U.S. State Resident Big Five Personality and Work Satisfaction: The Importance of Neuroticism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two studies determined relations between state resident Big Five personality scores and state work satisfaction for the 50 states in the United States. Study 1 and 2 personality profiles were based on responses of 619,397 residents to the 44-item Big Five Inventory. For Studies 1 and 2, state work satisfaction scores were respectively taken from the Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index based on 353,039 phone interviews in 2008 and on 353,564 in 2012. Higher neuroticism was associated with lower work satisfaction ( r = −.49, p < .001) in both studies despite negative recession impacts in Study 2. In Study 1, the robust relation persisted with state socioeconomic status, percent of White population identified in the census, urban population percent, unemployment rate, economic conservatism, income inequality, and political conservatism controlled. In Study 2, the relation persisted while controlling for peak-recession and end-of-recession unemployment rates, 2010-2011 GDP growth, and the other corresponding control variables of Study 1.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".