Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2017 Oct 19.
Published in final edited form as: Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2017 Apr 3;25(8):900–908. doi: 10.1016/j.jagp.2017.03.006

Table 2.

Grades of Evidence For Associations Between Big 5 Domains and Neurocognitive Test Scores

Big 5 Domain Neurocognitive Test / Function p BF β [95% CI] R2s [95% CI]
Strong Evidence
Neuroticism HVOT / Visual Organization <.0001 642.50 −.30 [−.46, −.15] .09 [.02 .19]
Conscientiousness RAVLT / Recall Memory .0026 31.19 .25 [.09, .42] .06 [.01, .14]
Neuroticism TMT-A / Attention .009 24.32 .25 [.06, .44] .05 [.01, .15]
Neuroticism TMT-B / Executive Function .0026 22.94 .25 [.09, .41] .06 [.01, .15]
Moderate Evidence
Openness BNT / Language .0045 17.19 .25 [.08, .42] .07 [.02, .14]
Openness RAVLT / Recall Memory .0032 7.22 .23 [.08, .38] .05 [.01, .12]
Conscientiousness TMT-B / Executive Function .0015 6.55 −.22 [−.35, −.09] .05 [.01, .12]
Openness Category Fluency / Language .0037 4.75 .22 [.07, .37] .06 [.01, .13]
Conscientiousness TMT-A / Attention .0035 3.54 −.20 [−.34, −.07] .04 [.01, .11]
Mildly Suggestive Evidence
Extraversion RAVLT / Recall Memory .0058 2.74 .19 [.06, .33] .03 [.00, .10]
Neuroticism Category Fluency / Language .0076 1.82 −.19 [−.33, −.05] .03 [.00, .09]
Conscientiousness Category Fluency / Language .0253 1.73 .19 [.02, .35] .03 [.00, .08]

Notes: Linear models adjusted for age, gender, and education. TMT = Trail Making Test; RAVLT = Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test. Higher scores on all test indicate better performance except for TMT A and B, for which higher scores equal worse performance. BF = Bayes Factor; β = standardized regression coefficient; R2s = unique variance accounted for via Shapley decomposition of R2. 95% CI = 95% Confidence Interval, based on robust standard errors for β and bootstrap percentiles for R2s. P-values from t-test with 178 degrees of freedom for all outcomes, except for Trails A and Category Fluency (177) and Trails B (176). Strong evidence for association based on p-values exceeding rejection threshold of FDR (.011) and Bayes Factors > 20; Moderate evidence for association based on p-values exceeding FDR threshold and Bayes Factors 3–20; Mildly suggestive evidence for association p-values exceeding conventional or FDR threshold, positive but anecdotal Bayes Factors.