for SES–personality associations and sequential logistic regressions predicting all-cause mortality (models 1–5), with change-in-estimate calculations to quantify confounding, adjusted population attributable fractions, and sensitivity analyses including multiple imputation, fractional polynomials, interaction screening, simulation extrapolation, and Monte Carlo sensitivity analysis.

Limitations

  • The paper states that it examined only all-cause mortality at 10 years and does not speculate about cause-specific mortality; findings are based on a US sample and the big 5 framework, limiting generalization; the mortality rate was relatively low, and future analyses with more accumulated deaths and date-of-death data for time-to-event modeling are needed.
  • The paper states that personality and SES were measured contemporaneously, so the causal direction of their association cannot be distinguished; attenuation of either risk by the other is interpreted conservatively as confounding rather than mediation.
  • The paper notes that cross-sectional, self-reported health behaviors may not fully capture health behaviors or changes over time, and that Monte Carlo sensitivity analyses indicate risk estimates remain uncertain under unobserved confounding, selection bias, and systematic measurement error. The analysis sample also had slightly higher average education than the larger sample, though multiple imputation was used to assess missing-data bias.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/aje/kwp323

Cites

94 of 94 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

0 of 33 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingown data

    Population-attributable fraction for current smoking, mutually adjusted for health behaviors and demographics, was 20.5%.

    “By comparison, population-attributable fractions for health behaviors mutually adjusted for one another and for demographics were 13.3% for physical inactivity, 4.7% for obesity, and 20.5% for current smoking.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Adjusted for demographics, the 25th versus 75th percentile of SES was associated with lower quintiles of conscientiousness (OR = 0.57, 95% CI: 0.51, 0.62).

    “Adjusted for demographics, the 25th versus 75th percentile of SES was associated with higher quintiles of neuroticism (odds ratio (OR) ¼ 1.31, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.19, 1.45) and agreeableness (OR ¼ 1.24, 95% CI: 1.13, 1.36) and with lower quintiles of extraversion (OR ¼ 0.91, 95% CI: 0.83, 1.00), openness (OR ¼ 0.80, 95% CI: 0.72, 0.88), and conscientiousness (OR ¼ 0.57, 95% CI: 0.51, 0”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingown data

    After mutually adjusting SES and personality, the population-attributable fraction for low SES was 13.3%.

    “Mutually adjusting SES and personality for one another revealed population-attributable fractions of 13.3% for low SES, 9.1% for high neuroticism, and 8.6% for low agreeableness and conscientiousness.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    When random measurement error in health behaviors was adjusted, the percentage of neuroticism mortality risk explained became 43%.

    “When random measurement error in health behaviors was adjusted, the percentage of risk explained became 92%, 43%, 21%, and 6%, respectively.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingown data

    In Monte Carlo sensitivity analyses, log(relative risk) estimates for neuroticism differed from those observed by a mean of 0.59 (SD 0.32).

    “MCSA indicated that, across all possible combinations of unmeasured confounding, selection bias, and systematic measurement error, with bias parameter drawn from distributions approximating other associations within the data (Web Tables 6 and 7), log(relative risk) estimates differed from those observed by a mean of 0.59 (standard deviation (SD), 0.32) for neuroticism, 0.62 (SD, 0.37) for”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims. 12
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 27
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 1

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    In multiple imputation analyses, the SES effect was about 10%-14% larger, but personality still explained 20% of this risk.

    “One exception was that the SES effect was about 10%-14% larger but, as before, personality explained 20% of this risk (Web Table 5).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Portions of SES and personality mortality risk were explained by health behaviors, although some residual risk remained unexplained.

    “Portions of SES and personality risk were explained by health behaviors, although some residual risk remained unexplained.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingnone given

    The mortality rate in the MIDUS Study is consistent with lower mortality rates often observed in mixed-age samples.

    “The mortality rate in the Midlife Development in the United States (MIDUS) Study, while consistent with lower mortality rates often observed in mixed-age samples, also speaks to the need for future analyses when deaths have accumulated in this cohort.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data

    In Model 3, the conscientiousness × agreeableness interaction is associated with decreased odds of all-cause mortality (OR = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.44, 0.85).

    “Conscientiousness | | | | | 0.61** | 0.44, 0.85 | 0.60** | 0.43, 0.83 | 0.58*** | 0.42, 0.81”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Both sociostructural inequalities and individual disposition hold public health implications.

    “Findings suggest that both sociostructural inequalities and individual disposition hold public health implications.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    Personality appears to explain some between-SES strata differences in mortality risk, as well as some individual risk heterogeneity within SES strata.

    “Personality appears to explain some between-SES strata differences in mortality risk, as well as some individual risk heterogeneity within SES strata.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    Using the big 5 personality framework in the United States, personality accounted for about 20% of the risk associated with lower SES, a number comparable across men and women.

    “In the United States, using the more general big 5 personality framework, we found that personality accounted for about 20% of the risk associated with lower SES, a number comparable across men and women.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    Sensitivity analyses revealed regressor linearity in the logit, no other reliable additive or multiplicative interactions, and a very similar pattern of findings using multiple imputation.

    “Sensitivity analyses revealed regressor linearity in the logit, no other reliable additive or multiplicative interactions, and a very similar pattern of findings using multiple imputation.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    Bias arising from the analysis sample's higher education was assessed with multiple imputation.

    “We assessed any bias arising from this with multiple imputation (see below).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductcitation

    Interactions between traits of the big 5 with one another and with gender, age, and SES on both multiplicative and additive scales were screened.

    “Also screened were interactions between traits of the big 5 with one another and with gender, age, and SES on both multiplicative and additive scales (36).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [36] Knol, 2007, Estimating interaction on an additive scale between continuous determinants in a logistic regression model, Int J Epidemiol source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    Cronbach's alpha estimates of internal consistency for the big 5 scales were: neuroticism 0.74; extraversion 0.78; openness 0.77; agreeableness 0.80; and conscientiousness 0.58.

    “Cronbach's alpha estimates of internal consistency for each scale were as follows: neuroticism, 0.74; extraversion, 0.78; openness, 0.77; agreeableness, 0.80; and conscientiousness, 0.58.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Neuroticism declines naturally over the life course.

    “Neuroticism declines, and agreeableness and conscientiousness increase naturally over the life course (81)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [81] Roberts, 2006, Patterns of mean-level change in personality traits across the life course: a meta-analysis of longitudinal studies, Psychol Bull. source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Some studies report minimal correlation between SES and personality factors linked to all-cause mortality.

    “Some studies report minimal correlation between SES and personality factors linked to all-cause mortality (20,21).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [20] Goldberg, 1998, Demographic variables and personality: the effects of gender, age, education, and ethnic/racial status on self-descriptions of personality attributes, Pers Individ Dif source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [21] Costa, 1992

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Some persons offset the risk of social disadvantage through adaptive personality tendencies, some negate the advantage of high SES through risky dispositional tendencies, and others are duly advantaged or disadvantaged with respect to SES and personality.

    “In other words, some persons are able to offset the risk of social disadvantage through adaptive personality tendencies, some persons negate the advantage of high SES through risky dispositional tendencies, and others are duly advantaged or disadvantaged with respect to SES and personality.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    Items loaded as expected on the big 5 factors.

    “Items loaded as expected on the big 5 factors (Web Table 2).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductcitation

    Linearity in the logit was assessed with fractional polynomials.

    “Linearity in the logit was assessed with fractional polynomials (35).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [35] Royston, 1999, The use of fractional polynomials to model continuous risk variables in epidemiology, Int J Epidemiol source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductcitation

    Missing data bias was examined using multiple imputation, and whether correcting random measurement error in health behaviors increased their capacity to explain observed SES/personality risks was examined using simulation extrapolation.

    “We examined missing data bias using multiple imputation (37) and whether correcting random measurement error in health behaviors increased their capacity to explain observed SES/ personality risks, using simulation extrapolation (38).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [37] Amler, 2007, A comparison of imputation techniques for handling missing predictor values in a risk model with a binary outcome, Stat Methods Med Res. source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [38] Hardin, 2003, The simulation extrapolation method for fitting generalized linear models with additive measurement error, Stata J source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    All-cause mortality has consistently been associated with both socioeconomic status and personality traits.

    “All-cause mortality has consistently been associated with both socioeconomic status (SES) (1-4) and personality traits (5).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 5 sources checked
    • cites [1] Pappas, 1993, The increasing disparity in mortality between socioeconomic groups in the United States, 1960 and 1986, N Engl J Med source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [2] Lantz, 1998, Socioeconomic factors, health behaviors, and mortality: results from a nationally representative prospective study of US adults, JAMA source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [3] Marmot, 1996, Do socioeconomic differences in mortality persist after retirement? 25 year follow up of civil servants from the first Whitehall study, BMJ source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [4] Marmot, 1997, Social inequalities in health: next questions and converging evidence, Soc Sci Med source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [5] Roberts, 2007, The power of personality: a comparative analysis of the predictive validity of personality traits, SES, and IQ, Perspect Psychol Sci. source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    A cultural/behavioral mechanism model suggests that SES shapes individual personality tendencies, which in turn affect health (a mediating relation).

    “A cultural/behavioral mechanism model suggests that SES shapes individual personality tendencies, which in turn affect health (8) (a mediating relation).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [8] Black, 1988

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    Sensitivity analyses examined the change in estimate in SES for all 32 combinations of adjustment for the big 5 factors.

    “Sensitivity analyses examined the change in estimate in SES for all 32 combinations of adjustment for the big 5 factors.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Some findings support the notion of SES-personality correlation, suggesting that SES influences childhood personality development, personality influences school achievement, and educational and occupational experiences shape personality.

    “Some findings support the notion of SES-personality correlation, suggesting that SES influences childhood personality development (11,12), personality influences school achievement (13,14), and educational (15) and occupational (16,17) experiences shape personality and that adult economic attainment may be linked to personality (18,19).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 5 sources checked
    • cites [11] Conger, 2007, An interactionist perspective on the socioeconomic context of human development, Annu Rev Psychol source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [12] Hart, 2008, The association of neighborhood poverty with personality change in childhood, J Pers Soc Psychol source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [13] John, 1994, The “little five”: exploring the nomological network of the five-factor model of personality in adolescent boys, Child Dev. source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [14] Hampson, 2007, Mechanisms by which childhood personality traits influence adult health status: educational attainment and healthy behaviors, Health Psychol source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [15] Miller, 1986, Educational self-direction and personality, Am Sociol Rev. source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning

    The quest for interpersonal harmony in the absence of self-discipline may signal a yielding to social pressures deleterious to health.

    “The quest for interpersonal harmony in the absence of self-discipline may signal a yielding to social pressures deleterious to health.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    The notion of indirect selection suggests that certain personality dispositions lead to both downward social mobility and poor health (a confounding relation).

    “For instance, the notion of indirect selection (8)(9)(10) suggests that certain personality dispositions lead to both downward social mobility and poor health (a confounding relation).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites (8)(9)(10)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductcitation

    Monte Carlo sensitivity analyses were used to quantify the uncertainty in observed risk estimates due to the simultaneous operation of unmeasured confounders, selection bias differential with respect to both personality/SES and mortality, and systematic measurement error in personality and SES.

    “Finally, we used Monte Carlo sensitivity analyses (MCSA) (39,40) to quantify the uncertainty in observed risk estimates due to the simultaneous operation of unmeasured confounders, selection bias differential with respect to both personality/SES and mortality, and systematic measurement error in personality and SES.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [39] Rothman, 2008

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [40] Greenland, 2005, Multiple-bias modelling for analysis of observational data, J R Stat Soc Ser A source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    The analysis sample did not differ from the larger sample in age or gender but had a slightly higher average level of education (P < 0.001).

    “Multivariate logit models indicated that the analysis sample did not differ from the larger sample in terms of age or gender but had a slightly higher average level of education (i.e., 3-4 years of college with no degree vs. 1-2 years of college) (P < 0.001).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In estimating all-cause mortality risk, attenuation of either personality or SES risk by the other is interpreted conservatively as confounding, rather than invoking the strong temporal assumptions inherent in mediation.

    “In estimating all-cause mortality risk, we interpret attenuation of either personality or SES risk by the other conservatively as confounding, rather than invoking the strong temporal assumptions inherent in mediation.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Conscientiousness increases naturally over the life course.

    “Neuroticism declines, and agreeableness and conscientiousness increase naturally over the life course (81)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [81] Roberts, 2006, Patterns of mean-level change in personality traits across the life course: a meta-analysis of longitudinal studies, Psychol Bull. source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    Mortality rates were below the 10% threshold at which odds ratios approximate relative risks.

    “Although mortality rates were below the threshold (10%) at which odds ratios approximate relative risks, we retain the term ''odds ratio'' for precision.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductown data

    The study examined only all-cause mortality at 10 years.

    “We examined only all-cause mortality at 10 years and refrain from speculation about the interface of SES and personality risks for cause-specific mortality.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Personality variation will likely persist for evolutionary reasons.

    “Yet, it is important to note that personality variation will likely persist for evolutionary reasons (88), even if central tendencies of trait distributions shift.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [88] Nettle, 2006, The evolution of personality variation in humans and other animals, Am Psychol source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationown data

    The findings are based on the big 5 personality framework.

    “Our findings are based on a US sample and the big 5 personality framework, representing both significant extensions of prior work and the limiting frame for generalization.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationown data

    Risk estimates might vary under unknown combinations of unobserved biases.

    “Finally, our MCSA indicate that risk estimates are precisely that-estimates based on available information, which might vary under unknown combinations of unobserved biases.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductown data

    The study involved analysis of missing data patterns and bias.

    “Study strengths involved the first examination of which we are aware of the contribution of personality to SES gradients in US all-cause mortality, careful treatment of random and systematic measurement error, analysis of missing data patterns and bias, and quantification of a range of other unobserved biases.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Social programs may directly and/or indirectly shape population disposition over the long term.

    “Our findings raise the possibility that such social programs may directly and/or indirectly shape population disposition as well over the long term.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Numerous social programs already endeavor to shape sociocultural factors.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationown data

    The findings are based on a US sample.

    “Our findings are based on a US sample and the big 5 personality framework, representing both significant extensions of prior work and the limiting frame for generalization.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductnone given

    The study involved quantification of a range of other unobserved biases.

    “Study strengths involved the first examination of which we are aware of the contribution of personality to SES gradients in US all-cause mortality, careful treatment of random and systematic measurement error, analysis of missing data patterns and bias, and quantification of a range of other unobserved biases.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    Personality, SES, and their interrelations have public health, clinical, and social policy implications.

    “Personality, SES, and their interrelations have public health, clinical, and social policy implications.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    We have no evidence supporting or dismissing the magnitude, direction, or operation of unobserved bias factors.

    “We have no evidence supporting or dismissing the magnitude, direction, or even the operation of such factors, but we believe that the MCSA provide a useful reminder of the uncertainty involved in statistical estimation.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductnone given

    The study involved careful treatment of random and systematic measurement error.

    “Study strengths involved the first examination of which we are aware of the contribution of personality to SES gradients in US all-cause mortality, careful treatment of random and systematic measurement error, analysis of missing data patterns and bias, and quantification of a range of other unobserved biases.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
39 of 39

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The distributions of bias parameters used in the Monte Carlo sensitivity analyses approximate other associations within the data.

    “with bias parameter drawn from distributions approximating other associations within the data (Web Tables 6 and 7)”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Numerous social programs already endeavor to shape sociocultural factors.

    “Numerous social programs already endeavor to shape sociocultural factors.”
2 of 2

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?

Self-check

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

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Adjusted attributable fraction is reported as both 8.6% and 8.9%

    Major

    The text gives two different adjusted population-attributable fractions for low agreeableness and conscientiousness.

  • Heavy-drinking counts do not add to the reported total

    Minor

    The 506 survivors and 30 deceased participants with a heavy-drinking history sum to 536, not the reported total of 467.

    Reported 467 · recomputed 536

  • Survivor heavy-drinking percentage is inconsistent with its count

    Minor

    The reported 506 survivors are 17.95% of the 2,819 survivors, which rounds to 18%, not 17%.

    Reported 17 · recomputed 17.949628

3 of 3

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

6 of the 100 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. Blane, 1998, Making sense of socio-economic health inequalities, 79
  2. Costa, 1992, Revised NEO Personality Inventory and NEO Five Factor Inventory: Professional Manual
  3. Brim, 2004, The MIDUS national survey: an overview, 1
  4. Lachman, 1997, The Midlife Development Inventory (MIDI) Personality Scales: Scale Construction and Scoring
  5. Rothman, 2008, Modern Epidemiology
  6. Chapman, Childhood social class and adult obesity: additive effects of adult personality and socioeconomic position?, Health Psychol
  7. Costa, 2003, Multivariate assessment: NEO-PI R profiles of Madeline G, 262
  8. Franks, Personality trait moderators of an intervention to enhance chronic disease management self-efficacy, Br J Health Psychol

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Chapman, B. P., Fiscella, K., Kawachi, I., & Duberstein, P. R.
Affiliations
University of Rochester Medicine (US)
Corresponding author
Chapman, Benjamin P.
ORCID
Venue
American Journal of Epidemiology
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2009-12-04
Volume
171
Issue
1
Pages
83-92
ISSN
  • 0002-9262 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-6256
DOI
10.1093/aje/kwp323
PMC
PMC2800299
OpenAlex
W2166796633
Semantic Scholar
416bbd7cf6ae8f476d37b9765024ccc8a1c84f25
Cited by
198
References
100
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 24 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 22 · 2012: 14
FWCI
10.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Journal of Epidemiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Digital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (DASH) (Harvard University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
  • John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation
  • University of Rochester
  • National Institute on Aging (K08AG031328, L30 AG031021)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (T32MH073452)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Psychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
Keywords
socioeconomic status, personality, Big Five personality traits, all-cause mortality, neuroticism, conscientiousness, agreeableness, openness to experience, extraversion, health disparities, health behavior, risk heterogeneity, social deprivation
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Concept Formation, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Mortality, Personality, Personality Tests, Poverty, Psychometrics, Social Class, United States, Models, Statistical, Cohort Studies, Multivariate Analysis, Confidence Intervals, Odds Ratio, Health Status Disparities

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.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-10.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-10.

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