Cited by 196Cultural Differences and ValuesPersonality Traits and PsychologySocial and Intergroup Psychology

Motivational Basis of Personality Traits: A Meta‐Analysis of Value‐Personality Correlations

Fischer, Ronald, Boer, Diana·2015·Journal of Personality

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

Crossref · 10.1111/jopy.12125

Cites

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 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.”

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