Motivational Basis of Personality Traits: A Meta‐Analysis of Value‐Personality Correlations
Abstract
We investigated the relationships between personality traits and basic value dimensions. Furthermore, we developed novel country‐level hypotheses predicting that contextual threat moderates value‐personality trait relationships. We conducted a three‐level v‐known meta‐analysis of correlations between Big Five traits and S chwartz's (1992) 10 values involving 9,935 participants from 14 countries. Variations in contextual threat (measured as resource threat, ecological threat, and restrictive social institutions) were used as country‐level moderator variables. We found systematic relationships between Big Five traits and human values that varied across contexts. Overall, correlations between Openness traits and the Conservation value dimension and Agreeableness traits and the Transcendence value dimension were strongest across all samples. Correlations between values and all personality traits (except Extraversion) were weaker in contexts with greater financial, ecological, and social threats. In contrast, stronger personality‐value links are typically found in contexts with low financial and ecological threats and more democratic institutions and permissive social context. These effects explained on average more than 10% of the variability in value‐personality correlations. Our results provide strong support for systematic linkages between personality and broad value dimensions, but they also point out that these relations are shaped by contextual factors.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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?
The values and moral foundations present in LLMs could be made to better align with desired human values by tuning for corresponding personality traits, as personality is meta-analytically linked to human values.
“The values and moral foundations present in LLMs could be made to better align with desired human values by tuning for corresponding personality traits, as personality is meta-analytically linked to human values57.”
From A psychometric framework for evaluating and shaping personality traits in large language models (2025) · cites this paper as [57]
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 87 · Cited by 196
- Authors
- Fischer, R., & Boer, D.
- Affiliations
- Victoria University of Wellington (NZ)
- Goethe University Frankfurt (DE)
- Corresponding author
- Fischer, Ronald
- Venue
- Journal of Personality
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2014-10-06
- Volume
- 83
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 491-510
- ISSN
- 0022-3506 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-6494
- OpenAlex
- W2145368128
- Cited by
- 196
- References
- 87
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 56 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 1
- FWCI
- 1.36
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Personality (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Royal Society of New Zealand
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Cultural Differences and Values
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
- Keywords
- personality traits, Big Five personality traits, Schwartz value dimensions, human values, ecological threats, democracy, openness to experience, agreeableness, conservation value, cross-cultural comparison
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Motivation, Personality, Social Values, Young Adult
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