tag:theconversation.com,2011:/us/topics/big-five-17929/articlesBig Five – The Conversation2021-09-21T02:29:36Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1681942021-09-21T02:29:36Z2021-09-21T02:29:36ZPersonality traits may drive our ideas about fairness and sharing<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/422063/original/file-20210920-23-71epr8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=2%2C2%2C1595%2C1061&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Disputes over fairness can create conflict. Families squabble over inheritances, societies polarise around the question of how to distribute wealth fairly, and nations become mired in territorial quarrels. </p>
<p>Many of these disputes stem from different perspectives people have on fairness. In new research, we found people’s ideas about fairness may stem from their personality traits.</p>
<h2>No universal rule for sharing</h2>
<p>Many disputes over fairness stem from the fact there isn’t a single universal moral solution to sharing a resource. Instead, there are several commonly used and widely acceptable moral stances, or norms.</p>
<p>Consider dividing an inheritance among siblings. Under the “norm of equality”, the inheritance should be split equally among them, regardless of any other information.</p>
<p>By the “equity norm”, however, a sibling in dire economic need should receive a larger share. By the “indirect reciprocity norm”, a sibling who has done more to take care of their parents while they were ill deserves a greater portion of the inheritance.</p>
<p>Individuals may disagree in good faith about which of these norms should guide the division of the inheritance.</p>
<h2>More than selfishness</h2>
<p>Previous research has shown that, in situations where multiple norms can be applied, individuals gravitate toward norms that best <a href="https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2014.2112">serve their economic interests</a>. </p>
<p>But is this the whole story? Do people just select norms to serve their momentary interest? Or might they also have stable preferences for particular norms, even when they have no personal stake? </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/what-do-children-think-of-economic-inequality-we-did-an-experiment-to-find-out-163262">What do children think of economic inequality? We did an experiment to find out</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>In our work at the Decision Neuroscience Lab at the University of Melbourne, we shed light on these issues in two new studies. In the first, we developed a <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-74975-0">new way to measure the relative importance individuals give to different fairness norms</a>. In the second, we <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/19485506211038295">related these measures to personality traits</a>.</p>
<h2>The ten-dollar question</h2>
<p>To measure the importance individuals assign to different norms, we asked participants to make moral judgements of how people chose to share $10 in a simple game. Our participants rated different sharing behaviours on a scale from “morally good” to “morally bad”. </p>
<p>The participants showed prominent differences in how they judged different sharing behaviours. Most participants judged even-handed sharing (dividing the $10 equally) as more moral than more generous sharing (giving away more than they kept), but some did the opposite. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/422067/original/file-20210920-25-140xtq0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/422067/original/file-20210920-25-140xtq0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/422067/original/file-20210920-25-140xtq0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/422067/original/file-20210920-25-140xtq0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/422067/original/file-20210920-25-140xtq0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/422067/original/file-20210920-25-140xtq0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/422067/original/file-20210920-25-140xtq0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">When judging the morality of another person choice to split $10 dollars with a third party, people’s responses correlated with personality.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Some participants were quite harsh in their judgements of low sharing (such as keeping $9 and giving only $1 to one’s partner), whereas others were more accepting of such behaviours. </p>
<p>To describe these differences, we mathematically derived a set of scores for each individual, where each score reflected the importance they place on a different fairness norm.</p>
<h2>Why should personality matter?</h2>
<p>Personality traits describe characteristics of individuals that are relatively stable over time, and also persist across situations. In our research, we looked at the set of personality traits described by the Big Five framework which include: extraversion, agreeableness, openness to experience, conscientiousness, and negative emotionality.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/psychology-by-numbers-a-brief-history-of-personality-tests-53927">Psychology by numbers: a brief history of personality tests</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>In some situations, most individuals behave in a similar way regardless of their personality. Almost everyone is likely to agree it is morally wrong to murder an innocent person. </p>
<p>In other situations, there will be individual differences in behaviour that do not systematically relate to personality differences. Residents of an apartment building will reliably press different buttons in the lift, but each person’s choice is determined by where they live. </p>
<p>However, many situations produce individual differences in behaviour that reveal people’s personalities — such as how they respond differently to stress, good news, a major life change, and so on. So, why might judging the behaviour of others be one of these situations?</p>
<p>First, there are robust individual differences in the importance people assign to fairness norms in moral judgements. Second, previous research has demonstrated that agreeableness in particular <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000217">predicts adherence to fairness norms</a> in several sharing situations. </p>
<p>Agreeableness is thought to capture kindness, politeness and compassion when dealing with others. How agreeableness is connected to fairness-related moral judgements of other people has not been studied before. </p>
<p>One might expect a kind, polite and compassionate person to be more forgiving and tolerant when judging others. On the other hand, agreeableness predicts higher adherence to fairness norms, so perhaps a polite and compassionate person would be highly sensitive to perceived unfairness, and thus judge the perpetrator of the unfairness more harshly. We hypothesised the latter to be the case.</p>
<h2>How do personality traits relate to importance people assign to fairness norms?</h2>
<p>For our second study, we measured agreeableness alongside other personality traits (including extraversion, conscientiousness, negative emotionality, and openness) using a reliable and well-validated questionnaire. We then examined associations these personality traits had with moral judgements in our sharing game. </p>
<p>Our findings supported the idea that agreeable individuals would judge abuses of fairness norms more harshly – and provided no support for the idea that agreeable people would be forgiving and tolerant when judging others that abuse fairness norms. Agreeable people may still be more forgiving when they are affected by norm abuses themselves, but do not seem to be forgiving on other people’s behalf. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/422069/original/file-20210920-28-rs5qw7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/422069/original/file-20210920-28-rs5qw7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/422069/original/file-20210920-28-rs5qw7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/422069/original/file-20210920-28-rs5qw7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/422069/original/file-20210920-28-rs5qw7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/422069/original/file-20210920-28-rs5qw7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/422069/original/file-20210920-28-rs5qw7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">People who score highly for agreeableness, conscientiousness, openness and extraversion tended to judge the decisions of others more harshly.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>We found people who scored highly on the traits of conscientiousness, openness and extraversion also made harsher judgements. These findings were somewhat surprising to us, so we recommend future studies to further investigate why this is the case. </p>
<p>Do conscientious people have a stricter understanding of fairness norms, or are they more diligent when rating the behaviour of others? Are extraverts more sensitive to abuse of some moral norms because they are more sensitive to social rewards and punishments than introverts? Do highly open people have a more confident understanding of moral situations? Further research is needed to get to the bottom of these questions.</p>
<h2>More tolerance for moral plurality</h2>
<p>What do these findings mean for conflicts around fairness that we encounter in our everyday lives? At least some of these conflicts likely occur because of differences in the importance individuals assign to different fairness norms. </p>
<p>Revealing these differences cannot settle disputes, but it may help us better understand moral plurality, and have a more tolerant approach to differences in perspective when negotiating fairness in our everyday lives.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/coronavirus-and-you-how-your-personality-affects-how-you-cope-and-what-you-can-do-about-it-134037">Coronavirus and you: how your personality affects how you cope and what you can do about it</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/168194/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The research described in this article was supported by an Australian Research Council grant (ARC DP160103353) to Stefan Bode.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Daniel Feuerriegel and Luke Smillie do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>There are many ways to decide what’s ‘fair’ in a given situation. Which one you prefer may depend on what kind of person you are.Milan Andrejević, PhD Candidate in Psychology, The University of MelbourneDaniel Feuerriegel, Research Fellow In Psychology, The University of MelbourneLuke Smillie, Associate Professor in Personality Psychology, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1646862021-07-29T12:23:40Z2021-07-29T12:23:40ZLead exposure during childhood may influence adult personality, and not for the better<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/413162/original/file-20210726-23-1t9x3iv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C4717%2C3036&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Lead pollution may have wider ranging adverse effects on health than previously thought.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/double-exposure-portrait-of-face-of-young-man-royalty-free-image/1219500833">Busà Photography/Moment via Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p><em>The <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/topics/research-brief-83231">Research Brief</a> is a short take about interesting academic work.</em></p>
<h2>The big idea</h2>
<p>Children raised in areas with more atmospheric lead pollution grew up to have less <a href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2020104118">adaptive and less mature personalities</a>, according to a study I led of over 1.5 million people across the U.S. and Europe. As adults, they were less conscientious, less agreeable and, in some cases, more neurotic.</p>
<p>Researchers have known for many years that childhood lead exposure has <a href="https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2020.19998">harmful effects on brain development</a>. It causes <a href="https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.1996.03530290033034">mental health problems</a> and <a href="https://doi.org/10.2202/1935-1682.1796">criminal behavior</a> that costs the U.S. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1001/archpediatrics.2009.128">over US$1.2 trillion</a>. And lead-related problems may be much greater and more widespread than researchers previously thought because lead exposure may also affect <a href="https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2018.4192">everyday personality traits</a>.</p>
<p>To determine whether lead exposure causes personality changes, my team and I examined personality differences before and after the U.S. <a href="https://www.epa.gov/clean-air-act-overview/evolution-clean-air-act">1970 Clean Air Act</a>. This law forced companies to remove lead from gasoline and led to massive reductions in atmospheric lead. </p>
<p>We compared local changes in atmospheric lead levels with changes in that area’s average personality trait scores, using data from an online personality questionnaire assessing <a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/big-5-personality-traits">Big Five personality traits</a>: openness to experience (intellectual curiosity and creative imagination), extraversion (sociability and assertiveness), conscientiousness (organization and responsibility), agreeableness (compassion and respectfulness) and neuroticism (tendency toward anxiety, depression and hostility). We found that people born after lead levels began to decline had more mature personalities than those born when lead levels were high. They were slightly more conscientious, more agreeable and less neurotic. This suggests that lead may actually cause personality changes.</p>
<p>We also tested whether there were similar effects of lead exposure in Europe, where <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2015.01.036">lead was phased out from gasoline more gradually</a> than in the U.S. As in the U.S., we found that Europeans exposed to greater amounts of atmospheric lead were also less agreeable and more neurotic. However, they were not less conscientious. These results are an example of how <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.81.2.322">psychological findings often differ across cultures</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/413165/original/file-20210726-27-1monz4b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Factory smokestacks emitting clouds of pollution over a hazy skyline." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/413165/original/file-20210726-27-1monz4b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/413165/original/file-20210726-27-1monz4b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/413165/original/file-20210726-27-1monz4b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/413165/original/file-20210726-27-1monz4b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/413165/original/file-20210726-27-1monz4b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/413165/original/file-20210726-27-1monz4b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/413165/original/file-20210726-27-1monz4b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The 1970 Clean Air Act scrubbed both lead out of the sky and its negative influences on personality development.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/pollution-royalty-free-image/575346013">Dirk Meister/Moment via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Why it matters</h2>
<p>Personality traits <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111%2Fj.1745-6916.2007.00047.x">influence nearly every aspect of people’s lives</a>, from happiness to career success to longevity. This means that the effects of lead exposure on personality are likely to have widespread consequences.</p>
<p>Thankfully, we found that lead exposure had a relatively small effect. But because <a href="https://dx.doi.org/10.1097%2FPHH.0000000000000889">so many millions of people have been exposed</a> to some amount of lead throughout their lives, these effects add up at the societal level.</p>
<p>Lead exposure is also a social justice issue. For example, Black children are <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4605011/">twice as likely to have high levels of lead in their blood</a> as white children. Because <a href="https://doi.org/10.1097/PHH.0000000000000891">vulnerable groups tend to have higher levels of lead exposure</a>, reducing childhood lead exposure is one step toward a more equitable society.</p>
<h2>What still isn’t known</h2>
<p>Since the Clean Air Act, children have <a href="https://www.epa.gov/americaschildrenenvironment/ace-biomonitoring-lead">much less lead exposure than in the 1960s and 1970s</a>. But more research is needed on other sources of exposure, like <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/10643389.2011.556556">lead pipes and contaminated groundwater</a>. Examining modern sources of lead exposure could help scientists better understand how they may be linked to personality change.</p>
<h2>What’s next</h2>
<p>Personality traits are generally <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.08.034">quite stable</a> across time. But researchers have found that personality can change in response to life experiences. Because <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000503">personality change has widespread consequences</a>, my team and I plan to continue studying how other experiences like traveling abroad in college or learning to use the internet in old age affect personality.</p>
<p>[<em>The Conversation’s science, health and technology editors pick their favorite stories.</em> <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters/science-editors-picks-71/?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=science-favorite">Weekly on Wednesdays</a>.]</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/164686/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Ted Schwaba does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Early exposure to lead pollution may lead to less mature personality traits as an adult.Ted Schwaba, Postdoctoral Researcher in Psychology, The University of Texas at AustinLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1423642020-07-15T12:13:30Z2020-07-15T12:13:30ZPersonality can predict who’s a rule-follower and who flouts COVID-19 social distancing guidelines<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/347340/original/file-20200714-139854-1wyiypp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=107%2C86%2C3368%2C2069&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Who will wait on the checkout line footprints and who will rage against them?</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/vons-shopper-maintain-safe-distance-in-the-checkout-line-at-news-photo/1212798930">Al Seib/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>As states struggle to get the COVID-19 balance right – between eased restrictions and rising infection rates – it falls to individuals to abide by mask-wearing rules and to maintain six feet of distance between themselves and others when out and about.</p>
<p>Some people dutifully endure the hardships of coronavirus lockdown, while others can’t be bothered to keep their distance. Why?</p>
<p><a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=fXwMNNMAAAAJ&hl=en">As a cognitive researcher</a>, I’m interested in how what psychologists call the <a href="https://www.verywellmind.com/the-big-five-personality-dimensions-2795422">“Big Five” personality traits</a> influence the ways individuals deal with social distancing rules in daily life. Who is more likely to mask up every time they leave their home? And who is more likely to flout these evolving behavioral expectations?</p>
<h2>Personal space, territorial invasion</h2>
<p>How comfortable you are being near to other people has a big cultural component. Anthropologist Edward T. Hall made a study of <a href="https://study.com/academy/lesson/what-is-proxemics-definition-examples.html">what he called proxemics</a>, measuring personal space expectations around the world.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/347172/original/file-20200713-50-13b1guu.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/347172/original/file-20200713-50-13b1guu.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/347172/original/file-20200713-50-13b1guu.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=457&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/347172/original/file-20200713-50-13b1guu.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=457&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/347172/original/file-20200713-50-13b1guu.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=457&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/347172/original/file-20200713-50-13b1guu.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=575&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/347172/original/file-20200713-50-13b1guu.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=575&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/347172/original/file-20200713-50-13b1guu.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=575&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Pandemic response means the personal space bubble is now bigger than the previous norm.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Personal_Spaces_in_Proxemics.svg">Jean-Louis Grall/Wikimedia Commons</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Touching or whispering happens in the closest zone. From about 1.5 to 4 feet away is the distance reserved for communicating with friends. Now public health recommendations have extended that zone to 6 feet or more, the distance that had been normal for interactions with those you don’t know well.</p>
<p>When people violate proximity norms, it can feel like they’re invading your territory. And nowadays, the stakes are higher than just your personal comfort – these distance guidelines are meant to protect you from infectious germs.</p>
<p>Subconsciously, everyone knows the traditional spatial zones. The “wait here” foot emblems now found at a store’s checkout line are necessary to help rewrite the cognitive script for where you stand until it becomes a mindless habit. You are forced to “unlearn” subconscious behavior; old dogs must learn new tricks. </p>
<p>Strangers who invade your social distance are being aggressive if they’re aware of what they’re doing. But if it’s done mindlessly or subconsciously, then personality traits are helping drive the behavior.</p>
<p>[<em>Deep knowledge, daily.</em> <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters/the-daily-3?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=deepknowledge">Sign up for The Conversation’s newsletter</a>.]</p>
<h2>Predictions based on personality traits</h2>
<p>For more than four decades, psychology researchers have divvied people up by personality types based on an individual’s <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781849200479.n9">combination of five key traits</a>. They’re used to predict how people make purchases, <a href="https://www.floridatechonline.com/blog/business/how-the-big-five-personality-traits-influence-work-behavior/">behave at work</a>, even <a href="https://www.psychologicalscience.org/news/releases/personality-traits-life-outcomes-replication.html">long-term life outcomes</a> like marriage stability and career achievement. <a href="http://psychology.iresearchnet.com/counseling-psychology/history-of-counseling/paul-costa-and-robert-mccrae/">Paul Costa and Robert McRae</a> popularized the acronym OCEAN, for openness, conscientiousness, extroversion, agreeableness and neuroticism.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/347342/original/file-20200714-38-fdgfjd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/347342/original/file-20200714-38-fdgfjd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/347342/original/file-20200714-38-fdgfjd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=342&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/347342/original/file-20200714-38-fdgfjd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=342&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/347342/original/file-20200714-38-fdgfjd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=342&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/347342/original/file-20200714-38-fdgfjd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=430&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/347342/original/file-20200714-38-fdgfjd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=430&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/347342/original/file-20200714-38-fdgfjd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=430&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Everyone varies from high to low on each of the five personality traits.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/big-five-personality-traits-psychology-concept-royalty-free-image/1242962102">Olivier Le Moal/iStock via Getty Images Plus</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>An open individual is inclined to be curious, imaginative, creative, original, artistic and flexible. Openness reflects a tendency to think in abstract, complex ways. People high in openness tend to be adventurous and intellectual and enjoy the arts, while those on the opposite end of the spectrum tend to be practical, conventional and focused on the concrete. The more open your personality is, the better you might cope with uncertainty over a long, sustained period – as in the case of a global pandemic.</p>
<p>Conscientiousness is the tendency to be habitually careful, reliable, hard-working, well-organized and purposeful. A conscientious person controls, regulates and directs their impulses. They would likely be early adopters of mask-wearing, even without direction to do so. This trait makes someone less willing to violate territorial space and social distancing guidelines.</p>
<p>Extroversion is characterized by being outgoing and drawing energy from interacting with others, compared to introverts who get their energy from within themselves. Behavioral neuroscience research has <a href="https://doi.org/10.3758/s13415-014-0331-6">revealed two subtypes of this trait</a>.</p>
<p>Agentic extroversion is about being comfortable in the limelight and taking a leadership position. These people are less likely to feel a strong bond with others and have more interest in going for rewards in social or workplace contexts.</p>
<p>On the other hand, affiliative extroverts don’t seek out leadership roles as much and have close social bonds with a lot of people from which they gather happiness and meaning.</p>
<p>Both types of extroverts would likely enjoy virtual networking during isolation, while probably struggling with isolation if sheltering alone.</p>
<p>Agreeableness reflects compliance. It is the opposite pole of antagonism and reflects a tendency to be good-natured, acquiescent, courteous, helpful and trusting. People high in this trait would probably go along with mask-wearing right away and be more likely to follow social distancing guidelines as soon as they’re announced without grumbling about the rules.</p>
<p>Neuroticism is characterized by impulsivity and a tendency to experience negative emotions including anxiety, worry, fear, anger, depression or sadness, hostility, self-consciousness and loneliness. This trait is associated with <a href="https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.100352">wishful thinking and disengagement</a> in order to escape feelings of distress. Presumably people high on neuroticism would tend to react to the pandemic with avoidance and denial.</p>
<h2>The dark triad of personality traits</h2>
<p>Personalities can have their dark sides, too.</p>
<p>Narcissism involves loving oneself obsessively; it goes along with grandiosity and vanity.</p>
<p>Machiavellianism is about manipulating others; it’s characterized by cynicism and long-term, calculating strategies.</p>
<p>Finally there’s psychopathy, meaning a lack of empathy. Psychopathic people are usually impulsive and have cold interpersonal relations. Individuals at the higher end of the continuum are deceptive, aggressive, sexually promiscuous and coercive.</p>
<p>All of these dark triad traits, as psychologists group them, would likely be associated with more social distancing violations.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/347344/original/file-20200714-22-102fpcp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/347344/original/file-20200714-22-102fpcp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/347344/original/file-20200714-22-102fpcp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=437&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/347344/original/file-20200714-22-102fpcp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=437&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/347344/original/file-20200714-22-102fpcp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=437&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/347344/original/file-20200714-22-102fpcp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=549&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/347344/original/file-20200714-22-102fpcp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=549&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/347344/original/file-20200714-22-102fpcp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=549&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Personality traits influence who’s fine with masks and who isn’t.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/taxi-driver-with-thumbs-up-and-wearing-a-facemask-royalty-free-image/1223488542">andresr/E+ via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Personality influences your behavior</h2>
<p>Everyone varies on all of those personality traits from high to low. It’s possible to deduce a personality profile for someone more likely to rampantly violate social distancing guidelines.</p>
<p>Pulling from meta-analyses of <a href="https://doi.org/10.1017/psrm.2017.14">how personality affects pro-social behaviors</a>, I’ve come up with this formulation. I have in mind coronavirus-mitigating behaviors in the U.S., but it could be tested cross-culturally and in other contexts.</p>
<p>Social distancing violator = Low openness + Low conscientiousness + Low agreeableness + High neuroticism + High Machiavellianism + High narcissism + High psychopathy + Error</p>
<p>My model predicts that a person who scores lower in openness, conscientiousness and agreeableness would be more likely to violate social distancing guidelines. Same for someone higher in neuroticism, Machiavellianism, narcissism and psychopathy.</p>
<p>The error term in the equation is a bit of a fudge factor; it represents all the variation in social distancing that is not explained by the personality traits. For example, political ideology influences social distancing compliance, with <a href="https://voxeu.org/article/political-beliefs-and-compliance-social-distancing-orders">Republicans less likely to adhere</a> to social distancing orders.</p>
<p>Psychology researchers are starting to collect data during the pandemic that supports this model. In one study, for instance, Pavel Blagov found that people with lower levels of agreeableness and conscientiousness were less likely to <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550620936439">endorse health recommendations</a> related to social distancing and hygiene during the coronavirus pandemic. </p>
<p>Personality is not fixed; it <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2008.00543.x">can evolve over one’s lifespan</a>. As the coronavirus crisis drags on, I’ll be interested to see how adherence to social distancing guidelines changes over time – and wondering how much personality traits are changing too.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/142364/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>James M. Honeycutt does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Psychologists call these traits the ‘Big Five’: openness, conscientiousness, extroversion, agreeableness and neuroticism. A researcher suggests your profile implies your response to social distancing.James M. Honeycutt, Lecturer in Executive Education; Distinguished Professor Emeritus of Communication Studies from Louisiana State University, University of Texas at DallasLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/957352018-05-24T10:22:34Z2018-05-24T10:22:34ZPersonality tests with deep-sounding questions provide shallow answers about the ‘true’ you<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/220226/original/file-20180523-51141-s5bwj2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=529%2C98%2C4742%2C3377&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">A quirky quiz probably isn't going to tell you much about your innermost essence.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/portrait-smiling-young-woman-covering-her-648726070">StunningArt/Shutterstock.com</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Have you ever clicked on a link like “What does your favorite animal say about you?” wondering what your love of hedgehogs reveals about your psyche? Or filled out a personality assessment to gain new understanding into whether you’re an introverted or extroverted “type”? People love turning to these kinds of personality quizzes and tests on the hunt for deep insights into themselves. People tend to believe they have <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691616689495">a “true” and revealing self</a> hidden somewhere deep within, so it’s natural that assessments claiming to unveil it will be appealing. </p>
<p><a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=Ep1t9nsAAAAJ&hl=en">As</a> <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=So__A9oAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=sra">psychologists</a>, we noticed something striking about assessments that claim to uncover people’s “true type.” Many of the questions are poorly constructed – their wording can be ambiguous and they often contain forced choices between options that are not opposites. This can be true of BuzzFeed-type quizzes as well as more seemingly sober assessments.</p>
<p>On the other hand, assessments created by trained personality psychologists use questions that are more straightforward to interpret. The most notable example is probably the well-respected <a href="https://ipip.ori.org/newBigFive5broadKey.htm">Big Five Inventory</a>. Rather than sorting people into “types,” it scores people on the established psychological dimensions of openness to new experience, conscientiousness, extroversion, agreeableness and neuroticism. This simplicity is by design; psychology researchers know that the more respondents struggle to understand the question, the worse the question is.</p>
<p>But the lack of rigor in “type” assessments turns out to be a feature, not a bug, for the general public. What makes tests less valid can ironically make them more interesting. Since most people aren’t trained to think about psychology in a scientifically rigorous way, it stands to reason they also won’t be great at evaluating those assessments. We recently conducted <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550618766409">series of studies</a> to investigate how consumers view these tests. When people try to answer these harder questions, do they think to themselves “This question is poorly written”? Or instead do they focus on its difficulty and think “This question’s deep”? Our results suggest that a desire for deep insight can lead to deep confusion.</p>
<h2>Confusing difficult for deep</h2>
<p>In our first study, we showed people items from both the Big Five and from the Keirsey Temperament Sorter (KTS), a popular “type” assessment that contains many questions we suspected people find comparatively difficult. Our participants rated each item in two ways. First, they rated difficulty. That is, how confusing and ambiguous did they find it? Second, what was its perceived “depth”? In other words, to what extent did they feel the item seemed to be getting at something hidden deep in the unconscious?</p>
<p>Sure enough, not only were these perceptions correlated, the KTS was seen as both more difficult and deeper. In follow-up studies, we experimentally manipulated difficulty. In one study, we modified Big Five items to make them harder to answer like the KTS items, and again we found that participants rated the more difficult versions as “deeper.”</p>
<p>We also noticed that some personality assessments seem to derive their intrigue from having seemingly nothing to do with personality at all. Take <a href="https://www.buzzfeed.com/agh/this-color-association-test-will-reveal-the-age-you-are-at-h">one BuzzFeed quiz</a>, for example, that asks about which colors people associate with abstract concepts like letters and days of the week and then outputs “the true age of your soul.” Even if people trust BuzzFeed more for entertainment than psychological truths, perhaps they are actually on board with the idea that these difficult, abstract decisions do reveal some deep insights. In fact, that is the entire idea behind <a href="http://www.emory.edu/EMORY_REPORT/erarchive/2001/May/erMay.7/5_7_01lilienfeld.html">classically problematic</a> measures such as the Rorschach, or “ink blot,” test. </p>
<p>In two studies inspired by that BuzzFeed quiz, we found exactly that. We gave people items from purported “personality assessment” checklists. In one study, we assigned half the participants to the “difficult” condition, wherein the assessment items required them to choose which of two colors they associated with abstract concepts, like the letter “M.” In the “easier” condition, respondents were still required to rate colors on how much they associated them with those abstract concepts, but they more simply rated one color at a time instead of choosing between two.</p>
<p>Again, participants rated the difficult version as deeper. Seemingly, the sillier the assessment, the better people think it can read the hidden self.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/220227/original/file-20180524-51121-1e0hdfm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/220227/original/file-20180524-51121-1e0hdfm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/220227/original/file-20180524-51121-1e0hdfm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/220227/original/file-20180524-51121-1e0hdfm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/220227/original/file-20180524-51121-1e0hdfm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/220227/original/file-20180524-51121-1e0hdfm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/220227/original/file-20180524-51121-1e0hdfm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/220227/original/file-20180524-51121-1e0hdfm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Complicated or hard-to-parse questions about yourself aren’t going to spring open a shortcut to the true you.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/optical-form-examination-pencil-213521044">Basar/Shutterstock.com</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Intuition may steer you wrong</h2>
<p>One of the implications of this research is that people are going to have a hard time leaving behind the bad ideas baked into popular yet unscientific personality assessments. The most notable example is the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, which infamously remains quite popular while doing a fairly poor job of assessing personality, due to <a href="https://www.vox.com/2014/7/15/5881947/myers-briggs-personality-test-meaningless">longstanding issues</a> with the <a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/give-and-take/201309/goodbye-mbti-the-fad-won-t-die">assessment itself</a> and the long-discredited <a href="https://medium.com/@AdamMGrant/mbti-if-you-want-me-back-you-need-to-change-too-c7f1a7b6970">Jungian theory</a> behind it. Our findings suggest that Myers-Briggs-like assessments that have largely been debunked by experts might persist in part because their formats overlap quite well with people’s intuitions about what will best access the “true self.” </p>
<p>People’s intuitions do them no favors here. Intuitions often <a href="https://www.basicbooks.com/titles/andrew-shtulman/scienceblind/9780465094929/">undermine scientific thinking</a> on topics like physics and biology. Psychology is no different. People arbitrarily divide parts of themselves into “true” and superficial components and seem all too willing to believe in tests that claim to definitively make those distinctions. But the idea of a “true self” doesn’t really work as a scientific concept.</p>
<p>Some people might be stuck in a self-reinforcing yet unproductive line of thought: Personality assessments can cause confusion. That confusion in turn overlaps with intuitions of how they think their deep psychology works, and then they tell themselves the confusion is profound. So intuitions about psychology might be especially pernicious. Following them too closely could lead you to know less about yourself, not more.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/95735/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Few can resist an assessment that promises to reveal your hidden, true self. But new research suggests that people mistakenly believe difficult to answer questions offer deep insights.Randy Stein, Assistant Professor of Marketing, California State Polytechnic University, PomonaAlexander Swan, Assistant Professor of Psychology, Eureka CollegeLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/523292015-12-17T04:47:33Z2015-12-17T04:47:33ZFrom Hemingway to Blixen: why Africa still attracts hunters<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/106067/original/image-20151215-23202-1cnzp2u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Hunting for game at the Iwamanzi Game Reserve in South Africa.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Reuters/Siphiwe Sibeko </span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Africa is known as one of the best safari destinations <a href="https://www.mobal.com/blog/travel-talk/best-of-guides/the-worlds-best-hunting-destinations/">in the world</a>. Its vast grass plains, forests, deserts, mountains, big lakes and beautiful coastlines make it hugely attractive.</p>
<p>What makes it even more appealing is the abundance of game, such as elephant, rhino, lion, leopard, buffalo, giraffe and plentiful antelope species like gemsbok, kudu, eland and wildebeest. All have a certain allure for those wanting just to see them in their natural habitat, as well as those interested in hunting.</p>
<p>The main reason hunters hunt is not to kill animals, but to experience the thrill of hunting and nature. Nevertheless, hunting remains a <a href="https://theconversation.com/hunting-in-africa-to-ban-or-not-to-ban-is-the-question-44269">controversial pastime</a>. This has not diminished its appeal. In fact a number of countries use it to their advantage.</p>
<p>Funds generated by hunting in some countries are used for <a href="https://theconversation.com/trophy-hunting-is-not-poaching-and-can-help-conserve-wildlife-29938">conservation</a> and empower local communities. And if an economic value is placed on game, owners and communities are more likely to want them <a href="http://www.natshoot.co.za/uploads/documents/Hunt=Conserve%20SAHGCA2013.pdf">conserved</a>.</p>
<p>South Africa and Namibia are cases in point. Both countries <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-killing-lions-like-cecil-may-actually-be-good-for-conservation-45400">recorded growth</a> in their game populations in the last 20 to 25 years as a result of hunting and good conservation practices by government and the private sector.</p>
<h2>Europeans and Americans going back 200 years</h2>
<p>Africa’s variety of wildlife has been attracting great hunters from Europe and America since the early 1800s. This includes the likes of <a href="http://www.rhodesia.nl/nimrod.htm">Frederick Selous</a>, <a href="http://www.chuckhawks.com/bell_elephants.htm">William Bell</a> (later known as Karamojo Bell), <a href="http://www.africahunting.com/threads/baron-bror-blixen-1886-1946.3196/">Bror von Blixen-Finecke</a> (married to Out of Africa author Karen Blixen), <a href="http://www.africahunting.com/threads/william-charles-baldwin-1826-1903-big-game-hunter.3535/">William Charles Baldwin</a>, <a href="http://www.africahunting.com/threads/roualeyn-george-gordon-cumming-1820-1866-the-lion-hunter.3267/">Gordon Cumming</a>, <a href="http://www.booksofzimbabwe.com/ahrs3.html">William Finaughty</a>, <a href="http://www.africahunting.com/threads/john-alexander-hunter-1887-1963.3120/">JA Hunter</a>, <a href="http://www.ernesthemingwaycollection.com/about-hemingway/ernest-hemingway-in-africa">Ernest Hemingway</a> and even former US president <a href="http://www.theodoreroosevelt.org/site/c.elKSIdOWIiJ8H/b.8344379/k.2B69/The_Hunter.htm">Theodore Roosevelt</a> to name a few.</p>
<p>Selous was a British officer and a good friend of both Roosevelt and Cecil John Rhodes. The well-known <a href="http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/199">Selous Game Reserve</a> in Tanzania is named after him. </p>
<p>Bell was named “Karamojo” due to his hunting in Karamojo in Uganda. He became famous for his ability to place the perfect headshot on elephants. He is reported to have hunted more than 1000.</p>
<p>Cumming, a Scotsman who hunted mainly in South Africa, was known as “lion hunter”. On returning to England, his trophies were shown at the <a href="http://www.africahunting.com/threads/roualeyn-george-gordon-cumming-1820-1866-the-lion-hunter.3267/">Great Exhibition</a> in London, weighing more than 27 metric tonnes.</p>
<p>Most kept a diary of their hunting experiences in Africa. These later became novels portraying their hunting safaris and expeditions <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/books/99/07/04/specials/hemingway-green.html">on the continent</a>, further fuelling its attraction.</p>
<p>The most popular hunting destinations between 1800 and 1950 were Kenya, Rwanda, Uganda, Tanganyika (Tanzania), Portuguese West Africa (Angola), South West Africa (Namibia), Southern Rhodesia (Zimbabwe), Northern Rhodesia (Zambia), Portuguese East Africa (Mozambique), Bechuanaland (Botswana) and South Africa.</p>
<p>Not all are still open to hunters. And countries that still allow hunting are becoming fewer. The main destinations today are Zimbabwe, Zambia, South Africa, Mozambique and Namibia.</p>
<h2>Prime attractions</h2>
<p>Namibia gives hunters the <a href="http://www.smj-safaris.com/bigfivehunting.htm">opportunity</a> to hunt the <a href="http://big5.southafrica.net/#intro">big five</a> – elephant, rhino, lion, leopard and buffalo. There is also the opportunity to hunt various plains game like gemsbok, oryx, springbok and eland – of which gemsbok is the most famous among hunters.</p>
<p>Namibia’s hunting land varies. Sometimes hunters use private land which can vary from a few thousand hectares to millions of hectares. They also use state-owned hunting concession areas the <a href="http://www.huntersnamibia.com/an-overview-of-hunting-in-namibia/">country’s north</a>.</p>
<p>Zimbabwe and Zambia recently <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/travel_news/article-2735902/Zambia-lifts-ban-safari-hunting-attract-tourists-wildlife-authority-pushes-allow-lions-leopards-killed-cash.html">re-allowed hunting</a>. Both have vast game reserves, concessions and national parks. These still provide hunters with the challenge of hunting game in open, unfenced areas. Most encompass thousands of hectares of land where hunters still primarily hunt on foot. </p>
<p>Game is plentiful. And <a href="http://www.huntinginzimbabwe.com/">Zimbabwe</a> is home to the big five.</p>
<p>Zimbabwe and Zambia provide hunters with relatively easy access and good infrastructure. Hunting lodges have well-maintained camps. Accommodation in most cases is in luxury bush camps, called fly camps, erected for the <a href="http://www.safarisdemozambique.com/#!karambenda/c1zwn">hunting season only</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/106004/original/image-20151215-23186-6clf8e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/106004/original/image-20151215-23186-6clf8e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=381&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106004/original/image-20151215-23186-6clf8e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=381&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106004/original/image-20151215-23186-6clf8e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=381&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106004/original/image-20151215-23186-6clf8e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=479&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106004/original/image-20151215-23186-6clf8e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=479&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106004/original/image-20151215-23186-6clf8e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=479&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Game lodges in South Africa give hunters a true African experience.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>South Africa also offers hunters the big five. What makes it particularly attractive is that it has more than 40 <a href="http://www.safaribwana.com/COUNTRIES/South%20Africa/sapages/sahunt.htm">different species to hunt</a>. The country is easily accessible and has better infrastructure than most competitors in Africa.</p>
<p>Accommodation ranges from rustic bush camps to five-star permanent hunting lodges. Hunting takes place mainly on privately owned land where game is well managed. Because game is privately owned, it has a value for owners. This has led to tremendous increases in numbers during the <a href="http://www.natshoot.co.za/uploads/documents/Hunt=Conserve%20SAHGCA2013.pdf">last 20 years</a>.</p>
<p>As in Zimbabwe and Zambia, hunting in Mozambique is conducted in state-owned concession areas. Mozambique nearly faced the extinction of some game species after its long civil war, but has shown some promising <a href="http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2013/06/gorongosa-park/wilson-text">recovery</a>. Traditional hunting areas near Beira were hit the hardest.</p>
<p>Today the best hunting areas are found in more remote areas, near Tanzania and close to Zimbabwe. Wildlife includes a variety of species, but sables can be hunted in most areas, giving Mozambique an advantage over other hunting destinations. Sables are one of the most sought-after animals for hunters.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/52329/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Peet Van Der Merwe receives funding from the NRF.</span></em></p>Hunting remains a controversial pastime. But that hasn’t stopped it attracting hunters wanting to track Africa’s wide array of wild animals.Peet Van Der Merwe, Professor in Tourism, North-West UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/430632015-06-17T20:16:57Z2015-06-17T20:16:57ZMonkey minds: what we can learn from primate personality<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/85347/original/image-20150617-23239-nivria.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=5%2C21%2C3097%2C1989&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">We're not that different from you.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/csd619/3386667066/in/photolist-6agy8u-bEJmhU-ghdM2t-gZP4HP-pdJM7X-2HPs31-qcdZcV-pdJCW8-uGpRDF-8Ysg74-nKHuAn-pT4Mi8-pUZ5Ak-34Ar3H-d8GCt3-dEwTk5-fEQwLJ-p3qJgw-7ZSgky-in6HT2-7ZSf5A-7ZP3Ti-fCu5D7-7ZP4rz-ecZ1N5-571naU-eEYh6W-cG5Wnd-571ntJ-pT5jez-2HPrAy-s16FTp-pSWmVq-pKNxc4-pbY21H-njVsTS-2HK5zv-pJYm4k-ah6a3o-nBVKKA-2HPo3J-adzSEP-4HgzYw-9z4CL2-63z8qN-oC8bVN-d4A6os-7ZP4CT-dT3vYA-56WcEn">Christopher Drake/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/">CC BY-NC</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Every human is different. Some are outgoing, while others are reserved and shy. Some are focused and diligent, while others are haphazard and unfussed. Some people are curious, others avoid novelty and enjoy their rut. </p>
<p>This is reflected in our personality, which is typically measured across five factors, known as the “<a href="http://psychology.about.com/od/personalitydevelopment/a/bigfive.htm">Big Five</a>”. These are:</p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Openness</strong> – intellectual curiosity and preference for novelty</li>
<li><strong>Conscientiousness</strong> – the degree of organisation and self-discipline</li>
<li><strong>Extraversion</strong> – sociability, emotional expression and tendency to seek others’ company</li>
<li><strong>Agreeableness</strong> – degree of trust or suspicious of others and tendencies towards helpfulness and altruism, and<br></li>
<li><strong>Neuroticism</strong> – emotional stability or volatility.</li>
</ul>
<p>But did you know that our primate cousins – other apes (chimpanzees, bonobos, orangutans, gorillas and gibbons) and monkeys – also exhibit a similar personality profile? Some are bold, others shy. Some are friendly, other aggressive. Some are curious, while others are conservative.</p>
<p>But they also differ from us in some interesting ways. And it’s in teasing out these differences that we can learn a surprising amount about the way they live, and how they have evolved.</p>
<h2>Social influence</h2>
<p>Comparative psychologists have long adapted personality tests to measure the personality of other species, including <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886914006217">pets</a>, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0037104">big cats</a>, and our “hairy” <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajp.v72:8/issuetoc">primate relatives</a>. </p>
<p>Since nonhuman animals cannot fill out a questionnaire, a human who knows them well – perhaps a caregiver, zookeeper, owner, researcher or park ranger – rates their personality for them. </p>
<p>Chimpanzees, it turns out, are remarkably similar to us in their personality make-up. They have been found to have the same five personality factors that we have. However, they also have a sixth <a href="http://www.u.arizona.edu/%7Eajf/pdf/King%20%26%20Figueredo%201997.pdf">Dominance</a> factor. This includes features such as: independent, confident, fearless, intelligent, bullying and persistent. </p>
<p>Why do chimps have a Dominance factor and we don’t? It appears to be due to the kind of <a href="https://books.google.com.au/books?id=XsrhU2vV5PIC&hl=en">society that chimps live in</a>. Understanding the dominance hierarchy of male chimpanzees – who is powerful and who is not – is a matter of survival and well-being for every chimpanzee in a community. </p>
<p>Other primates also show interesting variations in personality that correspond to their social dynamics.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/85348/original/image-20150617-23239-talpdf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/85348/original/image-20150617-23239-talpdf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/85348/original/image-20150617-23239-talpdf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/85348/original/image-20150617-23239-talpdf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/85348/original/image-20150617-23239-talpdf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/85348/original/image-20150617-23239-talpdf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=504&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/85348/original/image-20150617-23239-talpdf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=504&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/85348/original/image-20150617-23239-talpdf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=504&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Do I look conscientious or neurotic?</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Rod Waddington/Flickr</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Macaque machinations</h2>
<p>The 22 species of macaque monkeys are the only primates that are as <a href="http://www.iucnredlist.org">widespread in their distribution as we are</a>. Along with their disparate habitats, they also have a wide variation in the structure of the societies, which appears to have <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000041">influenced the evolution of their personalities</a>. </p>
<p>A team of researchers, led by Mark Adams and Alexander Weiss of Edinburgh University, investigated personality and social structure in six species of macaque and found some interesting variation.</p>
<p>There are four main categories of social style, ranging from Grade 1 “despotic” to Grade 4 “tolerant”, depending on how strict or relaxed their female dominance hierarchies are. </p>
<p>Grade 1 species showed strong nepotism or favouritism towards kin and high ranking monkeys. These species include rhesus macaques, a species commonly used in <a href="http://animals.nationalgeographic.com/animals/mammals/rhesus-monkey/">laboratories</a> and <a href="http://history.nasa.gov/animals.html">sent into space before humans</a>, and Japanese macaques, which include the <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txDR1y1drl0">famous snow monkeys</a> who soak in hot springs.</p>
<p>At the other end of the spectrum, the Grade 4 species showed more tolerance in social interactions between unrelated females. This includes Tonkean macaques, which are found in Sulawesi and the nearby Togian Islands in <a href="http://www.arkive.org/tonkean-macaque/macaca-tonkeana/">Indonesia</a>, and Crested macaques, which are <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmjCrZNlOps">critically endangered</a>. </p>
<p>(A wild crested macaque received international attention when he stole a wildlife photographer’s camera and then <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/8615859/Monkey-steals-camera-to-snap-himself.html">photographed himself</a>. This could be an example of a “bold” and “curious” personality.)</p>
<p>In the middle of the social tolerance scale are the Grade 2 and 3 species. This includes Assamese macaques, which are sometimes found at high altitudes <a href="http://www.arkive.org/assam-macaque/macaca-assamensis/">in Nepal and Tibet</a>, and Barbary macaques, which include the infamous <a href="http://www.barbarymacaque.org/">“apes” of Gibraltar</a> (actually monkeys, not apes), who are often overweight and aggressive because tourists overfeed them.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/85349/original/image-20150617-23223-sphe68.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/85349/original/image-20150617-23223-sphe68.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/85349/original/image-20150617-23223-sphe68.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/85349/original/image-20150617-23223-sphe68.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/85349/original/image-20150617-23223-sphe68.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/85349/original/image-20150617-23223-sphe68.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/85349/original/image-20150617-23223-sphe68.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/85349/original/image-20150617-23223-sphe68.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Do I look aggressive to you?</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Michelle Bender/Flickr</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">CC BY-NC-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Personality differences between macaque species</h2>
<p>Interestingly, the individual species of macaques didn’t all have the same personality factors. The Japanese, Barbary, crested and Tonkean macaques had only four, while the Assamese had five, and rhesus monkeys had six factors. </p>
<p>All of the species exhibited the dimension of Friendliness. This seems to be a personality factor unique to macaques, and is a blend of chimpanzee Agreeableness and human Altruism. </p>
<p>Tonkean macaques also had a Sociability personality factor. Just like chimpanzees and humans, this species of macaque uses affiliative contacts (i.e. friendship) to reinforce bonds. Only crested macaques did not show the personality factor of Openness (i.e. curiosity), usually found in humans and other primates. The factors Dominance and Anxiety were found for rhesus and Japanese macaques.</p>
<h2>The old and the new</h2>
<p>The study also showed the fascinating connections between personality and social style. Grade 1 despotic species – Japanese and rhesus macaques – were rather similar, and so were Grades 2, 3 and 4, including the more tolerant species such as Assamese, Tonkean and crested macaques. </p>
<p>On the evolutionary scale, African primates, such as the African Barbary macaque, are “older”. Therefore, they represented the “ancestral” social behaviours for macaques.</p>
<p>Barbary macaque personality has a Dominance/Confidence factor, which is related to social assertiveness, an Opportunism factor, which relates to aggression and impulsivity, a Friendliness factor, relating to social affiliation, and an Openness factor, relating to curiosity and exploratory behaviour. </p>
<p>Rhesus and Japanese macaques, on the other hand, are “younger” on the evolutionary scale. Therefore, the Dominance and Anxiety factors seen in these species must have evolved later.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/85350/original/image-20150617-23259-1g5enlg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/85350/original/image-20150617-23259-1g5enlg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/85350/original/image-20150617-23259-1g5enlg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/85350/original/image-20150617-23259-1g5enlg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/85350/original/image-20150617-23259-1g5enlg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/85350/original/image-20150617-23259-1g5enlg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/85350/original/image-20150617-23259-1g5enlg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/85350/original/image-20150617-23259-1g5enlg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Psst. You’re disagreeable.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">jinterwas/Flickr</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Understanding the personality of an individual animal or species can help in animal management and welfare. Rhesus macaques, for example, display an Anxiety personality factor. These monkeys are also most commonly used in bio-medical laboratory research. Knowing that some individuals may be prone to anxiety means that researchers must make extra efforts to alleviate any potential distress. </p>
<p>The findings that some Barbary macaques may be especially socially assertive, aggressive, impulsive, curious and exploratory may also help us convince tourists to keep their distance from these monkeys in Gibraltar to avoid conflicts!</p>
<p>Such studies of animal personality also shed light on our own personality dimensions. Our lack of a Dominance factor suggests that our ancestral environment was perhaps more egalitarian and less characterised by high social stratification, which is also borne out by <a href="http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674006911">anthropological and palaeontological studies</a>. </p>
<p>Ultimately, we can learn a lot from our primate cousins, not only about their personalities, but about personality itself – not to mention learning a thing or two about ourselves and the social environment in which we evolved.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/43063/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Carla Litchfield does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>We can learn a lot about ourselves and our evolutionary history by looking at the personalities of our primate cousins.Carla Litchfield, Lecturer, School of Psychology, Social Work and Social Policy, University of South AustraliaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.