Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T09:36:29.939Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

42 - Intelligence and Personality

from Part VIII - Intelligence and Allied Constructs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 December 2019

By
Colin G. DeYoung
Edited by
Robert J. Sternberg
Robert J. Sternberg
Affiliation:
Cornell University, New York
Get access

Summary

This chapter reviews conceptual and empirical work that attempts to establish the relation of intelligence to personality. It first offers a summary and critique of three dichotomies often used to distinguish intelligence from personality conceptually and then reviews empirical research on the relation of intelligence to a wide range of personality traits. Both conceptually and empirically, intelligence is most strongly related to the personality trait Intellect, which is measured in questionnaires through descriptions of intellectual engagement and perceived intellectual ability, and which is one of two major subfactors of the broad Openness/Intellect dimension of the Five Factor Model or Big Five. Nonetheless, various other personality traits are also related to intelligence, and the nature and implications of these associations are thoroughly discussed.

Keywords

intelligencepersonalityBig Fiveintellectopenness to experience
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Intelligence , pp. 1011 - 1047
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ackerman, P. L. (1996). A theory of adult intellectual development: Process, personality, interests, and knowledge. Intelligence, 22, 229–259.Google Scholar
Ackerman, P. L. (2000). Domain-specific knowledge as the “dark matter” of adult intelligence: Gf/Gc, personality, and interest correlates. Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences, 55B, 69–84.Google Scholar
Ackerman, P. L. (2009). Personality and intelligence. In Corr, P. J. & Matthews, G. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of personality psychology (pp. 162–174). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ackerman, P. L., Beier, M. E., & Bowen, K. R. (2002). What we really know about our abilities and our knowledge. Personality and Individual Differences, 34, 587–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ackerman, P. L. & Goff, M. (1994). Typical intellectual engagement and personality: Reply to Rocklin (1994). Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 150–153.Google Scholar
Ackerman, P. L., & Heggestad, E. D. (1997). Intelligence, personality, and interests: Evidence for overlapping traits. Psychological Bulletin, 121, 219–245.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Allen, T. A., & DeYoung, C. G. (2017). Personality neuroscience and the Five Factor Model. In Widiger, T. A. (Ed.). Oxford handbook of the Five Factor Model (pp. 319–349). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Allen, T. A., Rueter, A. R., Abram, S. V., Brown, J. S., & DeYoung, C. G. (2017). Personality and neural correlates of mentalizing ability. European Journal of Personality, 31, 599–613.Google Scholar
Alvidrez, J., & Weinstein, R. S. (1999). Early teacher perceptions and later student academic achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 731–746.Google Scholar
Andrews-Hanna, J. R., Smallwood, J., & Spreng, R. N. (2014). The default network and self-generated thought: Component processes, dynamic control, and clinical relevance. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1316(1), 29–52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ashton, M. C., Lee, K., Perugini, M., Szarota, P., de Vries, R. E., Blas, L. D., Boies, K., & De Raad, B. (2004). A six-factor structure of personality descriptive adjectives: Solutions from psycholexical studies in seven languages. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 356–366.Google Scholar
Ashton, M. C., Lee, K., Vernon, P. A., & Jang, K. L. (2000). Fluid intelligence, crystallized intelligence, and the Openness/Intellect factor. Journal of Research in Personality, 34, 197–207.Google Scholar
Austin, E. J., Deary, I. J., & Gibson, G. J. (1997). Relationship between ability and personality: Three hypotheses tested. Intelligence, 25, 49–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Austin, A. J., Deary, I. J., Whiteman, M. C., Fowkes, F. G. R., Padersen, N. L., Rabbitt, P., Bent, N., & McInnes, L. (2002). Relationships between ability and personality: Does intelligence contribute positively to personal and social adjustment? Personality and Individual Differences, 32, 1391–1411.Google Scholar
Baker, T. J., & Bichsel, J. (2006). Personality predictors of intelligence: Differences between young and cognitively healthy older adults. Personality and Individual Differences, 41, 861–871.Google Scholar
Barchard, K. A. (2003). Does emotional intelligence assist in the prediction of academic success? Educational and Psychological Measurement, 63, 840–858.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bates, T. C., & Shieles, A. (2003). Crystallized intelligence as a product of speed and drive for experience: The relationship of inspection time and openness to g and Gc. Intelligence, 31, 275−287.Google Scholar
Beaty, R. E., Kaufman, S. B., Benedek, M., Jung, R. E., Kenett, Y. N., Jauk, E., … Silvia, P. J. (2016). Personality and complex brain networks: The role of openness to experience in default network efficiency. Human Brain Mapping, 37(2), 773–779.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beauducel, A., Liepmann, D., Felfe, J., & Nettelnstroth, W. (2007). The impact of different measurement models for fluid and crystallized intelligence on the correlation with personality traits. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 23, 71–78.Google Scholar
Bergold, S., & Steinmayr, R. (2018). Personality and intelligence interact in the prediction of academic achievement. Journal of Intelligence, 6, 27.Google Scholar
Block, J., & Block, J. H. (2006). Nursery school personality and political orientation two decades later, Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 734–749.Google Scholar
Bouchard, T., Segal, N., Tellegen, A., McGue, M., Keyes, M., & Krueger, R. (2003). Evidence for the construct validity and heritability of the Wilson–Patterson conservatism scale: A reared-apart twins study of social attitudes. Personality and Individual Differences, 34, 959–969.Google Scholar
Brickenkamp, R. (1975). Handbuch psychologischer und padagogischer Tests [Handbook of Psychological and Educational Tests]. Göttingen: Hogrefe.Google Scholar
Brody, N. (2004). What cognitive intelligence is and what emotional intelligence is not. Psychological Inquiry, 15, 234–238.Google Scholar
Brugger, P. (2001). From haunted brain to haunted science. A cognitive neuroscience view of paranormal and pseudoscientific thought. In Houran, J. & Lange, R (Eds.), Hauntings and poltergeists: Multidisciplinary perspectives (pp. 195–215). Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Company.Google Scholar
Bunge, S. A., & Zelazo, P. D. (2006). A brain-based account of the development of rule use in childhood. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15, 118–121.Google Scholar
Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., Feinstein, J. A., & Jarvis, W. B. G. (1996). Dispositional differences in cognitive motivation: The life and times of individuals differing in need for cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 197–253.Google Scholar
Carney, D., Jost, J., Gosling, S., & Potter, J. (2008). The secret lives of liberals and conservatives: Personality profiles, interaction styles, and the things they leave behind. Political Psychology, 29(6), 807–840.Google Scholar
Carroll, J. B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cattell, R. B. (1950). Personality. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Cattell, R. B. (1978). Scientific use of factor analysis in behavioral and life sciences. New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
Cattell, R. B., & Birkett, H. (1980). The known personality factors found aligned between first order T-data and second order Q-data factors, with new evidence on the inhibitory control, independence and regression traits. Personality and Individual Differences, 1, 229–238.Google Scholar
Cattell, R. B., & Warburton, F. W. (1967). Objective personality and motivation tests: A theoretical introduction and practical compendium. Champaign: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Chamorro-Premuzic, T., & Furnham, A. (2005). Personality and intellectual competence. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Chamorro-Premuzic, T., Moutafi, J., & Furnham, A. (2005). The relationship between personality traits, subjectively-assessed and fluid intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 38, 1517–1528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chapman, B., Duberstein, P., Tindle, H. A., Sink, K. M., Robbins, J., Tancredi, D. J., & Franks, P. (2012). Personality predicts cognitive function over 7 years in older persons. The American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 20, 612–621.Google Scholar
Collis, J. M., & Messick, S. (Eds.) (2001). Intelligence and personality: Bridging the gap in theory and measurement. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992a). Four ways five factors are basic. Personality and Individual Differences, 13, 653–665.Google Scholar
Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992b). NEO PI-R Professional Manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
Costa, P. T. Jr., Terracciano, A., & McCrae, R. R. (2001). Gender differences in personality traits across cultures: Robust and surprising findings. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 322–331.Google Scholar
Cronbach, L. J. (1949). Essentials of psychological testing. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
De Pauw, S. S. W., Mervielde, I., & Van Leeuwen, K. G. (2009). How are traits related to problem behavior in preschoolers? Similarities and contrasts between temperament and personality. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 37, 309–325.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Deary, I. J. (2012). Intelligence. Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 453–82Google Scholar
Deary, I. J., Batty, G. D., & Gale, C. R. (2008). Bright children become enlightened adults. Psychological Science, 19, 1–6.Google Scholar
Deary, I. J., Penke, L., & Johnson, W. (2010). The neuroscience of human intelligence differences. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 11(3), 201–211.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
DeYoung, C. G. (2006). Higher-order factors of the Big Five in a multi-informant sample. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 1138–1151.Google Scholar
DeYoung, C. G. (2011). Intelligence and personality. In Sternberg, R. J. & Kaufman, S. B. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of intelligence (pp. 711–737). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
DeYoung, C. G. (2015a). Cybernetic Big Five Theory. Journal of Research in Personality, 56, 33–58.Google Scholar
DeYoung, C. G. (2015b). Openness/Intellect: A dimension of personality reflecting cognitive exploration. In Cooper, M. L. & Larsen, R. J. (Eds.), The APA handbook of personality and social psychology: Personality processes and individual differences, Vol. 4 (pp. 369–399). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
DeYoung, C. G., Carey, B. E., Krueger, B. F., & Ross, S. R. (2016). Ten aspects of the Big Five in the Personality Inventory for DSM-5. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 7, 113–123.Google Scholar
DeYoung, C. G., Grazioplene, R. G., & Peterson, J. B. (2012). From madness to genius: The Openness/Intellect trait domain as a paradoxical simplex. Journal of Research in Personality, 46, 63–78.Google Scholar
DeYoung, C. G., Peterson, J. B., & Higgins, D. M. (2005). Sources of Openness/Intellect: Cognitive and neuropsychological correlates of the fifth factor of personality. Journal of Personality, 73, 825–858.Google Scholar
DeYoung, C. G., Peterson, J. B., Séguin, J. R., Pihl, R. O., & Tremblay, R. E. (2008). Externalizing behavior and the higher-order factors of the Big Five. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 117, 947–953.Google Scholar
DeYoung, C. G., Quilty, L. C., & Peterson, J. B. (2007). Between facets and domains: 10 aspects of the Big Five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 880–896.Google Scholar
DeYoung, C. G., Quilty, L. C., Peterson, J. B., & Gray, J. R. (2014). Openness to Experience, Intellect, and cognitive ability. Journal of Personality Assessment, 96, 46–52.Google Scholar
DeYoung, C. G., & Rueter, A. R. (2016). Impulsivity as a personality trait. In Vohs, K. D. & Baumeister, R. F. (Eds.). Handbook of self-regulation: Research, theory, and applications (3rd ed., pp. 345–363). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
DeYoung, C. G., Shamosh, N. A., Green, A. E., Braver, T. S., & Gray, J. R. (2009). Intellect as distinct from Openness: Differences revealed by fMRI of working memory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 883–892.Google Scholar
Digman, J. M. (1997). Higher-order factors of the Big Five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 1246–1256.Google Scholar
Doerfler, T., & Hornke, L. F. (2010). Working style and extraversion: New insights into the nature of item response latencies in computer-based intelligence testing. Journal of Research in Personality, 44(1), 159–162.Google Scholar
Duckworth, A. L. (2009). (Over and) beyond high-stakes testing. American Psychologist, 64, 279–280.Google Scholar
Duckworth, A. L., & Yeager, D. S. (2015). Measurement matters: Assessing personal qualities other than cognitive ability for educational purposes. Educational Researcher, 44(4), 237–251.Google Scholar
Espejo, J., Day, E. A., & Scott, G. (2005). Performance evaluations, need for cognition, and the acquisition of a complex skill: An attribute–treatment interaction. Personality and Individual Differences, 38(8), 1867–1877.Google Scholar
Eysenck, H. J. (1994). Personality and intelligence: Psychometric and experimental approaches. In Sternberg, R. J. & Ruzgis, P. (Eds.), Personality and intelligence (pp. 3–31). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fales, C. L., Barch, D. M., Burgess, G. C., Schaefer, A., Mennin, D. S., Braver, T. S., & Gray, J. R. (2008). Anxiety and cognitive efficiency: Differential modulation of transient and sustained neural activity during a working memory task. Cognitive, Affective, and Behavioral Neuroscience, 8, 239–253.Google Scholar
Feist, G. J. (1998). A meta-analysis of personality in scientific and artistic creativity. Personality & Social Psychology Review, 2, 290–309.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Frederick, S. (2005). Cognitive reflection and decision making. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 19(4), 25–42.Google Scholar
Frederick, S., Loewenstein, G., & O’Donoghue, T. (2002). Time discounting and time preference: A critical review. Journal of Economic Literature, 40, 351–401.Google Scholar
Freund, P. A., & Kasten, N. (2012). How smart do you think you are? A meta-analysis on the validity of self-estimates of cognitive ability. Psychological Bulletin, 138, 296–331.Google Scholar
Frisell, T., Pawitan, Y., & Långström, N. (2012). Is the association between general cognitive ability and violent crime caused by family-level confounders? PLoS ONE, 7, e41783. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0041783Google Scholar
Furnham, A., Dissou, G., Sloan, P., Chamorro-Premuzic, T. (2007). Personality and intelligence in business people: A study of two personality and two intelligence measures. Journal of Business and Psychology, 22, 99–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gabriel, M. T., Critelli, J. W., & Ee, J. S. (1994). Narcissistic illusions in self-evaluations of intelligence and attractiveness. Journal of Personality, 62, 143–155.Google Scholar
Gläscher, J., Rudrauf, D., Colom, R., Paul, L. K., Tranel, D., Damasio, H., & Adolphs, R. (2010). Distributed neural system for general intelligence revealed by lesion mapping. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107(10), 4705–4709.Google Scholar
Goff, M., & Ackerman, P. L. (1992). Personality–intelligence relations: Assessment of typical intellectual engagement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 537–552.Google Scholar
Goldberg, L. R. (1990). An alternative “description of personality”: The Big-Five factor structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 1216–1229.Google Scholar
Goldberg, L. R. (1992). The development of markers for the big-five factor structure. Psychological Assessment, 4, 26–42.Google Scholar
Goldberg, L. R. (1999). A broad-bandwidth, public domain, personality inventory measuring the lower-level facets of several five-factor models. In Mervielde, I., Deary, I., De Fruyt, F., & Ostendorf, F. (Eds.), Personality psychology in Europe (Vol. 7, pp. 7–28). Tilburg: Tilburg University Press.Google Scholar
Goldberg, L. R., & Rosolack, T. K. (1994). The big five factor structure as an integrative framework: An empirical comparison with Eysenck’s P-E-N model. In Halverson, C. F., Jr., Kohnstamm, G. A., & Martin, R. P. (Eds.), The developing structure of temperament and personality from infancy to adulthood (pp. 7–35). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Gottfredson, L. S. (1997a). Mainstream science on intelligence: An editorial with 52 signatories, history, and bibliography. Intelligence, 24, 13–23.Google Scholar
Gottfredson, L. S. (1997b). Why g matters: The complexity of everyday life. Intelligence, 24, 79–132.Google Scholar
Gow, A. J., Whiteman, M. C., Pattie, A., & Deary, I. J. (2005). The personality–intelligence interface: Insights from an ageing cohort. Personality and Individual Differences, 39, 751–761.Google Scholar
Gray, J. A., & McNaughton, N. (2000). The neuropsychology of anxiety: An enquiry into the functions of the septo-hippocampal system (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Guilford, J. P. (1959). Personality. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Hemphill, J. F. (2003). Interpreting the magnitudes of correlation coefficients. American Psychologist, 58, 78–80.Google Scholar
Hill, B. D., Foster, J. D., Elliott, E. M., Shelton, J. T., McCain, J., & Gouvier, W. D. (2013). Need for cognition is related to higher general intelligence, fluid intelligence, and crystallized intelligence, but not working memory. Journal of Research in Personality, 47(1), 22–25.Google Scholar
Hinson, J. M., Jameson, T. L., & Whitney, P. (2003). Impulsive decision making and working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29, 298−306.Google Scholar
Hirsh, J. B., DeYoung, C. G., Xu, X., & Peterson, J. B. (2010). Compassionate liberals and polite conservatives: Associations of Agreeableness with political ideology and values. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 655–664.Google Scholar
Hodson, G., & Busseri, M. A. (2012). Bright minds and dark attitudes: Lower cognitive ability predicts greater prejudice through right-wing ideology and low intergroup contact. Psychological Science, 23, 187–195.Google Scholar
Hofstee, W. K. B., Kiers, H. A., De Raad, B., & Goldberg, L. R. (1997). A comparison of Big Five structures of personality traits in Dutch, English, and German. European Journal of Personality, 11, 15–31.Google Scholar
Holland, D. C., Dollinger, S. J., Holland, C. J., & MacDonald, D. A. (1995). The relationship between psychometric intelligence and the five-factor model of personality in a rehabilitation sample. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 51, 79–88.Google Scholar
Horn, J. L., & Cattell, R. B. (1966). Refinement and test of the theory of fluid and crystallized general intelligences. Journal of Educational Psychology, 57, 253–270.Google Scholar
Huesmann, L. R., Eron, L. D., & Yarmel, P. W. (1987). Intellectual functioning and aggression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 232–240.Google Scholar
Jang, K. L., Hu, S., Livesley, W. J., Angleitner, A., Riemann, R., & Vernon, P. A. (2002). Genetic and environmental influences on the covariance of facets defining the domains of the five-factor model of personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 33, 83–101.Google Scholar
Jensen, A. R. (1998). The g factor: The science of mental ability. Westport, CT: Praeger.Google Scholar
John, O. P., Naumann, L. P., & Soto, C. J. (2008). Paradigm shift to the integrative Big Five trait taxonomy: History: measurement, and conceptual issue. In John, O. P., Robins, R. W., & Pervin, L. A. (Eds). Handbook of personality: Theory and research (pp. 114–158). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Johnson, J. A. (1994). Clarification of factor five with the help of the AB5C model. European Journal of Personality, 8, 311–334.Google Scholar
Johnson, W., & Bouchard, T. J., Jr. (2005a). The structure of human intelligence: It’s verbal, perceptual, and image rotation (VPR), not fluid-crystallized. Intelligence, 33, 393–416.Google Scholar
Johnson, W., & Bouchard, T. J., Jr. (2005b). Constructive replication of the visual–perceptual-image rotation model in Thurstone’s (1941) battery of 60 tests of mental ability, Intelligence, 33, 417–430.Google Scholar
Johnson, W., & Bouchard, T. J., Jr. (2007). Sex differences in mental abilities: g masks the dimensions on which they lie. Intelligence, 35, 23–39.Google Scholar
Johnson, W., Bouchard, T. J., Jr., McGue, M., Segal, N. L., Tellegen, A., Keyes, M., & Gottesman, I. I. (2007). Genetic and environmental influences on the Verbal-Perceptual-Image Rotation (VPR) model of the structure of mental abilities in the Minnesota study of twins reared apart. Intelligence, 35, 542–562.Google Scholar
Johnson, W., Nijenhuis, J., & Bouchard, T. J. (2007). Replication of the hierarchical visual–perceptual-image rotation model in de Wolff and Buiten’s (1963) battery of 46 tests of mental ability. Intelligence, 35, 69−81.Google Scholar
Jost, J. T. (2017). Ideological asymmetries and the essence of political psychology. Political Psychology, 38, 167–208.Google Scholar
Kaufman, J. C. (2012). Self estimates of general, crystallized, and fluid intelligences in an ethnically diverse population. Learning and Individual Differences, 22, 118–122.Google Scholar
Kaufman, S. B., DeYoung, C. G., Gray, J. R., Jiménez, L., Brown, J., & Mackintosh, N. J. (2010). Implicit learning as an ability. Cognition, 116, 321–340.Google Scholar
Kaufman, S. B., Quilty, L. C., Grazioplene, R. G., Hirsh, J. B., Gray, J. R., Peterson, J. B., & DeYoung, C. G. (2016). Openness to Experience and Intellect differentially predict creative achievement in the arts and sciences. Journal of Personality, 84, 248–258.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Keightley, M. L., Seminowicz, D. A., Bagby, R. M., Costa, P. T., Fossati, P., & Mayberg, H. S. (2003). Personality influences limbic-cortical interactions during sad mood. NeuroImage, 20, 2031–2039.Google Scholar
Kirby, K. N. (2009). One-year temporal stability of delay-discount rates. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16, 457–462.Google Scholar
Koenen, K. C., Caspi, A., Moffitt, T. E., Rijsdijk, F., & Taylor, A. (2006). Genetic influences on the overlap between low IQ and antisocial behavior in young children. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 115, 787–797.Google Scholar
Koenig, L. B., & Bouchard, T. J., Jr. (2006). Genetic and environmental influences on the Traditional Moral Values Triad – Authoritarianism, Conservatism and Religiousness – as assessed by quantitative behavior genetic methods. In McNamara, P. (Ed.), Where god and science meet: How brain and evolutionary studies alter our understanding of religion, Vol. 1, Evolution, genes, and the religious brain. Westport, CT: Praeger.Google Scholar
Kovacs, K., & Conway, A. R. A. (2016). Process Overlap Theory: A unified account of the general factor of intelligence, Psychological Inquiry, 27, 151–177.Google Scholar
Krueger, R. F., Markon, K. E., Patrick, C. J., Benning, S. D., & Kramer, M. D. (2007). Linking antisocial behavior, substance use, and personality: An integrative quantitative model of the adult externalizing spectrum. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 116, 645–666.Google Scholar
Kuhn, T. (1970). The structure of scientific revolution (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Kuntsi, J., Eley, T.C., Taylor, A., Hughes, C., Asherson, P., Caspi, A., et al. (2004). Co-occurrence of ADHD and low IQ has genetic origins. American Journal of Medical Genetics, 124, 41–47.Google Scholar
Leikas, S., Mäkinen, S., Lönnqvist, J. E., & Verkasalo, M. (2009). Cognitive ability × emotional stability interactions on adjustment. European Journal of Personality, 23(4), 329–342.Google Scholar
Loevinger, J. (1957). Objective tests as instruments of psychological theory. Psychological Reports, 3, 635–694.Google Scholar
Ludeke, S. G., Rasmussen, S. H. R., & DeYoung, C. G. (2017). Verbal ability drives the link between intelligence and ideology in two American community samples. Intelligence, 61, 1–6.Google Scholar
Lynam, D. R., Moffitt, T. E., & Stouthamer-Loeber, M. (1993). Explaining the relation between IQ and delinquency: Class, race, test motivation, school failure, or self-control? Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 102, 187–196.Google Scholar
Mahalingam, V., Stillwell, D., Kosinski, M., Rust, J., & Kogan, A. (2014). Who can wait for the future? A personality perspective. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 5(5), 573–583.Google Scholar
Major, J. T., Johnson, W., & Deary, I. J. (2012). Comparing models of intelligence in Project TALENT: The VPR model fits better than the CHC and extended Gf–Gc models. Intelligence, 40, 543–559.Google Scholar
Major, J. T., Johnson, W., & Deary, I. J. (2014). Linear and nonlinear associations between general intelligence and personality in Project TALENT. Journal of personality and social psychology, 106(4), 638–654.Google Scholar
Malka, A., Lelkes, Y., & Soto, C. J. (2017). Are cultural and economic conservatism positively correlated? A large-scale cross-national test. British Journal of Political Science, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123417000072Google Scholar
Markon, K. E., Krueger, R. F., & Watson, D. (2005). Delineating the structure of normal and abnormal personality: An integrative hierarchical approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 139–157.Google Scholar
Mayer, J. D., Roberts, R. D., & Barsade, S. G. (2008). Human abilities: Emotional intelligence. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 507–536.Google Scholar
Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., & Caruso, D. R. (2004). Emotional intelligence: Theory, findings, and implications. Psychological Inquiry, 60, 197–215.Google Scholar
Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., & Caruso, D. R. (2008). Emotional intelligence: New ability or eclectic traits? American Psychologist, 63, 503–517.Google Scholar
McAdams, D. P., & Pals, J. L. (2006). A new Big Five: Fundamental principles for an integrative science of personality. American Psychologist, 61, 204–217.Google Scholar
McCrae, R. R. (1993). Openness to Experience as a basic dimension of personality. Imagination, Cognition, and Personality, 13, 39–55.Google Scholar
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T., Jr. (1997). Conceptions and correlates of Openness to Experience. In Hogan, R., Johnson, J., & Briggs, S. (Eds.), Handbook of personality psychology (pp. 825–847). Boston: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Miller, G. F., & Tal, I. R. (2007). Schizotypy versus openness and intelligence as predictors of creativity. Schizophrenia Research, 93, 317–324.Google Scholar
Miller, J. D., & Lynam, D. R. (2001). Structural models of personality and their relation to antisocial behavior: A meta-analytic review. Criminology, 39, 765–798.Google Scholar
Moutafi, J., Furnham, A., & Crump, J. (2003). Demographic and personality predictors of intelligence: A study using the NEO Personality Inventory and the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. European Journal of Personality, 17, 79–94.Google Scholar
Moutafi, J., Furnham, A., & Crump, J. (2006). What facets of openness and conscientiousness predict fluid intelligence score? Learning and Individual Differences, 16, 31–42.Google Scholar
Moutafi, J., Furnham, A., & Paltiel, L. (2004). Why is Conscientiousness negatively correlated with intelligence? Personality and Individual Differences, 37, 1013–1022.Google Scholar
Moutafi, J., Furnham, A., & Tsaousis, I. (2006). Is the relationship between intelligence and trait neuroticism mediated by test anxiety? Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 587–597.Google Scholar
Mussel, P. (2013). Intellect: A theoretical framework for personality traits related to intellectual achievements. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104(5), 885–906.Google Scholar
Neisser, U., Boodoo, G., Bouchard, T. J., Jr, Boykin, A. W., Brody, N., Ceci, S. J., … & Urbina, S. (1996). Intelligence: Knowns and unknowns. American psychologist, 51(2), 77.Google Scholar
Nettle, D. (2006). The evolution of personality variation in humans and other animals. American Psychologist, 61, 622–631.Google Scholar
Nettle, D., & Liddle, B. (2008). Agreeableness is related to social-cognitive, but not social-perceptual, theory of mind. European Journal of Personality, 22, 323–335.Google Scholar
Nolan, S. A., Roberts, J. E., & Gotlib, I. H. (1998). Neuroticism and ruminative response style as predictors of change in depressive symptomatology. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 22, 445–455.Google Scholar
Nusbaum, E. C., & Silvia, P. J. (2011). Are openness and intellect distinct aspects of openness to experience? A test of the O/I model. Personality and Individual Differences, 51, 571–574.Google Scholar
Oltmanns, J. R., & Widiger, T. A. (2016). Self-pathology, the five-factor model, and bloated specific factors: A cautionary tale. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 125, 423–434.Google Scholar
Onraet, E., Van Hiel, A., Dhont, K., Hodson, G., Schittekatte, M., & De Pauw, S. (2015). The association of cognitive ability with right‐wing ideological attitudes and prejudice: A meta‐analytic review. European Journal of Personality, 29(6), 599–621.Google Scholar
Osborne, D., Wootton, L. W., & Sibley, C. G. (2012). Are liberals agreeable or not? Politeness and Compassion differentially predict political conservatism via distinct ideologies. Social Psychology, 44, 354–360.Google Scholar
Ostaszewski, P. (1996). The relation between temperament and rate of temporal discounting. European Journal of Personality, 10, 161–172.Google Scholar
Ostendorf, F., & Angleitner, A. (1994). Reflections on different labels for Factor V. European Journal of Personality, 8, 341–349.Google Scholar
Paulhus, D. L., & John, O. P. (1998). Egoistic and moralistic biases in self-perception: The interplay of self-deceptive styles with basic traits and motives. Journal of Personality, 66, 1025–1060.Google Scholar
Paulhus, D. L., Lysy, D. C., & Yik, M. S. M. (1998). Self-report measures of intelligence: Are they useful as proxy IQ tests? Journal of Personality, 66, 525–554.Google Scholar
Pedulla, J. J., Airasian, P. W., Madaus, G. F. (1980). Do teacher ratings and standardized test results of students yield the same information? American Educational Research Journal, 17, 303–307.Google Scholar
Perkins, A. M., & Corr, P. J. (2006). Cognitive ability as a buffer to neuroticism: Churchill’s secret weapon? Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 39–51.Google Scholar
Peterson, J. B., & Flanders, J. L. (2002). Complexity management theory: Motivation for ideological rigidity and social conflict. Cortex, 38, 429–458.Google Scholar
Pickering, A. D. (2004). The neuropsychology of impulsive antisocial sensation seeking personality traits: From dopamine to hippocampal function? In Stelmack, R. M. (Ed.), On the psychobiology of personality: Essays in honor of Marvin Zuckerman (pp. 453–477). New York: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Pietschnig, J., & Voracek, M. (2015). One century of global IQ gains: A formal meta-analysis of the Flynn effect (1909–2013). Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10(3), 282–306.Google Scholar
Pytlik Zillig, L. M., Hemenover, S. H., & Dienstbier, R. A. (2002). What do we assess when we assess a Big 5 trait? A content analysis of the affective, behavioral and cognitive processes represented in the Big 5 personality inventories. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 847–858.Google Scholar
Raine, A., Moffitt, T. E., Caspi, A., Loeber, R., Stouthamer-Loeber, M., & Lynam, D. (2005). Neurocognitive impairments in boys on the life-course persistent antisocial path. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 114(1), 38–49.Google Scholar
Reeve, C. L., Meyer, R. D., & Bonaccio, S. (2006). Intelligence–personality associations reconsidered: The importance of distinguishing between general and narrow dimensions of intelligence. Intelligence, 34, 387–402.Google Scholar
Richards, J. B., Zhang, L., Mitchell, S., & de Wit, H. (1999). Delay and probability discounting in a model of impulsive behavior: effect of alcohol. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 71, 121–143.Google Scholar
Riemann, R., Angleitner, A., & Strelau, J. (1997). Genetic and environmental influences on personality: A study of twins reared together using the self- and peer report NEO-FFI scales. Journal of Personality, 65, 449–476.Google Scholar
Roberts, B. W., Lejuez, C., Krueger, R. F., Richards, J. M., & Hill, P. L. (2014). What is conscientiousness and how can it be assessed? Developmental Psychology, 50, 1315–1330.Google Scholar
Roberts, R. D., Schulze, R., MacCann, C. (2008). The measurement of emotional intelligence: A decade of progress? In Boyle, G., Matthews, G., & Saklofske, D. H. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of personality theory and assessment, Vol. 2. Los Angeles: Sage.Google Scholar
Rueter, A. R., Abram, S. V., MacDonald, A. W., Rustichini, A., & DeYoung, C. G. (2018). The goal priority network as a neural substrate of Conscientiousness. Human Brain Mapping, 39(9), 3574–3585.Google Scholar
Saklofske, D. H., & Zeidner, M. (Eds.) (1995). International handbook of personality and intelligence. New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
Santarnecchi, E., Emmendorfer, A., & Pascual-Leone, A. (2017). Dissecting the parieto-frontal correlates of fluid intelligence: A comprehensive ALE meta-analysis study. Intelligence, 63, 9–28.Google Scholar
Saucier, G. (1992). Openness versus intellect: Much ado about nothing? European Journal of Personality, 6, 381–386.Google Scholar
Saucier, G. (1994). Trapnell versus the lexical factor: More ado about nothing? European Journal of Personality, 8, 291–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schulte, M. J., Ree, M. J., & Carretta, T. (2004). Emotional intelligence: Not much more than g and personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 37, 1059–1068.Google Scholar
Séguin, J. R., Boulerice, B., Harden, P., Tremblay, R. E., & Pihl, R. O. (1999). Executive functions and physical aggression after controlling for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, general memory, and IQ. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 40, 1197–1208.Google Scholar
Shamosh, N. A., DeYoung, C. G., Green, A. E., Reis, D. L., Johnson, M. R., Conway, A. R. A. et al. (2008). Individual differences in delay discounting: Relation to intelligence, working memory, and anterior prefrontal cortex. Psychological Science, 19, 904–911.Google Scholar
Shamosh, N.A., & Gray, J.R. (2008). Delay discounting and intelligence: A meta-analysis. Intelligence, 38, 289–305.Google Scholar
Shiner, R. L., & DeYoung, C. G. (2013). The structure of temperament and personality traits: A developmental perspective. In Zelazo, P. D. (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of developmental psychology (pp. 113–141). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Silvia, P. J. (2008). Another look at creativity and intelligence: Exploring higher-order models and probable confounds. Personality and Individual differences, 44(4), 1012–1021.Google Scholar
Smillie, L. D., Varsavsky, V., Avery, R. E., & Perry, R. (2016). Trait intellect predicts cognitive engagement: Evidence from a resource allocation perspective. European Journal of Personality, 30(3), 215–226.Google Scholar
Soto, C. J., & John, O. P. (2017). The next Big Five Inventory (BFI-2): Developing and assessing a hierarchical model with 15 facets to enhance bandwidth, fidelity, and predictive power. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113, 117–143.Google Scholar
Spearman, C. (1904). “General intelligence,” objectively determined and measured. American Journal of Psychology, 15, 201–293.Google Scholar
Stanek, K. C. (2014). Meta-analyses of personality and cognitive ability. Doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota.Google Scholar
Steinmayr, R., & Spinath, B. (2009). What explains boys’ stronger confidence in their intelligence? Sex Roles, 61, 736–749.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J., & Ruzgis, P. (Eds.) (1994). Personality and intelligence. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Swann, A. C., Bjork, J. M., Moeller, F. G., & Dougherty, D. M. (2002). Two models of impulsivity: relationship to personality traits and psychopathology. Biological Psychiatry, 51, 988–994.Google Scholar
Syzmanowicz, A., & Furnham, A. (2011). Gender differences in self-estimates of general, mathematical, spatial and verbal intelligence: Four meta analyses. Learning and Individual Differences, 21, 493–504.Google Scholar
Vigil-Colet, A., & Morales-Vives, F. (2005). How impulsivity is related to intelligence and academic achievement. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 8, 199–204.Google Scholar
Von Stumm, S., & Ackerman, P. L. (2013). Investment and intellect: A review and meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 139, 841–869.Google Scholar
Wacker, J., & Smillie, L. D. (2015). Trait extraversion and dopamine function. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 9(6), 225–238.Google Scholar
Wainwright, M. A., Wright, M. J., Luciano, M., Geffen, G. M., & Martin, N. G. (2008). Genetic covariation among facets of openness to experience and general cognitive ability. Twin Research and Human Genetics, 11, 275–286.Google Scholar
Wallace, J. (1966). An abilities conception of personality: Some implications for personality measurement. American Psychologist, 21, 132–138.Google Scholar
Waller, N. G., DeYoung, C. G., & Bouchard, T. J. (2016). The recaptured scale technique: A method for testing the structural robustness of personality scales. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 51, 433–445.Google Scholar
Weisberg, Y. J., DeYoung, C. G., & Hirsh, J. B. (2011). Gender differences in personality across the ten aspects of the Big Five. Frontiers in Personality Science and Individual Differences, 2, 178. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00178Google Scholar
Whiteside, S. P., & Lynam, R. W. (2001). The Five Factor Model and impulsivity: Using a structural model of personality to understand impulsivity. Personality and Individual Differences, 30, 669–689.Google Scholar
Willerman, L., Turner, R. G., & Peterson, M. (1976). A comparison of the predictive validity of typical and maximal personality measures. Journal of Research in Personality, 10, 482–492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilt, J., & Revelle, W. (2015). Affect, behaviour, cognition and desire in the Big Five: An analysis of item content and structure. European Journal of Personality, 29(4), 478–497.Google Scholar
Wolf, M. B., & Ackerman, P. L. (2005). Extraversion and intelligence: A meta-analytic investigation. Personality and Individual Differences, 39, 531–542.Google Scholar
Woo, S. E., Chernyshenko, O. S., Longley, A., Zhang, Z. X., Chiu, C. Y., & Stark, S. E. (2014). Openness to experience: Its lower level structure, measurement, and cross-cultural equivalence. Journal of Personality Assessment, 96(1), 29–45.Google Scholar
Woo, S. E., Chernyshenko, O. S., Stark, S. E., & Conz, G. (2014). Validity of six openness facets in predicting work behaviors: A meta-analysis. Journal of Personality Assessment, 96(1), 76–86.Google Scholar
Yamagata, S., Suzuki, A., Ando, J., Ono, Y., Kijima, N., Yoshimura, K. et al. (2006). Is the genetic structure of human personality universal? A cross-cultural twin study from North America, Europe, and Asia. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 987–998.Google Scholar
Zeidner, M., & Matthews, G. (2000). Intelligence and personality. In Sternberg, R. (Ed.), Handbook of intelligence (pp. 581–610). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Zhang, J., & Ziegler, M. (2015). Interaction effects between openness and fluid intelligence predicting scholastic performance. Journal of Intelligence, 3, 91–110.Google Scholar
Ziegler, M., Danay, E., Heene, M., Asendorpf, J., & Bühner, M. (2012). Openness, fluid intelligence, and crystallized intelligence: Toward an integrative model. Journal of Research in Personality, 46, 173–183.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×