Bart Wille

General and maladaptive traits in a Five-Factor Framework for DSM-5 in a university student sample

The relationships between two measures proposed to describe personality pathology, that is the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-3) and the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5), are examined in an undergraduate sample (N = 240). The NEO inventories are general trait measures, also considered relevant to assess disordered personality, whereas the PID-5 measure is specifically designed to assess pathological personality traits, as conceptualized in the DSM-5 proposal. A structural analysis of the 25 PID-5 traits confirmed the factor structure observed in the U.S. derivation sample, with higher order factors of Negative Affectivity, Detachment, Antagonism, Disinhibition, and Psychoticism. A joint factor analysis of, respectively, the NEO domains and their facets with the PID-5 traits showed that general and maladaptive traits are subsumed under an umbrella of five to six major dimensions that can be interpreted from the perspective of the five-factor model or the Personality Psychopathology Five. Implications for the assessment of personality pathology and the construction of models of psychopathology grounded in personality are discussed.

Vocations as a Source of Identity: Reciprocal Relations Between Big Five Personality Traits and RIASEC Characteristics Over 15 Years

Although work is a core part of life, the direction of influence from personality to work has typically been conceived as only unidirectional. The present study aims to contribute to the literature by considering reciprocal relations between personality and occupational characteristics, drawing on current perspectives from personality psychology (i.e., the social investment principle) and using a well-established framework to conceptualize career development (i.e., Hollands RIASEC theory). For this purpose, a longitudinal cohort of college alumni (N = 266) was tracked across a substantial and significant period in their professional career. Big Five personality traits and RIASEC occupational characteristics were assessed at the career start and 15 years later when their careers had unfolded. A combination of observed and latent variable analyses were used to disentangle the longitudinal and reciprocal relations between traits and occupational characteristics. Our results indicate that personality shapes and is shaped by our vocational experiences, suggesting that work can be a source of identity. The implications for theory and research on personality in the industrial and organizational literature are discussed alongside a number of practical implications for organizational and counseling settings.

Assessing Aberrant Personality in Managerial Coaching: Measurement Issues and Prevalence Rates across Employment Sectors

The convergent and discriminant validity of two methods to assess a broad spectrum of aberrant personality tendencies was examined in a large sample of managers who were administered the NEO–PI–R (N = 11 862) and the Hogan Development Survey (N = 6774) in the context of a professional development assessment. Five–Factor Model (FFM) aberrant compounds, defined as linear combinations of NEO–PI–R facets, converged for the antisocial, borderline, histrionic, avoidant and obsessive–compulsive tendencies with their respective Hogan Development Survey counterparts. Alternative linear FFM combinations did improve convergent results for the schizoid and obsessive–compulsive pattern. Risk for various aberrant tendencies was roughly equal across different employment sectors, with a higher prevalence of borderline, avoidant and dependent tendencies in the legal and more histrionic tendencies in the retail sector. Adopting FFM aberrant compound cut–offs developed for coaching purposes to flag at risk individuals showed that 20% to 25% of all managers qualified for at least one and 10% to 15% were flagged as at risk for two or more aberrant tendencies. The theoretical implications and the repercussions of this research for the design of professional development and coaching trajectories are discussed. Copyright

The Double-Edged Sword of Leader Charisma: Understanding the Curvilinear Relationship Between Charismatic Personality and Leader Effectiveness.

This study advanced knowledge on charisma by (a) introducing a new personality-based model to conceptualize and assess charisma and by (b) investigating curvilinear relationships between charismatic personality and leader effectiveness. Moreover, we delved deeper into this curvilinear association by (c) examining moderation by the leader’s level of adjustment and by (d) testing a process model through which the effects of charismatic personality on effectiveness are explained with a consideration of specific leader behaviors. Study 1 validated HDS charisma (Hogan Development Survey) as a useful trait-based measure of charisma. In Study 2 a sample of leaders (N = 306) were assessed in the context of a 360-degree development center. In line with the too-much-of-a-good-thing effect, an inverted U-shaped relationship between charismatic personality and observer-rated leader effectiveness was found, indicating that moderate levels are better than low or high levels of charisma. Study 3 (N = 287) replicated this curvilinear relationship and further illustrated the moderating role of leader adjustment, in such a way that the inflection point after which the effects of charisma turn negative occurs at higher levels of charisma when adjustment is high. Nonlinear mediation modeling further confirmed that strategic and operational leader behaviors fully mediate the curvilinear relationship. Leaders low on charisma are less effective because they lack strategic behavior; highly charismatic leaders are less effective because they lack operational behavior. In sum, this work provides insight into the dispositional nature of charisma and uncovers the processes through which and conditions under which leader charisma translates into (in)effectiveness.

The Too Little/Too Much Scale: A New Rating Format for Detecting Curvilinear Effects

This article describes the too little/too much (TLTM) scale as an innovation in rating scale methodology that may facilitate research on the too-much-of-a-good-thing effect. Two studies demonstrate how this scale can improve the ability to detect curvilinear relationships in leadership research. In Study 1, leaders were rated twice on a set of leader behaviors: once using a traditional 5-point Likert scale and once using the TLTM scale, which ranged between –4 (much too little), 0 (the right amount), and +4 (much too much). Only linear effects were observed for the Likert ratings, while the TLTM ratings demonstrated curvilinear, inverted U-shaped relationships with performance. Segmented regressions indicated that Likert ratings provided variance associated with the too little range of the TLTM scale but not in the too much range. Further, the TLTM ratings added incremental validity over Likert ratings, which was entirely due to variance from the too much range. Study 2 replicated these findings using a more fine-grained, 9-point Likert scale, ruling out differences in scale coarseness as an explanation for why the TLTM scale was better at detecting curvilinear effects.

Personality and Occupational Specialty: An Examination of Medical Specialties using Holland’s RIASEC Model

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to re-examine the role of personality in occupational specialty choice, to better understand how and in what ways personality traits might influence vocational development after a person has chosen a career. Design/methodology/approach – The study tested hypotheses in a sample of UK medical students, each of whom had chosen their specialty pathway, and completed a measure of the Big Five personality traits. Associations of the junior doctor’s Big Five personality traits with the Holland’s realistic, investigative, artistic, social, enterprising, conventional (RIASEC) profiles of their medical specialty selections (derived from the O*NET database) were examined. Findings – Findings provided good support for the hypotheses. Junior doctors’ agreeableness (with social) and neuroticism (with realistic, artistic and enterprising) were the main predictors of the RIASEC profiles of their specialty selections. Research limitations/implications – The findings suggest that pers...