Robust inference and widespread genetic correlates from a large-scale genetic association study of human personality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Personality traits describe stable differences in how individuals think, feel, and behave and how they interact with and experience their social and physical environments. We assemble data from 46 cohorts including 611K-1.14M participants with European-like and African-like genomes for genome-wide association studies (GWAS) of the Big Five personality traits (extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, neuroticism, and openness to experience), and data from 51K participants for within-family GWAS. We identify 1,257 lead genetic variants associated with personality, including 823 novel variants. Common genetic variants explain 4.8%-9.3% of the variance in each trait, and 10.5%-16.2% accounting for measurement unreliability. Genetic effects on personality are highly consistent across geography, reporter (self vs. close other), age group, and measurement instrument, and we find minimal spousal assortment for personality in recent history. In stark contrast to many other social and behavioral traits, within-family GWAS and polygenic index analyses indicate little to no shared environmental confounding in genetic associations with personality. Polygenic prediction, genetic correlation, and Mendelian randomization analyses indicate that personality genetics have widespread, potentially causal associations with a wide range of consequential behaviors and life outcomes. The genetic architecture of personality is robust and fundamental to being a human.
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 | 0.013 | 0.054 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".