Table 3.
Relationship between self-reports of ProM failures and big five personality factors.
| Reference | n | Participants | Personality measures | ProM self-report | Effect index1 | O | C | E | A | N | Other personality factors2 | Pers. M/SD3 | Pers. rxx4 | ProM M/SD5 | ProM rxx6 | Notes7 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BIG FIVE | ||||||||||||||||
| Gondo et al. (2010) | 459 | Students | NEO FFI | PRMQ | Hr/beta | 0.05 | −0.35 | 0.07 | 0.01 | 0.13 | + Perfectionism | y | y | y | y | |
| Gondo et al. (2010) | 1291 | 50–69 years old | NEO FFI | PRMQ | Hr/beta | 0.06 | −0.15 | 0.04 | −0.07 | 0.29 | Perfectionism | y | y | y | y | |
| Gondo et al. (2010) | 860 | 70–79 years old | NEO FFI | PRMQ | Hr/beta | −0.02 | −0.18 | 0.03 | −0.01 | 0.25 | Perfectionism | y | y | y | y | |
| Heffernan and Ling (2001) | 56 | Students | EPQR | PMQ LTE | Cor/msd | −0.19 | n | n | y | y | ||||||
| Heffernan and Ling (2001) | 56 | Students | EPQR | PMQ STH | Cor/msd | −0.45 | n | n | y | y | ||||||
| Uttl (2011) | 240 | Students | NEO FFI | PMQ LTE | Cor | −0.04 | −0.33 | 0.04 | −0.01 | 0.16 | y | y | y | y | ||
| Uttl (2011) | 240 | Students | NEO FFI | PMQ STE | Cor | −0.03 | −0.25 | 0.12 | −0.02 | 0.08 | y | y | y | y | ||
| Uttl (2011) | 240 | Students | NEO FFI | PMQ IC | Cor | −0.10 | −0.34 | 0.02 | −0.05 | 0.23 | y | y | y | y | ||
| Uttl (2011) | 240 | Students | NEO FFI | PRMQ | Cor | 0.10 | −0.30 | −0.13 | −0.02 | 0.26 | y | y | y | y | ||
| Uttl (2011) | 240 | Students | NEO FFI | MemQ ProM | Cor | 0.12 | −0.50 | −0.05 | 0.03 | 0.26 | y | y | y | y | ||
| Uttl (2011) | 240 | Students | NEO FFI | CAPM/A IADL | Cor | 0.11 | −0.37 | −0.09 | 0.04 | 0.18 | y | y | y | y | ||
| Uttl (2011) | 240 | Students | NEO FFI | CAPM/A BADL | Cor | −0.02 | −0.32 | −0.03 | 0.04 | 0.13 | y | y | y | y | ||
| Uttl (2011) | 240 | Students | NEO FFI | TCPMQ Freq | Cor | 0.03 | −0.42 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.29 | y | y | y | y | ||
| Zimprich et al. (2011) | 336 | 66–81 years old | NEO FFI | PRMQ/modified | Loading | 0.13 | n | n | n | y | ||||||
| OTHER | ||||||||||||||||
| Rönnlund et al. (2011) | 255 | 60–94 years old | TCI | PRMQ | Hr/beta | Harm avoidance +self-directedness | n | n | n | y | ag | |||||
Note. O, Openness; C, Conscientiousness; E, Extroversion; A, Agreeableness; N, Neuroticism; 1cor, zero order correlation; cor/msd, correlations obtained from the mean differences; hr/beta, hierarchical regression/beta values; loading, factor loading; 2The column lists personality factors investigated in each study condition beyond the Big Five. The “+” sign in front of the factor indicates the relationship between ProM and the specific personality factor was statistically significant and positive and the “−” sign indicates that the relationship was statistically significant and negative. The fractions such as 1/3 indicate that out of 3 personality factors examined only one was significantly related to ProM. 3Were Ms and SDs for personality measures reported? y, yes; n, no; 4Were reliabilities of personality measures reported? y, yes; n, no; 5Were Ms and SDs for ProM measures reported? y, yes; n, no; 6Were reliabilities of ProM measures reported? y, yes; n, no. 7ag, aggregate group; c, ceiling effects; NEO FFI (Costa and McCrae, 1992); EPQR (Eysenk and Eysenk, 1991); PRMQ (G. Smith et al., 2000); PMQ (Hannon et al., 1995); MemQ (Uttl and Kibreab, 2011); CAPM (Roche et al., 2007); TCPMQ (Cuttler and Graf, 2009). Bold indicates p < 0.05.