The Relationship Between Personality and Self-Report Abilities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The relationship between self-report abilities and personality was examined at both the phenotypic (zero-order) level as well as at the genetic and environmental levels. Twins and siblings (N = 516) completed self-report ability and personality questionnaires. A factor analysis of the ability questions revealed 10 factors, including politics, interpersonal relationships, practical tasks, intellectual pursuits, academic skills, entrepreneur/business, domestic skills, vocal abilities, and creativity. Five personality factors were examined, including extraversion, conscientiousness, dependence, aggression, and openness. At the phenotypic level, the correlations between the ability factor scores and personality factor scores ranged from 0 to .60 (between political abilities and extraversion). The relationship between the two areas at the genetic level was found to range between –.01 and .60; the environmental correlations ranged from –.01 to .48. The results suggest that some of the self-report ability scores are related to self-report personality, and that some of these observed relationships may have a common genetic basis while others are from a common environmental factor.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".