A General Factor of Personality From Multitrait–Multimethod Data and Cross–National Twins
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In three studies, a General Factor of Personality (GFP) was found to occupy the apex of the hierarchical structure. In Study 1, a GFP emerged independent of method variance and accounted for 54% of the reliable variance in a multitrait-multimethod assessment of 391 Italian high school students that used self-, teacher-, and parent-ratings on the Big Five Questionnaire - Children. In Study 2, a GFP was found in the seven dimensions of Cloninger's Temperament and Character Inventory as well as the Big Five of the NEO PI-R, with the GFPtci correlating r = .72 with the GFPneo. These results indicate that the GFP is practically the same in both test batteries, and its existence does not depend on being extracted using the Big Five model. The GFP accounted for 22% of the total variance in these trait measures, which were assessed in 651 pairs of 14- to 30-year-old Japanese twins. In Study 3, a GFP accounted for 32% of the total variance in nine scales derived from the NEO PI-R, the Humor Styles Questionnaire, and the Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire assessed in 386 pairs of 18- to 74-year-old Canadian and U.S. twins. The GFP was found to be 50% heritable with high scores indicating openness, conscientiousness, sociability, agreeableness, emotional stability, good humor and emotional intelligence. The possible evolutionary origins of the GFP are discussed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it