Elsevier

Journal of Economic Psychology

Volume 59, April 2017, Pages 164-170
Journal of Economic Psychology

Who gets ahead in life? Personality traits and childhood background in economic success

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2017.03.004Get rights and content

Highlights

  • We analyzed a representative Swedish sample (N = 5280) for economic success.

  • Personality traits related as much as childhood background to annual income.

  • Childhood background related more than personality traits to educational attainment.

  • Personality traits related more than childhood background to life outcome satisfaction.

Abstract

In many societies around the world, the ideal is that anyone can achieve a successful life independent of family background. An indication of such social mobility could be that personality characteristics have stronger impact than childhood background on economic success. The present study investigated how much of life outcomes (i.e., educational attainment, annual income, and life outcome satisfaction) were accounted for by adult personality traits (the Big Five), when controlled for childhood socio-economic status (SES). The results from a large, representative Swedish sample (N = 5280) showed that personality traits (especially neuroticism) were associated as much as or more than childhood SES to annual income and life outcome satisfaction, whereas childhood SES related more to educational attainment. These results may help facilitate our understanding of the mechanisms behind individual economic success.

Introduction

The ideal society for many can be described with equal opportunities for success and upward social mobility. According to Pew Research Center,1 a majority of people believes that economic success is related to individual characteristics, such as working hard. Critics of this point out that childhood socio-economic status (SES; i.e., parents’ education, income, and occupational status) is still the greatest predictor of economically relevant life outcomes (see Furnham & Cheng, 2013). It has been reported that socio-economic status persists across generations, especially for the low and high-end earners (Bowles, Gintis, & Osborne Groves, 2005). In a large U.S. sample, the chance of moving up from the bottom income quintile to at least the middle quintile was near 30% (Davidai & Gilovich, 2015). Childhood background and educational attainment has long been regarded as more important than individuals’ personality traits (Jencks et al., 1979). However, there have been more recent reports showing that personality traits may be growing in importance parallel with the contexts of individualism in modern society (cf. Skirbekk & Blekesaune, 2014). We analyzed a representative sample from Sweden, comparing how adult personality traits relate to life outcomes of economic success, while controlling for childhood SES.

The power of one’s upbringing has demonstrated relationships to life outcomes in every society – for instance in the US longitudinal study on mortality (Jokela, Elovainio, Singh-Manoux, & Kivimäki, 2009), the Swedish longitudinal total-population study on criminality (Sariaslan, Larsson, D’Onofrio, Långström, & Lichtenstein, 2014), the Port Pirie study in Australia on educational attainment (Keage et al., 2016), the Whitehall II study in England on health (Singh-Manoux, Ferrie, Lynch, & Marmot, 2005), and the Paths of Generation study in Estonia on occupational status and economic income (Strenze, 2006). All mentioned life outcomes (e.g., education, health, and occupational status) are arguably also indicators of economic success. A meta-analysis based on 286 studies concluded that socio-economic factors account for well-being throughout life (Pinquart & Sörensen, 2000). Nevertheless, the mechanisms behind childhood SES and life outcomes are still vague. One theory is that a resourceful childhood environment (i.e., high SES) enhances social networks, cognitive ability, and even physical attractiveness. These factors are consequently known to enhance opportunities for future employments and salary increases (Judge, Hurst, & Simon, 2009).

One of the more impacting long-term, individual characteristics in life outcomes is personality traits (Roberts, Kuncel, Shiner, Caspi, & Goldberg, 2007). Personality is known to be genetically influenced with an overall heritability of approximately 50% (Polderman et al., 2015). The most researched conceptualization of personality is the Five-Factor Model, which is organized into the Big Five traits; neuroticism, extraversion, openness, agreeableness, and conscientiousness (McCrae & Costa, 1997). These traits have consistently demonstrated predictive power in life patterns, among various cultures, age groups, cohorts, and ethnicities (e.g., Schmitt, Allik, McCrae, & Benet-Martínez, 2007). Personality traits are known to stabilize in adulthood around the age of 30 and mature predictably according to rank-order patterns into old age (Briley & Tucker-Drob, 2014). The majority of reliable variation over a life-time (83%) has been shown to be due to stable factors such as genetics and social maturation (Anusic & Schimmack, 2015). The consensus is that the Big Five are useful psychological constructs for predicting many important life outcomes, such as mortality, divorce, and occupational attainment (Ozer and Benet-Martinez, 2006, Roberts et al., 2007). Similarly, personality traits have been found to correlate with accumulated wealth, even after controlling for factors such as education, risk preferences, financial knowledge, and need for cognition (Estrada-Meija, de Vries, & Zeelenberg, 2016).

One of the most cited studies, comparing how personality and childhood SES relate to life outcomes (Roberts et al., 2007), consists of 53 studies, which measured personality by using adults’ assessments of children’s behaviors. The findings demonstrated that the Big Five outperformed (β = 0.23) childhood SES (β = 0.09) in predicting occupational prestige. Conscientiousness was reported to have the strongest impact out of the Big Five traits. Another influential, longitudinal study was Project Talent by the American Institute for Research, which was conducted in 1960 using a representative sample of 5% of U.S. high school students (Damian, Su, Shanahan, Trautwein, & Roberts, 2014). All the Big Five traits were correlated with life outcomes; education (rMd = 0.13), income (rMd = 0.04), and occupational prestige (rMd = 0.15). However, overall, family background showed even stronger relationships; education (r = 0.42), income (r = 0.13), and occupational prestige (r = 0.35). A similar study from Europe was based on Luxembourg students’ characteristics as assessed by teacher-ratings in 1968 (Spengler et al., 2015). This study demonstrated that economically relevant variables could be predicted 40 years later – studiousness was related to educational attainment (r = 0.41), individual income (r = 0.29), and occupational status (r = 0.40), while childhood SES was related to educational attainment (r = 0.41), individual income (r = 0.21), and occupational status (r = 0.33). The overall conclusion was that studiousness, similar to the Big Five trait conscientiousness, slightly outperformed childhood SES in predicting career success. Not many studies have compared personality in adulthood, after traits have stabilized at the age of 30, with childhood SES in economic life outcomes. The exception is one British sample which 50 years after having had childhood SES measured was measured on the Big Five traits (Furnham & Cheng, 2013). The results showed that childhood SES predicted earnings (r = 0.21) better than adult personality traits; neuroticism (r = −0.09), extraversion (r = 0.10), and conscientiousness (r = 0.14).

Based on the reviewed literature there is evidence suggesting that both individual personality traits and childhood SES are related to economic life outcomes. It is thus of importance to study how personality in adulthood may be associated with economic life outcomes while controlling for childhood SES.

There is a compelling body of research showing that the best economic decisions will involve emotions (Fehr et al., 2009, Loewenstein and Lerner, 2003). Self-regulation of emotions has long been regarded to be associated with personality traits, and is often explained as the tendency to postpone immediate rewards for a later reward (Mischel, 2004, Mischel et al., 1989). This delay of gratification is an important individual disposition that directs long-term success. Self-regulation is an intricate part of several personality traits, such as neuroticism (cf. emotional stability), extraversion (cf. optimism), openness (cf. intellect), agreeableness (cf. cooperation), and conscientiousness (cf. self-discipline) (see Big Five trait content in Costa & McCrae, 1995). We therefore argue that personality traits in adulthood may facilitate decisions that increase economic success.

The objective of the present study was to test how adult personality traits relate to economic success, compared to childhood SES. Based on the mentioned self-regulation theory, we expected all five personality traits to be related to economic success. Economic success was measured by three relevant life outcomes; educational attainment, annual income, and life outcome satisfaction, making use of representative Swedish population data.

Section snippets

Sample and procedure

The Institute for Society, Opinion, and Media in Sweden annually surveys attitudes representing the Swedish population.2 This material is made available for researchers, and is approved by the guidelines of the National Committee for Ethics in Sweden. The questionnaire is based on voluntary participation and has been made anonymous, with no retraceable ways to individual participants. The data for

Results

The objective was to analyze the relatedness of the Big Five personality traits to economically relevant life outcomes, compared to childhood SES. Table 1 contains the descriptive summary of means and standard deviations, as well as the bivariate zero-order correlations between study variables.

Second, we compared the accounted variances from the Big Five and childhood SES respectively. Three hierarchical regression models, one for each life outcome, were conducted in two steps: In step 1, the

Discussion

The present study is one of the first to report that adult personality is comparable to childhood SES in economic life outcomes (see also Furnham & Cheng, 2013). Especially the personality trait neuroticism was associated with annual income and life outcome satisfaction. In addition, openness was associated with educational attainment, and extraversion with life outcome satisfaction. Agreeableness and conscientiousness showed only marginal associations with life outcomes.

The shown advantages of

Acknowledgements

Prof. Anna Dåderman at University West, Sweden, kindly helped by reviewing an early version of the manuscript. Dr. Magnus Roos, University of Gothenburg and University of Skövde, provided the introduction to the SOM-institute’s data. The funding source was designated research time at University West, Sweden. Part of the study was presented at the 2nd World Conference on Personality in Buzios, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, March 31st to April 4th, 2016.

References (51)

  • I. Anusic et al.

    Stability and change of personality traits, self-esteem and well-being: Introducing the meta-analytic stability and change model of retest correlations

    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

    (2015)
  • M.R. Barrick et al.

    The big five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis

    Personnel Psychology

    (1991)
  • S. Bowles et al.

    Unequal chances: Family background and economic success

    (2005)
  • D.A. Briley et al.

    Genetic and environmental continuity in personality development: A meta-analysis

    Psychological Bulletin

    (2014)
  • P.T. Costa et al.

    Domains and facets: Hierarchical personality assessment using the revised NEO personality inventory

    Journal of Personality Assessment

    (1995)
  • S. Côté et al.

    The ability to regulate emotion is associated with greater well-being, income, and socioeconomic status

    Emotion

    (2010)
  • R.I. Damian et al.

    Can personality traits and intelligence compensate for background disadvantage? Predicting status attainment in adulthood

    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

    (2014)
  • S. Davidai et al.

    Building a more mobile America – One income quintile at a time

    Perspectives on Psychological Science

    (2015)
  • C. Estrada-Meija et al.

    Numeracy and wealth

    Journal of Economic Psychology

    (2016)
  • T. Flensborg-Madsen et al.

    Infant SES as a predictor of personality – Is the association mediated by intelligence?

    PLOS One

    (2014)
  • M.A. Hilgert et al.

    Household financial management: The connection between knowledge and behavior

    Federal Reserve Bulletin

    (2003)
  • C. Jencks et al.

    Who gets ahead? The determinants of economic success in America

    (1979)
  • M. Jokela et al.

    IQ, socioeconomic status, and early death: The US National Longitudinal Survey of Youth

    Psychosomatic Medicine

    (2009)
  • T.A. Judge et al.

    The big five personality traits, general mental ability, and career success across the life span

    Personnel Psychology

    (2006)
  • T.A. Judge et al.

    Does it pay to be smart, attractive, or confident (or all three)? Relationships among general mental ability, physical attractiveness, core self-evaluations, and income

    Journal of Applied Psychology

    (2009)
  • Cited by (26)

    • Personality and management level: Traits that get you to the top

      2023, Personality and Individual Differences
    • The Big Five personality traits and earnings: A meta-analysis

      2023, Journal of Economic Psychology
      Citation Excerpt :

      Based on meta-analysis and meta-regression techniques, our study deepens the understanding of the interplay between the Big Five personality traits and personal earnings, with the aim of enhancing the debate on a number of meaningful issues that are still in need of further exploration. Indeed, despite the consensus that personality plays a role in labor market dynamics (Kajonius & Carlander, 2017; Maczulskij & Viinikainen, 2018; Uysal & Pohlmeier, 2011), there remains a certain degree of disagreement on how, and to what extent, the Big Five contribute to explaining personal earnings. With the caveat in mind that only primary studies may address specific research questions, meta-analytical techniques allow us to quantitatively synthesize the results of the literature, as well as to investigate the heterogeneity of primary studies.

    • “Smoking your child's job away”: Parental smoking during one's childhood and the probability of being employed in adulthood

      2021, Journal of Business Research
      Citation Excerpt :

      Second, we focus on the antecedents of early childhood environment on adult outcomes. These studies include early childhood health (Almond et al., 2018; Case et al., 2005; Smith, 2009), childhood parental socio-economic status (Black and Devereux, 2011; Brunello et al., 2017; Brzeziński, 2017; Flores et al., 2020; Kajonius and Carlander, 2017), family structure (Hota and Bartsch, 2019), early life shocks (Awaworyi Churchill, Munyanyi, Smyth et al., 2021) and childhood psychological problems (Currie and Widom, 2010; Goodman et al., 2011). We contribute to this literature by examining the role of experiencing passive smoking in childhood on adult outcomes.

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text