Personality traits and subjective well-being: emotional stability, not extraversion, is probably the important predictor
Introduction
More than 2000 years ago, Aristotle claimed that “It is contemplation alone that yields happiness” (cited in McGill, 1967, p. 18). Despite the popularity of paraphrasing Aristotle in current happiness research, his postulate about contemplation has had no impact on the literature. Contemplation is almost never mentioned as a correlate of happiness or subjective well-being (SWB). Reviews since the days of Wilson (1967) point to such factors as self-esteem, optimism and, not least, sociability and extraversion as the primary sources, or at least correlates, of SWB. Moreover, by many authors extraversion is held to be the cardinal trait of happiness and well-being (Argyle & Lu, 1990, Argyle & Martin, 1991, Baumeister 1991, Costa & McCrae, 1980, Diener & Larsen, 1993, Hotard et al., 1989, Larsen & Ketalaar, 1989, Lu & Shih, 1997, Lu et al., 1997, Magnus et al., 1993, Myers & Diener, 1995, Pavot et al., 1990, Rusting & larsen, 1997). However, in a recent meta-analysis DeNeve and Cooper (1998) found that when personality traits were grouped according to the Five Factor Model, emotional stability (i.e. the positive pole of neuroticism) was the strongest predictor of both life satisfaction and happiness, although extraversion contributed somewhat in explaining the variance in positive affect. Similarly, studies in which both extraversion and emotional stability are included as independent variables reveal that the effect on satisfaction from emotional stability normally outweighs the effect from extraversion (David et al., 1997, DeNeve & Cooper, 1998, Hotard et al., 1989, Pavot et al., 1997, Ryan & Frederick, 1997). In other words, unless emotional stability is controlled for, there is a need for care when researchers interpret the relationship between well-being and extraversion.
The purpose of this paper is to question the status that extraversion has attained as the cardinal subjective well-being trait, and to ask whether emotional stability may not actually be a more salient personality trait in predicting SWB. SWB is a broad category of phenomena including people's emotional responses, domain satisfaction and global judgment of life satisfaction (Diener, Suh, Lucas & Smith, 1999). Quite often, SWB is presented as a three-dimensional phenomenon, comprising perceived life satisfaction, presence of positive affect and absence of negative affect (Andrews & Withney, 1976, Argyle, 1996, Diener, 1984, Diener, 1994), and all three aspects will be employed in the current article.
Personality is regarded as one of the strongest predictors of subjective well-being (for reviews, see Argyle & Martin, 1991, DeNeve & Cooper, 1998, Diener, 1996, Diener & Lucas, 1999a). Among the personality traits, extraversion is the one that has received the most theoretical and empirical attention. Already a generation ago, Warner Wilson claimed that the happy person is extraverted (Wilson, 1967). Since Wilson's seminal review, a huge body of literature has reported significant associations between extraversion and well-being (Argyle & Lu, 1990, Argyle & Martin, 1991, Baumeister 1991, Diener & Lucas, 1999a, Emmons & Diener, 1985, Fujita, 1993, Larsen & Ketalaar, 1989, Larsen & Ketalaar, 1991, Lu et al., 1997, Pavot et al., 1997, Rusting & larsen, 1997). However, a closer examination of these studies reveals that at least two issues remain ambiguous in the treatment of extraversion as the most dominant predictor of SWB.
First, the effect size of prediction from extraversion to SWB is normally quite small compared with the corresponding effect size from emotional stability. For instance, in a landmark article published in 1980, Costa and McCrae proposed a model relating positive and negative affect to the personality traits of extraversion and neuroticism respectively (Costa & McCrae, 1980). Within the framework of 1 year (four measures, 3 months apart) and likewise after 10 years, neuroticism correlated highly with negative affect, whereas extraversion correlated more moderately with positive affect. In both studies, the correlation coefficients were about 0.40 between neuroticism and negative affect and about 0.20 between extraversion and positive affect. Despite the fact that extraversion accounts for only about 4% of positive affect in a 10-year time span, and despite the fact that neuroticism predicts both positive and negative affect, the Costa and McCrae study is no doubt the single most widely cited support for the hypothesis that extraversion predicts positive affect.
Suh, Diener and Fujita (1996), however, presented data showing that neuroticism, like extraversion, predicts both negative and positive affect. Contrary to common belief, correlations between extraversion and negative affect in this study were −0.40 and −0.39 (for two separate measures collected 2 years apart) and between neuroticism and positive affect −0.40 and −0.21. The correlation between extraversion and positive affect was 0.41 (0.33) and between neuroticism and negative affect it was 0.69 (0.47) (Time-2 figures in parentheses). Furthermore, using the Affectometer (Kammann & Flett, 1983), Kammann and his colleagues did not find any relationship between extraversion and either positive or negative affect (Kammann, Farry & Herbison, 1984). They did, however, detect a correlation between neuroticism and both positive and negative affect. In a study among Norwegian university students, no relationship was found between extraversion and either SWB or positive affect (Wallentin, 1996). No measure of neuroticism was available in this investigation. In an Australian study, the relationship between extraversion and positive affect was 0.15, while the correlation between neuroticism and negative affect was 0.32 (Headey & Wearing, 1989). Again, neuroticism explains more than 5 times as much variance in the affect measures as extraversion does. Using multiple regression, Brebner, Donaldson, Kirby and Ward (1995) found that for several measures of well-being and happiness, neuroticism (as measured from the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire) explained about three times as much variance than did extraversion. With regard to optimism, Brebner and his coworkers discovered that extraversion did not predict any of the Life Orientation Test (LOT, see Scheier & Carver, 1985) variance at all, while neuroticism accounted for about 22% of it. Finally, interaction studies conducted by McFatter (1994) makes the author conclude that “…the common claim that extraversion is related to measures of PA but not NA, whereas neuroticism is related to measures of NA but not PA, is probably misleading” (p. 577).
A second anomaly within the field relates to the problem of confounding variance. Because extraversion and emotional stability are normally found to be correlated, and particularly so within the Five Factor Model (FFM) approach (e.g. David et al., 1997, Diener et al., 1995, Francis et al., 1991, Lu et al., 1997, Magnus et al., 1993, Stelmack, 1981, Suh et al., 1996) it is challenging to sort out the unique contribution from extraversion in subjective well-being. Indeed, in studies controlling for emotional stability the effect of extraversion often attenuates or disappears altogether. Thus in two studies reported by Hotard et al. (1989), although initial analysis showed a significant regression coefficient from extraversion to SWB, that effect disappeared after emotional stability was introduced into the equation. Similarly, in a recent study by Pavot and colleagues it was shown that the relation between self-congruence (i.e. the discrepancy between the real-self and the ideal-self) and the four main traits other than emotional stability dropped to non- significance when emotional stability was controlled. Emotional stability, on the other hand, showed an extraordinarily large correlation with the congruence measures (Pavot et al., 1997). In the same study, emotional stability remained a significant predictor of SWB even after partialling out congruence (but not the other way around).
In a study conducted by David and collaborators (David et al., 1997), the zero-order correlations reported between positive affect and extraversion and neuroticism were 0.26 and −0.28 respectively. However, the standardized regression weights from the two traits were reduced to 0.03 (for extraversion) and −0.20 (for neuroticism) when both were treated as independent variables in a multiple regression analysis. Positive mood was the dependent variable, and some other variables were also included as independent variables.
Finally, in a study by Ryan and Frederick (1997), the effect from extraversion to the authors' concept of subjective vitality disappeared when emotional stability was entered into the equation. Nevertheless, the authors retained extraversion for further analysis, and not emotional stability, although the data seem to show that emotional stability is much more important.
Section snippets
The current study
From the literature just reviewed, one gleans at least two unsettling points about the relationship between subjective well-being and personality traits. First, the actual strength of zero- order correlations between extraversion and well-being, including subcomponents such as positive and negative affect, deserves further clarification. Since the impression has become widespread that extraversion is the strongest and most important well-being trait, there is an urgent requirement for closer
Participants
A panel survey produced questionnaire data collected at two different time points, the first in August 1995 and the second in May 1996. At Time 1 (T1; August 1995) the data were from 264 students attending a Norwegian folk high school. At the follow up at Time 2 (T2; May 1996) 225 of the subjects were still participating in the study. A folk high school offers two-semester courses in which students enjoy the freedom to work on whatever topics and questions they and the staff choose. There is no
Correlation analysis
Table 1 shows the matrix of zero-order correlations among all composite variables in the study, with means and standard deviations. The table reveals that emotional stability is significantly associated with all the well-being measures at both T1 and T2, and the correlation coefficients between the overall SWB variable and emotional stability are 0.59 and 0.65 for T1 and T2, respectively. Extraversion is significantly correlated with life satisfaction, positive affect and overall well-being,
Discussion
This paper has examined the relationship between emotional stability, extraversion and subjective well-being among Norwegian folk high school students. The study it describes employed a longitudinal design, 8 months in duration, and analysis of results has shown that contrary to common belief, emotional stability is a much stronger predictor for SWB than is extraversion. However, the extraversion variable repeatedly provides a unique prediction of positive affect.
The finding that emotional
Conclusion
This study questions the dominance of extraversion as the cardinal well-being trait and it brings together evidence that emotional stability should more properly assume this role. Although emotional stability is not synonymous with contemplation, which Aristotle regarded as the indispensable road to happiness, it may be productive to re-evaluate the advantages to well-being generated by low-arousal-level pleasant feelings such as tranquillity and calmness. At least in cultures placing
Acknowledgements
I express my appreciation to Raymond Chipeniuk, Canada, and two anonymous reviewers for helpful comments on earlier versions of this article. The project was supported by a grant from the Norwegian Research Council's research program on “Environmentally Dependent Life Quality”.
References (58)
- et al.
The happiness of extraverts
Personality and Individual Differences
(1990) - et al.
Relationship between happiness and personality
Personality and Individual Differences
(1995) Traits can be powerful, but are not enough: Lessons from subjective well- being
Journal of Research in Personality
(1996)- et al.
The comparability of the short form of EPQ-R with the EPQ among students in England, Canada, and Australia
Personality and Individual Differences
(1991) - et al.
Extraversion, neuroticism and susceptibility to positive and negative mood induction procedures
Personality and Individual Differences
(1989) - et al.
Personality and happiness: Is mental health a mediator?
Personality and Individual Differences
(1997) - et al.
Personal and environmental correlates of happiness
Personality and Individual Differences
(1997) - et al.
The structure of mood
Personality and Individual Differences
(1992) - et al.
The relation between self-aspect congruence, personality and subjective well-being
Personality and Individual Differences
(1997) - et al.
Extraversion and happiness
Personality and Individual Differences
(1990)
Extraversion, neuroticism, and susceptibility to positive and negative affecta test of two theoretical models
Personality and Individual Differences
Social indicators of well-being
Subjective well-being
The psychological causes of happiness
Meanings of life
Assessing the five-factor model of personality description
Journal of Personality
A power primer
Psychological Bulletin
Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.)
Influence of extraversion and neuroticism on subjective well-being: happy and unhappy people
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Set like laster? Evidence for the stability of adult personality
Differential roles of neuroticism, extraversion, and event desirability for mood in daily life. An integrative model of top-down and bottom-up influences
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
The happy personality: a meta-analysis of 137 personality traits and subjective well-being
Psychological Bulletin
Subjective well-being
Psychological Bulletin
Assessing subjective well-being: Progress and opportunities
Social Indicators Research
The experience of emotional well-being
Personality and subjective well-being
Cited by (133)
Research on psychological stress and mental health of medical staff in COVID-19 prevention and control
2021, International Journal of Disaster Risk ReductionAssociations of personality traits with quality of life and satisfaction with life in a longitudinal study with up to 29 year follow-up
2020, Personality and Individual DifferencesCitation Excerpt :Considering the difference in sample size between this study and the present study, it may be that the negative results found for extraversion in the present study reflect a question of power. However, several prior studies (Pavot, Fujita & Diener, 1997; Vittersø, 2001) have reported that associations of extraversion and well-being attenuated when adjusting for neuroticism. Three overall types of interpretations may apply to the results of this study.
A machine learning-based assessment of subjective quality of life
2024, Journal of Computational Social ScienceIndividual values, collective values and sacred values: cognitive ethnography in Ukraine during war
2023, Journal of Cultural Cognitive ScienceThe Role of Resilience in the Relationships between the Big Five Personality Traits and Life Satisfaction and Anxiety
2023, International Journal of Emotional Education