Katherine S. Corker

Conscientiousness in the Classroom: A Process Explanation

Although the research literature has established that Conscientiousness predicts task performance across a variety of achievement contexts (e.g., ; ), comparatively less is known about the processes that underlie these relations. To the latter end, the current research examines effortful strategies and achievement goals as mediating factors that might explain why people with higher levels of Conscientiousness are predicted to reach higher levels of academic performance. In a longitudinal study, 347 college students completed measures of personality and achievement goals at the beginning of the class, followed by measures of effortful strategies multiple times throughout the semester. Results support the hypothesis that effortful strategies mediate the association between Conscientiousness and academic performance. Moreover, the statistical effects of Conscientiousness were generally independent of achievement goals, but a small portion of the effect was mediated through approach, not avoidance, achievement goals. These results highlight the importance of examining mediating processes between personality and outcomes, and in the case of Conscientiousness, our results suggest that effortful strategies might serve as a useful target for performance-enhancing interventions.

The Development of Achievement Goals Throughout College Modeling Stability and Change

Emerging adulthood, defined for many by the college years, is an active period of personality development; less is known about goal change during these years. We investigated stability and change in the 2 × 2 model of achievement goals over 4 years (N = 527). We evaluated rank-order stability and mean-level change, and tested goal coupling hypotheses—the idea that early changes in goals predict later change in other goals—using multivariate latent difference score models. Achievement goals showed moderate rank-order stability over 4 years. Three of four goals demonstrated small normative declines, excepting performance approach goals. A change in mastery approach goals was associated with levels of the other three goals; these goals jointly acted to slow the decline of mastery goals. Trajectories for the other three goals were largely independent. Results suggest that goals are relatively stable individual differences during the college years.

College Student Samples Are Not Always Equivalent: The Magnitude of Personality Differences Across Colleges and Universities.

This research examined the magnitude of personality differences across different colleges and universities to understand (a) how much students at different colleges vary from one another and (b) whether there are site-level variables that can explain observed differences. Nearly 8,600 students at 30 colleges and universities completed a Big Five personality trait measure. Site-level information was obtained from the Integrated Postsecondary Education System database (U.S. Department of Education). Multilevel models revealed that each of the Big Five traits showed significant between-site variability, even after accounting for individual-level demographic differences. Some site-level variables (e.g., enrollment size, requiring letters of recommendation) explained between-site differences in traits, but many tests were not statistically significant. Student samples at different universities differed in terms of average levels of Big Five personality domains. This raises the possibility that personality differences may explain differences in research results obtained when studying students at different colleges and universities. Furthermore, results suggest that research that compares findings for only a few sites (e.g., much cross-cultural research) runs the risk of overgeneralizing differences between specific samples to broader group differences. These results underscore the value of multisite collaborative research efforts to enhance psychological research.

Commentary and rejoinder on Lynott et al. (2014)

We respond to Williams’(2014) comments on our three failures to replicate of Study 2 from Williams and Bargh (2008). We clarify our conclusions on this topic, making clear that although the results of our studies cast doubt on the specific effect reported in Williams and Bargh (i.e., that instant hot and cold packs influence choice of reward for self or friend), a more complete understanding of the embodiment hypothesis in question requires consideration of relevant conceptual replications. Accordingly, we consider the strength of the evidence in the conceptual replications that Williams identifies and find that small samples appear to be the norm. We conclude that in order for researchers to move forward, future studies must take seriously issues of power, researcher degrees of freedom, and file drawer problems. Doing so will ensure that future studies are more informative tests of this hypothesis.

Evaluating the Structure of Psychopathic Personality Traits: A Meta-Analysis of the Psychopathic Personality Inventory

Which core traits exemplify psychopathic personality disorder is a hotly debated question within psychology, particularly regarding the role of ostensibly adaptive traits such as stress immunity, social potency, and fearlessness. Much of the research on the interrelationships among putatively adaptive and more maladaptive traits of psychopathy has focused on the factor structure of the Psychopathic Personality Inventory (PPI) and its revision, the Psychopathic Personality Inventory—Revised (PPI-R). These instruments include content scales that have coalesced to form 2 higher order factors in some (but not all) prior studies: Fearless Dominance and Self-Centered Impulsivity. Given the inconsistencies in prior research, we performed a meta-analytic factor analysis of the 8 content scales from these instruments (total N > 18,000) and found general support for these 2 dimensions in community samples. The structure among offender samples (e.g., prisoners, forensic patients) supported a 3-factor model in which the Fearlessness content scale loaded onto Self-Centered Impulsivity (rather than Fearless Dominance). There were also indications that the Stress Immunity content scale had different relations to the other PPI scales in offender versus community samples. We discuss the theoretical and diagnostic implications of these differing factor structures for the field of psychopathy research.