Cited by 72Personality Traits and PsychologyAging and Gerontology ResearchPsychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction

Openness to Experience and Mortality in Men: Analysis of Trait and Facets

Open access
Turiano, Nicholas A., Spiro, Avron, Mroczek, Daniel K.·2012·Journal of Aging and Health

Abstract

Objectives: We examined whether specific facets are more robust predictors of mortality risk than overall trait openness in a sample of older men. Methods: The current investigation used data from 1,349 men from the Veterans Affairs Normative Aging Study. From 1990-1991 to 2008, 547 (41%) had died. We used exploratory factor analysis to extract facets of openness, followed by proportional hazards modeling to examine 18-year mortality risk. Results: Two facets emerged from the openness adjectives: intellect and creativity. In the fully adjusted model, only creativity predicted mortality risk. A 1- SD increase in creativity was associated with a 12% decrease in mortality risk. Discussion: The study demonstrated that consideration of facets allows for a more precise understanding of the personality–health association. Higher levels of creativity predict longer survival in a sample of older men which provides preliminary support of the protective role creativity has on health even at advanced ages.

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 · 10.1177/0898264311431303

Cites

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?

Self-check

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

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

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 45 · Cited by 72

Authors
Turiano, N. A., Spiro, A., & Mroczek, D. K.
Affiliations
  • Purdue University West Lafayette (US)
  • Boston University (US)
Venue
Journal of Aging and Health
Published
2012-01-04
Volume
24
Issue
4
Pages
654-672
ISSN
  • 0898-2643 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-6887
OpenAlex
W2099059613
Cited by
72
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 1
FWCI
7.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Aging and Health (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Aging (R01 AG 18436, R01AG018436, T32AG025671)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Aging and Gerontology Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Psychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
Keywords
openness to experience, personality traits, mortality risk, creativity, intellect, personality facets, older men, personality and health, survival
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Creativity, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Mortality, Personality, Proportional Hazards Models, Risk Assessment

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