The five factor model (FFM) or ‘Big Five’: Allowing measurement ofpersonality using 5 key traits: Openness, Conscientiousness,Extraversion, Agreeableness & Neuroticism

Research is performed using the Big Five Inventory (BFI) self-report questionnaire devised by Oliver John in which participants rate ano. of statements related to personality scored 1-5. These results arequantified and interpreted to measure the participant’s personality.

Each of the 5 key factors is made up of several other determinations. E.g.,a participant scoring high in conscientiousness has high self-discipline,and low impulsiveness; a participant scoring high in openness is curious,imaginative and emotional.

Conscientiousness (Consc) is related to the trait of impulsiveness, whichwas identified as a key factor in the measurement of personality byEysenck,1967. Kagen et al in 1964 devised the Matching FamiliarFigures Test (MFFT) in order to study ‘conceptual tempo’, aconcept close to impulsiveness. MFFT involves a participant matching agiven image with its pair, and is measured by evaluating response timeagainst errors made, resulting in a scale of ‘reflection-impulsivity’.

This experiment studies the factors of conscientiousness and opennessusing BFI and MFFT, to then determine the relationship betweencognitive performance and personality.

Conscientiousness, Openess Related to Impulsivity / Reflectiveness And Gender DifferenceProject Group Usual Suspects Supervisor: Dr. Garry Prentice, Group Members: Alan Doran, Alan Cummins, Martin Kacor, Sean Moore , Robert Maguire

Using BFIQ and MFFT a correlational study was carried out tomeasure Conscientiousness and openess and their relationto impulsivity. 24 Students took part in between groupsexperiment. It was found that there is no significant correlationbetween these factors.

1. There is no significant relationship between the two personalities.2. There is no internal consistency reliability of the items from the

personality measures.3. There is no significant correlation between conscientiousness and avg

time to 1st response and total error standardized difference scores.4. There is no significant correlation between openness and avg time to

1st response and total error standardized difference scores.5. There is no significant difference between genders on the avg time to

1st response and total error standardized difference scores.

Design and Procedure: Between groups, males vs. females Correlational design, BFIQ to Reflection-Impulsivity N = 24DBS Psychology students, voluntaryaged 18-40

Reflection-Impulsivity questionnaire: (Likert)IV: Gender, Personality Ttraits DV: BFIQ Score

MFFT experiment: (Online visual test)IV: Cards presented. DV: time taken and errors made.

Materials:

1. Consc and openness do not correlate; no signif correlation. Thecorrelation of consc and openness is very weak and negative.

2. There is an internal consistency reliability of the consc and theopenness. We reject the null hypothesis. Participants in the samplegave consistent answers, Cronbach’s Alpha shows results higher than0.7 in both cases.

3. No signif correlation between consc and avg time to 1st responseand total error std difference scores. We confirm the null hypothesis.Signif correlation between openness and avg time to 1st responseand total error std difference scores. We reject this null hypothesis.

The research has shown that being conscientious doesn’t predictimpulsiveness / reflectiveness. Found that being open does correlatenegatively with avg time on 1st response. Higher the participantsscore, lower their scores in the MFFT diff, meaning participants whoare open are more reflective.

4. No signif diff between genders on the avg time to 1st responseand total error std difference scores. We confirm the null hypothesis.

Females are not signif more imulsive even if their scores are a littlehigher.

Conclusion:The experiment goes along the original research and theory of Big Five,

where conscientiousness and openness are two different dimensions.We have found that participants in our sample, who scored high onopenness, tend to be more reflective.

Criticisms: Participants were instructed vaguely about the aims of the

experiment Lack of motivation to carry out test effectively and in timely manner. Time of day, sleep deprivation, coffee intake etc User interface with MFFT test Lab conditions, distractions such as noise, heat

Pearson Correlation: No signif relation ship in consc and openess.(r =-0.116, P>0.05, 2-tailed)

Internal consistency / reliability: Good- Consc: 0.772 - Openess: 0.854

Pearson Correlation: No signif relationship between consc and std scores(r =0.02, P > 0.05, 2-tailed)

Pearson correlation:Significant relationship between openess and std scores(r =-0.409, P < 0.05, 2-tailed)

Independent samples t-test: No signif gender diff(t=-1.349, P > 0.05, 2-tailed)

Mean Avg time to 1st response and total error:Eysenck, H.J., Eysenck, S.B.G. (1967). On the unitary nature ofextraversion. Acta Psychologica, 26, 383-390.Kagan, J., Rosman, B.L., Day, D., Albert, J. and Philips, W. (1964).Information processing in the child.: Significance of analytic andreflective attitudes. Psychological Monographs, 78, (1, Whole No. 578)Nunnally, J. (1978). Psychometric Theory. New York: McGraw Hill.

• Computer, Mouse, Web MFFT20 Lab Experiment Likert Scoring System

• Pens, Chairs, quiet labBig Five Inventory Questionnaire SPSS for analysis

-0.3202

0.2287

Male

Female