Associations among the Big Five, emotional responses, and coping with acute stress
Introduction
Personality variables have a long history of influencing stress, coping, and health. Specifically, research has linked personality variables such as Type A (e.g. Friedman, 1991), hostility (e.g. Suls & Wan, 1993), personal or perceived control (e.g. Lefcourt, 1992), optimism (e.g. Scheier & Carver, 1992), repressive coping (e.g. Baggett, Saab, & Carver, 1996), and belief in a just world (e.g. 21, 35) to stress- and health-related outcomes. Researchers have also found associations between personality and longevity. For example, several researchers have linked Type A behavior to death from coronary heart disease (e.g. 8, 11, 31).
Another personality variable that has predicted longevity is conscientiousness. Specifically, 6, 7 found that high-conscientious children, especially males, were approximately 30% less likely to die annually (all cause mortality) than low-conscientious children. Analyses of potential mediators of this effect revealed that injury risk, smoking, drinking, and obesity did not account for conscientiousness’ effect on longevity. The authors have suggested that other psychosocial factors (e.g. the individual’s ability to maintain social support networks), may account for conscientiousness’ effect on health and longevity. Surprisingly, the authors found cheerfulness (i.e. optimism), which shares many characteristics with both extraversion and agreeableness, to be inversely related to longevity in this sample.
Friedman et al.’s research represents a shift in research emphasis from narrow, unidimensional personality traits to broader, more comprehensive conceptualisations that frequently suggest five major personality dimensions (3, 13, 34, 40). A consequence of the traditional focus on narrower traits is that only a handful of studies have examined how the ‘Big Five’ relate to stress- and emotion-related reactions (Gallagher, 1990)—reactions that could help explain the association between these dimensions and health outcomes (Suls & Rittenhouse, 1990). Accordingly, the present study examined how McCrae and Costa’s (1986) Big Five personality dimensions relate to stress- and emotion-related reactions during an acute stressor.
McCrae and Costa conceptualise personality along five broad dimensions, including emotional stability or neuroticism, extraversion, openness to experience, agreeableness, and conscientiousness. Neuroticism (N) refers to a tendency to experience anxiety, tension, self-pity, hostility, impulsivity, self-consciousness, irrational thinking, depression, and low self-esteem (16, 23, 24), whereas extraversion (E) refers to a tendency to be positive, assertive, energetic, social, talkative, and warm (16, 24, 39). Openness (O) refers to a tendency to be curious, artistic, insightful, flexible, intellectual, and original (16, 23, 24), whereas agreeableness (A) refers to the tendency to be forgiving, kind, generous, trusting, sympathetic, compliant, altruistic, and trustworthy (16, 24). Finally, conscientiousness (C) refers to a tendency to be organized, efficient, reliable, self-disciplined, achievement-oriented, rational, and deliberate (16, 24).
Investigations of the links between the Big Five and stress-related processes (e.g. 15, 22) have traditionally focused on how these dimensions relate to the use of various coping strategies. In general, coping refers to cognitive and behavioral efforts to prevent, manage, or alleviate stress (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984). Although it includes many activities, most coping strategies reflect efforts to improve a troubled situation, such as making a plan or taking action (i.e. problem-focused coping), or efforts to regulate emotional distress, such as seeking out others for emotional support or cognitively minimizing a situation’s severity (i.e. emotion-focused coping).
The Big Five have predicted differential use of problem- and emotion-focused coping strategies. Neuroticism, for example, has positively predicted emotion-focused strategies such as escape-avoidance, hostile reactions, and emotional venting, and has negatively predicted problem-focused coping such as planning (15, 22, 26, 41). Conversely, extraversion has positively predicted problem-focused strategies such as rational action (22, 41), and negatively predicted emotion-focused coping such as accepting responsibility (O’Brien & DeLongis, 1996). Finally, openness has positively predicted emotion-focused strategies such as hostile reaction, sedation, and reappraisal (22, 26). Fewer studies have examined how agreeableness and conscientiousness relate to coping, but agreeableness has been positively linked to both emotion-focused coping such as social support seeking and positive reappraisal, and problem-focused coping such as planning (26, 41). In contrast, conscientiousness has negatively predicted emotion-focused coping, particularly avoidance and substance use, and has positively predicted problem-focused coping such as direct action and planning (26, 41).
Regrettably, many studies have limitations that preclude firm conclusions about the role of the Big Five in coping. For example, most studies have focused on N, E, and O to the detriment of A and C—an unfortunate situation considering the relation of these two variables to longevity (Friedman et al., 1995b). Furthermore, retrospective and self-selection biases plague many coping studies. Retrospective biases may include differential memory for types of stressful events, the methods used to cope with them, or both. Such biases may emerge because many coping studies ask participants to think about or describe a past stressful event, and then recall how they coped with the event. Self-selection biases, in contrast, refer to objective differences in the types of stressful situations people tend to experience (Scarr & McCartney, 1983). Thus, apparent coping differences in such studies might reflect differential experiences rather than a direct association between personality and coping. For example, retrospective bias, self-selection bias, or both may cause an individual high in N to report greater emotion-focused coping and less problem-focused coping than he or she actually used.
In general, cognitive appraisal processes refer to situational evaluations in terms of their significance for one’s well-being (Lazarus, 1991a). For example, many believe that stress results when situational demands are perceived as exceeding coping resources or abilities (14, 19, 25). Furthermore, appraisal researchers believe that patterns of appraisals across multiple dimensions produce specific emotional responses to stress, such as anger, guilt, or pride (9, 30).
Research has shown that cognitive appraisal processes predict subjective, physiological, and behavioral responses to stress. Using a model based on primary appraisals of situational demand and secondary appraisals of coping ability, Tomaka et al. (36, 37) have identified two distinct stress-related appraisal and response patterns. Threat appraisals occur when an individual appraises high situational demands relative to his or her appraised coping ability; threat responses include high subjective stress, poor task performance, and greater use of emotion-focused coping. In contrast, challenge appraisals occur when an individual appraises his or her coping abilities exceed situational demands; challenge responses include low subjective stress, successful task performance, and greater use of problem-focused coping (36, 37).
Several studies suggest that the Big Five may be associated with threat and challenge appraisals and responses. For example, Hemenover and Dienstbier (1996) examined whether and how N, E, and general appraisal tendencies were associated with stress and emotion-related cognitive appraisal processes for a college exam. They found that general appraisal tendencies mediated associations between N and perceived stress, as well as associations between E and emotion-focused coping. Similarly, Gallagher (1990) assessed N and E’s associations with emotional reactions to college-related stressors (e.g. exams). Although measured indirectly, Gallagher suggested that threat appraisals mediated the associations between N and negative affective reactions (e.g. low confidence and hope, high worry and fear), whereas challenge appraisals mediated associations between E and positive affective reactions (e.g. high confidence and hope).
As with the studies of coping and personality, the above studies of appraisals and personality have certain limitations. Specifically, these studies have typically measured personality’s effects on appraisals indirectly and have examined only N and E, excluding O, A, and C. Therefore, in addition to examining associations among the Big Five, appraisal, and coping generally, we examined associations among the Big Five and threat and challenge appraisals and responding.
The purpose of the present study was to investigate associations between personality and stress-related appraisals and responses. Specifically, we examined whether and how the Big Five were associated with appraisals, emotional reactions, subjective and observer-rated behavioral performance, and coping with an acute laboratory stressor. After completing a short version of the NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI), participants appraised and then performed a speech task in front of an audience. Following their speeches, participants reported their emotional reactions to the speech task, and the coping behaviors they used during the task.
Section snippets
Participants
One hundred and seven introductory psychology undergraduate students from the University of Texas at El Paso (UTEP) participated in this study in exchange for course credit. Due to missing data, we eliminated 10 participants from these analyses, yielding a final sample of n=97. This sample ranged from 17–42 years of age (34% male; mean age=21.05 years, S.D.=4.79 years). There were no significant gender differences for any variables in this study.
Personality
We measured personality with a 75-item
Results
Table 1 contains the means (based on a 5-point scale, ranging from 1 to 5), standard deviations, and the intercorrelations among the Big Five. The intercorrelations in the present sample were consistent with those found in previous research (e.g. 4, 26), with N demonstrating a negative association with the remaining Big Five dimensions. In addition, E was positively correlated with both O and C; O was also positively correlated with C.
Table 2 presents the zero-order correlation between each Big
Associations between the Big Five and stress outcomes
Consistent with previous characterisations of individuals high in N being prone to heightened negative affect (McCrae & John, 1992), we found that N was associated with low perceived coping ability and high total negative emotion, particularly emotions such as anxiety, fear, and self disgust. N was also inversely associated with perceived performance on the speech task in our sample, perhaps supporting previous descriptions of individuals high in N as having low self-esteem (John, 1989).
Acknowledgements
We thank Cristina Bejarano, David Galvan, and Marisol Hernandez for their help in data collection and data entry. We also thank Mary Herrald, Amanda Medina, Rebecca Palacios, and four anonymous reviewers for their comments on earlier drafts of this paper.
References (41)
Letter to the editor
Social Science & Medicine
(1991)Extraversion, neuroticism and appraisal of stressful academic events
Personality and Individual Differences
(1990)Individual coping efforts: moderators of the association between life stress and mental health outcomes
- et al.
Extraversion and its positive emotional core
- et al.
Appraisal, coping, task performance, and cardiovascular responses during the evaluated speaking task
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
(1996) - et al.
Assessing coping strategies: a theoretically based approach
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
(1989) - et al.
Still stable after all these years: personality as a key to some issues in adulthood and old age
- et al.
The NEO personality inventory manual
(1985) - et al.
Childhood conscientiousness and longevity: health behaviors and cause of death
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
(1995) - et al.
Psychosocial and behavioral predictors of longevity: the aging and death of the ‘Termites’
American Psychologist
(1995)
Type A behavior and your heart
The place of appraisal in emotion
Cognition and Emotion
Behavior patterns, stress, and coronary disease
Prediction of stress appraisals from mastery, extraversion, neuroticism, and general appraisal tendencies
Motivation and Emotion
Traits and metatraits: their reliability, stability, and shared genetic influence
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Conservation of resources: a new attempt at conceptualizing stress
American Psychologist
Personality and coping among caregivers of spouses with dementia
Gerontologist
Towards a taxonomy of personality descriptors
Emotion and adaptation
Progress on a cognitive—motivational–relational theory of emotion
American Psychologist
Cited by (317)
The role of trait mindfulness in shaping the perception of stress, including its role as a moderator or mediator of the effects of personality
2024, Personality and Individual DifferencesAntecedents of American hospitality students’ intercultural communication apprehension: Effect of ethnocentrism, cultural intelligence and core self-evaluations
2024, Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport and Tourism EducationUnderstanding school incivility: Exploring its impact on students and practical interventions
2024, Computers in Human BehaviorThe impact of managers' personality on task and relationship conflict: The moderating role of family and non-family business status
2024, Journal of Family Business StrategyLongitudinal links between early adolescent temperament and inflammation among young black adults
2023, Psychoneuroendocrinology