The DOI matches its Crossref record; 21 of the 21 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Nomological Net of the HEXACO Model of Personality: A Large-Scale Meta-Analytic Investigation
Open accessAbstract
Based on lexical studies, the HEXACO (honesty-humility, emotionality, extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, and openness to experience) model of personality has been proposed as a model of basic personality structure that summarizes individual differences in six broad trait dimensions. Although research across various fields relies on the HEXACO model increasingly, a comprehensive investigation of the nomological net of the HEXACO dimensions is missing entirely. Thus, it remains unclear whether each HEXACO dimension accounts for individual variation across theoretically relevant outcome criteria. We close this gap through a large-scale meta-analytic investigation, testing whether each HEXACO dimension is uniquely linked to one broad and theoretically relevant outcome domain. Results from 426 individual meta-analyses, 436 independent samples, and 3,893 effect-size estimates corroborate this unique mapping. Specifically, honesty-humility maps onto the outcome domain of exploitation, emotionality onto insecurity, extraversion onto sociality, agreeableness versus anger onto obstruction, conscientiousness onto duty, and openness to experience onto exploration. Overall, the current investigation provides a comprehensive empirical test of the (breadth of) content captured by the HEXACO dimensions and allows for a broad specification of the nomological net of the HEXACO model overall.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Conducting Meta-Analyses in R with the metafor Package
Viechtbauer, W. (2010) · Journal of Statistical Software · doi:10.18637/jss.v036.i03 · Cited by 20,464
Operating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias
Begg, C. B., & Mazumdar, M. (1994) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2533446 · Cited by 16,955
The genetical evolution of social behaviour. I
Hamilton, W. D. (1964) · Journal of Theoretical Biology · doi:10.1016/0022-5193(64)90038-4 · Cited by 15,725
Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2009) · doi:10.1002/9780470743386 · Cited by 14,225
Construct validity in psychological tests.
Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0040957 · Cited by 11,195
The Evolution of Reciprocal Altruism
Trivers, R. L. (1971) · The Quarterly Review of Biology · doi:10.1086/406755 · Cited by 11,010
Evaluating Effect Size in Psychological Research: Sense and Nonsense
Funder, D. C., & Ozer, D. J. (2019) · Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/2515245919847202 · Cited by 3,295 · cited 1×
“Although these thoughts regarding the observed effect sizes imply rather moderate main effects of basic (HEXACO) personality dimensions on outcomes, Funder and Ozer (2019) recently proposed alternative ways on how to meaningfully interpret effect sizes by referring to either benchmarks (e.g.,…”
BackgroundHunter, J., & Schmidt, F. (2004) · doi:10.4135/9781412985031 · Cited by 3,023
A Nonparametric “Trim and Fill” Method of Accounting for Publication Bias in Meta-Analysis
Duval, S., & Tweedie, R. (2000) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.2000.10473905 · Cited by 2,955
Effect size guidelines for individual differences researchers
Gignac, G. E., & Szodorai, E. T. (2016) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2016.06.069 · Cited by 2,860
Cited by
Personality and prosocial behavior: A theoretical framework and meta-analysis.
Thielmann, I., Spadaro, G., & Balliet, D. (2020) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/bul0000217 · Cited by 689
Self-citationAgreeableness and Its Consequences: A Quantitative Review of Meta-Analytic Findings
Wilmot, M. P., & Ones, D. S. (2022) · Personality and Social Psychology Review · doi:10.1177/10888683211073007 · Cited by 130
HEXACO, the Dark Triad, and Chat GPT: Who is willing to commit academic cheating?
Greitemeyer, T., & Kastenmüller, A. (2023) · Heliyon · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e19909 · Cited by 39
“According to a recent meta-analysis [6], Honesty-Humility is strongly and negatively associated with various forms of unethical behavior, including lying, cheating, and stealing.”
BackgroundMethodResultInfluentialGreitemeyer, T., & Kastenmüller, A. (2024) · Technology, Mind, and Behavior · doi:10.1037/tmb0000133 · Cited by 16
Dvilansky, A. S., Zadok, H., Shoshani, A., Samra, N. N., Verbeke, W., Vrticka, P., & Ein-Dor, T. (2025) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-025-89467-2 · Cited by 7
Metadata
- Authors
- Zettler, I., Thielmann, I., Hilbig, B. E., & Moshagen, M.
- Venue
- Perspectives on Psychological Science
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2020-04-23
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 723-760
- ISSN
- 1745-6916 (ISSN-L)
- 1745-6924
- OpenAlex
- W2994981385
- Cited by
- 257
- References
- 21
- FWCI
- 13.10
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Nomological Net of the HEXACO Model of Personality: A Large-Scale Meta-Analytic Investigation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/1745691619895036
- The paper
- Zettler, I., Thielmann, I., Hilbig, B. E., & Moshagen, M. (2020). The Nomological Net of the HEXACO Model of Personality: A Large-Scale Meta-Analytic Investigation. Perspectives on Psychological Science. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691619895036
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.