A Parsimonious Explanation of the Resilient,Undercontrolled,and Overcontrolled Personality Types

Abstract

Researchers applying clustering methods have found that the five most commonly studied personality traits (the ‘Big Five’) appear to form three prototypes, known as resilient, undercontrolled, and overcontrolled (RUO) personality types. The analysis has been replicated cross–nationally, and the results have been reasonably robust. However, these findings do not necessarily imply discontinuities or non–linearities in the Big Five data. We study whether the RUO types can arise from typical Big Five intercorrelations alone. We used data from a previous meta–analysis of inter–trait correlations (N = 144 117 participants) and simulated normally distributed observations with this correlation structure. Applying three different clustering algorithms (k–means, hierarchical agglomerative, and model based) with three–cluster solutions to the simulated data, we examined whether the known correlations alone can give rise to the RUO typology. The simulated results were compared with previous empirical findings. A simple multivariate normal distribution with the Big Five correlation structure was sufficient to generate the RUO typology in three–cluster solutions for all the three clustering methods. Contrary to the RUO typology ‘carving personality description at its joints’, linear correlations typical for correlations among Big Five traits can create RUO types even in the absence of any points of discontinuity. Copyright © 2017 European Association of Personality Psychology

Keywords

personality types statistical methods five-factor inventory clustering methods

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Alessandri

, Vecchione

, Donnellan

B. M.

, Eisenberg

, Caprara

G. V.

, & Cieciuch

(2014). On the cross–cultural replicability of the resilient, undercontrolled, and overcontrolled personality types. Journal of Personality, 82, 340–353. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12065.

Allport

G. W.

(1937). Personality: A psychological interpretation. New York, Holt: Rinehart & Winston.

Asendorpf

J. B.

(2002). Editorial: The puzzle of personality types. European Journal of Personality, 16, S1–S5. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.446.

Asendorpf

J. B.

, Borkenau

, Ostendorf

, & Van Aken

M. A. G.

(2001). Carving personality description at its joints: Confirmation of three replicable personality prototypes for both children and adults. European Journal of Personality, 15, 169–198. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.408.

Asendorpf

J. B.

, & van Aken

M. A.

(1999). Resilient, overcontrolled, and undercontrolled personality prototypes in childhood: Replicability, predictive power, and the trait–type issue. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 815–832. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022–3514.77.4.815.

Borsboom

(2006). The attack of the psychometricians. Psychometrika, 71, 425–440. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336–006–1447–6.

Borsboom

, Rhemtulla

, Cramer

A. O. J.

, van der Maas

H. L. J.

, Scheffer

, & Dolan

C. V.

(2016). Kinds versus continua: A review of psychometric approaches to uncover the structure of psychiatric constructs. Psychological Medicine, 46, 1567–1579. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291715001944.

Burnham

K. P.

, & Anderson

D. R.

(2004). Multimodel inference: Understanding AIC and BIC in model selection. Sociological Methods & Research, 33, 261–304. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124104268644.

Cover

T. M.

, & Thomas

J. A.

(2006). Elements of information theory (2nd ed.). Hoboken, US–NJ: John Willey & Sons, Inc.

10.

Cramer

A. O. J.

, van der Sluis

, Noordhof

, Wichers

, Geschwind

, Aggen

S. H.

, Kendler

K. S.

, et al. (2012). Dimensions of normal personality as networks in search of equilibrium: You can't like parties if you don't like people. European Journal of Personality, 26, 414–431. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.1866.

11.

De Boeck

, Wilson

, & Acton

G. S.

(2005). A conceptual and psychometric framework for distinguishing categories and dimensions. Psychological Review, 112, 129–158. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033–295X.112.1.129.

12.

Dempster

A. P.

, Laird

N. M.

, & Rubin

D. B.

(1977). Maximum likelihood from incomplete data via the EM algorithm. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B (Methodological), 39, 1–38.

13.

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. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022–3514.93.5.880.

14.

Digman

J. M.

(1990). Personality structure: Emergence of the five–factor model. Annual Review of Psychology, 40, 417–440. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ps.41.020190.002221.

15.

Efron

, & Tibshirani

R. J.

(1993). An introduction to the bootstrap. Boca Raton, US–FL: Chapman & Hall/CRC.

16.

Fraley

, & Raftery

A. E.

(2002). Model–based clustering, discriminant analysis, and density estimation. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 97, 611–632. https://doi.org/10.1198/016214502760047131.

17.

Goldberg

L. R.

, Johnson

J. A.

, Eber

H. W.

, Hogan

, Ashton

M. C.

, Cloninger

C. R.

, & Cough

H. G.

(2006). The International Personality Item Pool and the future of public–domain personality measures. Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 84–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2005.08.007.

18.

Haslam

, Holland

, & Kuppens

(2012). Categories versus dimensions in personality and psychopathology: A quantitative review of taxometric research. Psychological Medicine, 42, 903–920. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291711001966.

19.

Herzberg

P. Y.

, & Roth

(2006). Beyond resilients, undercontrollers, and overcontrollers? An extension of personality prototype research. European Journal of Personality, 20, 5–28. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.557.

20.

Horn

J. L.

(1965). A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrika, 30, 179–185.

21.

Hyvärinen

, Karhunen

, & Oja

(2001). Independent component analysis. NY, New York: Wiley.

22.

John

O. P.

, Naumann

L. P.

, & Soto

C. J.

(2008). In John

O. P.

, Robins

R. W.

, & Pervin

L. A.

(Eds.), Paradigm shift to the integrative Big Five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and conceptual issues (3rd ed., pp. 114–158). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

23.

Klenke

(2008). Probability theory: A comprehensive course. London, UK: Springer–Verlag.

24.

Klimstra

T. A.

, Hale

W. W.

, Raaijmakers

Q. A. W.

, Branje

S. J. T.

, & Meeus

W. H. J.

(2010). A developmental typology of adolescent personality. European Journal of Personality, 24, 309–323. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.744.

25.

Kotov

, Krueger

R. F.

, Watson

, Achenbach

T. M.

, Althoff

R. R.

, Bagby

R. M.

, … Zimmerman

(2017). The hierarchical taxonomy of psychopathology (HiTOP): A dimensional alternative to traditional nosologies. Journal of Abnormal Psychology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/abn0000258.

26.

Krueger

R. F.

, & Markon

K. E.

(2014). The role of the DSM–5 personality trait model in moving toward a quantitative and empirically based approach to classifying personality and psychopathology. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 10, 477–501. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev–clinpsy–032813–153732.

27.

MacKay

D. J. C.

(2003). Information theory, inference, and learning algorithms. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press Retrieved from http://www.inference.phy.cam.ac.uk/mackay/itila/.

28.

Markon

K. E.

, Chmielewski

, & Miller

C. J.

(2011). The reliability and validity of discrete and continuous measures of psychopathology: A quantitative review. Psychological Bulletin, 137, 856–879. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023678.

29.

Masyn

K. E.

, Henderson

C. E.

, & Greenbaum

P. E.

(2010). Exploring the latent structures of psychological constructs in social development using the dimensional–categorical spectrum. Social Development, 19, 470–493. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467–9507.2009.00573.x.

30.

Maxwell , & Delaney (1993). Bi–variate median splits and spurious statistical significance. Psychological Bulletin, 113, 181–190. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033–2909.113.1.181.

31.

McCrae

R. R.

, & Costa

P. T.

(2003). Personality in adulthood: A five–factor theory perspective (2nd ed.). New York, USA: The Guilford Press.

32.

McLahlan

, & Peel

(2000). Finite mixture models. New York, NY–USA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

33.

Meeus

, Van de Schoot

, Klimstra

, & Branje

(2011). Personality types in adolescence: Change and stability and links with adjustment and relationships: A five–wave longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 47, 1181–1195. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023816.

34.

Molenaar

P. C. M.

, & Campbell

C. G.

(2009). The new person–specific paradigm in psychology. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18, 112–117.

35.

Murtagh

, & Legendre

(2014). Ward's hierarchical agglomerative clustering method: Which algorithms implement Ward's criterion? Journal of Classification, 31, 274–295. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00357–014–9161–z.

36.

Pesonen

A.–K.

, Räikkönen

, Heinonen

, Andersson

, Hovi

, Järvenpää

A.–L.

, … Kajantie

(2008). Personality of young adults born prematurely: The Helsinki study of very low birth weight adults. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 49, 609–617. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469–7610.2007.01874.x.

37.

Robins

R. W.

, John

O. P.

, Caspi

, Moffitt

T. E.

, & Stouthamer–Loeber

(1996). Resilient, overcontrolled, and undercontrolled boys: Three replicable personality types. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 157–171. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022–3514.70.1.157.

38.

Royston

, Altman

D. G.

, & Sauerbrei

(2006). Dichotomizing continuous predictors in multiple regression: A bad idea. Statistics in Medicine, 25, 127–141. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.2331.

39.

Russell

(1945). A history of western philosophy: And its connection with political and social circumstances from the earliest times to the present day. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.

40.

Specht

, Luhmann

, & Geiser

(2014). On the consistency of personality types across adulthood: Latent profile analyses in two large–scale panel studies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 107, 540–556. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036863.

41.

Tyrer

, Reed

G. M.

, & Crawford

M. J.

(2015). Classification, assessment, prevalence, and effect of personality disorder. Lancet, 385, 717–726. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140–6736(14)61995–4.

42.

van der Linden

, te Nijenhuis

, & Bakker

A. B.

(2010). The general factor of personality: A meta–analysis of Big Five intercorrelations and a criterion–related validity study. Journal of Research in Personality, 44, 315–327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2010.03.003.

43.

van der Sluis

, Posthuma

, Nivard

M. G.

, Verhage

, & Dolan

C. V.

(2013). Power in GWAS: Lifting the curse of the clinical cut–off. Molecular Psychiatry, 18, 2–3. https://doi.org/10.1038/mp.2012.65.

44.

Widiger

T. A.

, & Mullins–Sweatt

S. N.

(2009). Five–factor model of personality disorder: A proposal for DSM–V. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 5, 197–220. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.clinpsy.032408.153542.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.03 MB