multilevel analysis of personality: personality of college ... · distinction is frequently...
TRANSCRIPT
Personality structure at multiple levels Data collection using SAPA Results Discussion Supplementary results References
Multilevel analysis of personality: Personality ofcollege majors
William Revelle and David Condon
Department of PsychologyNorthwestern UniversityEvanston, Illinois USA
Society of Multivariate Experimental PsychologyVancouver, B.COctober, 2012
1 / 21
Personality structure at multiple levels Data collection using SAPA Results Discussion Supplementary results References
Outline
1 Personality structure at multiple levels
2 Data collection using SAPA
3 ResultsBetween subjects pooled within majorsBetween majors
4 Discussion
5 Supplementary results
2 / 21
Personality structure at multiple levels Data collection using SAPA Results Discussion Supplementary results References
Multilevel analysis can yield surprising results
Although it is well known that the structure within a level does notimply anything about the structure at a different level, thisdistinction is frequently forgotten.
1 Various names for the phenomena:Yule-Simpson paradox (Simpson, 1951; Yule, 1903)The fallacy of ecological correlations (Robinson, 1950)The within group–between group problem (Pedhazur, 1997)Ergodicity (Molenaar, 2004)
2 Observed correlations may be decomposed into with groupcorrelations and between group correlations
rxy = etaxwg ∗ etaywg ∗ rxywg + etaxbg ∗ etaybg ∗ rxybgrxywg is the within group correlationrxybg is the between group correlationetaxwg is correlation of the data with the within group valuesetaxbg is correlation of the data with the between group values
3 We consider several examples of multi-level analysis.3 / 21
Personality structure at multiple levels Data collection using SAPA Results Discussion Supplementary results References
Method
1 Synthetic Aperture Personality Assessment (Revelle, Wilt &Rosenthal, 2010) forms large covariance matrices by samplingitems across people
≈ 120/day participants are recruited totest.personality-project.org
Each participant is given 60-70 itemsTotal set of items being analyzed > 500
2 Item content being sampled100 “IPIP” Big 5 items≈ 200 other temperamental items56-80 home brewed ability items92 Oregon Vocational Interest items (ORVIS)
3 Although > 240, 000 participants have been run in all, we willreport only those data from the last 75,000
4 Demographic information includedAge, Gender, Level of education, country of residenceCollege major and broad field (if appropriate)Occupation (if appropriate) 4 / 21
Personality structure at multiple levels Data collection using SAPA Results Discussion Supplementary results References
College major as an example of niche selection
We are analyzing the personality of groups. This is how thecomposition of groups differ in the average personalitycharacteristics of their members.
1 People differ in their temperaments, abilities and interests.
2 College majors differ in their social and intellectual challenges.3 We can see this by examining the TAI mean scores for each of
88 majors.
88 majors had more than 100 studentsData from students who had not declared majors were deleted.
4 Correlations can be found within and between these groups.
5 These between group correlations are not between people butof the means of the majors. This leads to the structure ofgroup differences.
6 Results displayed as heat maps of correlations
5 / 21
Personality structure at multiple levels Data collection using SAPA Results Discussion Supplementary results References
Between subjects pooled within majors
Structure of TAI within college majors is the standard structure
Within group correlations of TAI
Altru.wgArtis.wgErudi.wgProdu.wgLeade.wgAnaly.wgAdven.wgOrgan.wgVEdiq.wgR3Diq.wgMXiq.wgANiq.wgIntel.wg
Consc.wgExtra.wgAgree.wgNeuro.wggender.wg
gender.wg
Neuro.wg
Agree.wg
Extra.wg
Consc.wg
Intel.wg
ANiq.wg
MXiq.wg
R3Diq.wg
VEdiq.wg
Organ.wg
Adven.wg
Analy.wg
Leade.wg
Produ.wg
Erudi.wg
Artis.wg
Altru.wg -1
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
6 / 21
Personality structure at multiple levels Data collection using SAPA Results Discussion Supplementary results References
Between majors
Structure of TAI between college majors is very different
Between group correlations of TAI
Altru.bgArtis.bgErudi.bgProdu.bgLeade.bgAnaly.bgAdven.bgOrgan.bgVEdiq.bgR3Diq.bgMXiq.bgANiq.bgIntel.bg
Consc.bgExtra.bgAgree.bgNeuro.bggender.bg
gender.bg
Neuro.bg
Agree.bg
Extra.bg
Consc.bg
Intel.bg
ANiq.bg
MXiq.bg
R3Diq.bg
VEdiq.bg
Organ.bg
Adven.bg
Analy.bg
Leade.bg
Produ.bg
Erudi.bg
Artis.bg
Altru.bg -1
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
7 / 21
Personality structure at multiple levels Data collection using SAPA Results Discussion Supplementary results References
Between majors
Majors ordered by male and female ability correlate .86 and females>males 76/89 majors
−0.5 0.0 0.5
−0.
50.
00.
51.
0
Majors by male and female ability
Male Ability
Fem
ale
Abi
lity
Accounting
Aerospace.Eng
Animal.Sciences
Anthropology
Art.History
Arts.Edu
Art.Theory
Biology
Biomed.Eng
Biz.Admin.Mgmt
Chem.Bio.Eng
Chemistry
CIS.General
Civil.Eng
Cognitive.Sciences
Communication.Sciences
Communications.MediaStudies
Computer.Eng
Computer.Graphics
Computer.Programming
Criminal.Justice.Corrections
Criminology
Dentistry
Design
Drama.Theater
Economics
Edu.Administration
Electrical.Eng
Elementary.Edu
English
Entrepreneurship
Environmental.Sciences
Fiction.Writing
Finance Fine.Studio
General.Biz
Geological.Sciences
Graphic.Arts
Health.Sciences.General
Health.Svcs.Admin
History
Hospitality
HR.Admin
Human.Development.Family
Industrial.Eng
Intl.Business
Journalism
K.preK.Edu
Language.Arts.Edu
Law.Legal.Studies
Linguistics
Major.NA
Marketing
Math.Edu
Mathematics
Mechanical.Eng
Medical.Assisting
Medical.Lab.Technology
MgmtInfoSystems
Music
Neuroscience
Nursing
Nutrition.WellnessOther.Business
Other.CIS
Other.Communications
Other.Community.Social.Svss
Other.Edu
Other.Eng.Tech.MajorOther.Language.LitStudies
Other.Major
Other.Medicine.Allied.Health
Other.Natural.SciencesOther.PerfVisual.Art
Other.Social.Sciences
Pharmacology
Philosophy
Physical.Edu
Physics
Political.Science
PR.Advertising
PreMed
Psychology
Radio.TV.Film
Religion
Secondary.Edu
Social.Work
SociologySpecial.Edu
8 / 21
Personality structure at multiple levels Data collection using SAPA Results Discussion Supplementary results References
Between majors
Scatter plot and unweighted between group correlations for abilityand Big 5 Temperament (gender = % women in major)
gender-0.4 0.0
0.73 0.82
-0.4 0.2
0.42 0.28
-0.4 0.2 0.8
-0.41
0.2
0.6
1.0
-0.69
-0.4
0.0
Neuro0.39 0.02 -0.21 0.01 -0.35
Agree0.66 0.52 -0.58
-0.6
0.0-0.82
-0.4
0.2 Extra
0.58 -0.59 -0.67
Consc-0.78
-0.4
0.2
-0.63
-0.4
0.2
0.8
Intel0.74
0.2 0.6 1.0 -0.6 0.0 -0.4 0.2 -0.5 0.5
-0.5
0.5FullIQ
9 / 21
Personality structure at multiple levels Data collection using SAPA Results Discussion Supplementary results References
Between majors
Factor structure of TAI based upon mean scores of college majors
-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3
-3-2
-10
12
3Personality structure of college majors
Social vs. Intellectual Challenge
Em
otio
nal S
tabi
lity
and
Con
trol
-1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0
-1.0
-0.5
0.0
0.5
1.0
Agree
Consc
Extra
Neuro
Intel
ANiqMXiqR3Diq
VEdiq
Produ
AdventureAnalytic
Organization
Leader
Altruistic
EruditeArtistic
10 / 21
Personality structure at multiple levels Data collection using SAPA Results Discussion Supplementary results References
Between majors
Extend the solution to include percent females in each major
-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3
-3-2
-10
12
3Extend solution to include gender
Social vs. Intellectual Challenge
Em
otio
nal S
tabi
lity
and
Con
trol
-1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0
-1.0
-0.5
0.0
0.5
1.0
Agree
Consc
Extra
Neuro
Intel
ANiqMXiqR3Diq
VEdiq
Produ
AdventureAnalytic
Organization
Leader
Altruistic
EruditeArtisticgender
11 / 21
Personality structure at multiple levels Data collection using SAPA Results Discussion Supplementary results References
Between majors
A biplot of TAI and college majors locates majors in two space
-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3
-3-2
-10
12
3Personality structure of college majors
Social vs. Intellectual Challenge
Em
otio
nal S
tabi
lity
and
Con
trol
Accounting
Aerspc.Eng
Anml.Scncs
Anthroplgy
Art.Histry
Arts.Edu
Art.Theory
Biology
Biomed.Eng
Bz.Admn.Mg
Chem.B.Eng
Chemistry
CIS.Generl
Civil.Eng
Cgntv.ScncCmmnctn.Sc
Cmmnctn.MS
Comptr.Eng
Cmptr.GrphCmptr.Prgr
Crmnl.Js.C
Criminolgy
Dentistry
Design
Drama.Thtr
Economics
Ed.Admnstr
Elctrcl.En
Elmntry.Ed
English
Entrprnrsh
Envrnmnt.S
Fctn.Wrtng
Finance
Fine.Studi
General.Bz
Glgcl.Scnc
Grphc.Arts
Hlth.Scn.G
Hlth.Svc.A
History
Hospitalty
HR.Admin
Hmn.Dvlp.F
Indstrl.En
Intl.Bsnss
JournalismK.preK.Edu
Lngg.Art.E
Lw.Lgl.Std
Linguistcs
Major.NA
MarketingMath.Edu
Mathematcs
Mchncl.Eng
Mdcl.Assst
Mdcl.Lb.Tc
MgmtInfSys
Music
Neuroscinc
Nursing
Ntrtn.Wlln
Othr.Bsnss
Other.CIS
Othr.Cmmnc
Othr.C.S.S
Other.Edu
Othr.E.T.M
Othr.Ln.LS
Other.MajrOthr.M.A.H
Othr.Ntr.S
Othr.PrV.A
Othr.Scl.S
Pharmaclgy
Philosophy
Physicl.Ed Physics
Pltcl.Scnc
PR.Advrtsn
PreMed
Psychology
Rad.TV.Flm
Religion
Secndry.Ed
Social.Wrk
SociologySpecial.Ed
-1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0
-1.0
-0.5
0.0
0.5
1.0
Agree
Consc
Extra
Neuro
Intel
ANiqMXiqR3Diq
VEdiq
Produ
AdventureAnalytic
Organization
Leader
Altruistic
EruditeArtisticgender
12 / 21
Personality structure at multiple levels Data collection using SAPA Results Discussion Supplementary results References
Talk time = 50% talk, 50% discussion
Questions and Discussion?
13 / 21
Personality structure at multiple levels Data collection using SAPA Results Discussion Supplementary results References
The unweighted Temperament and Ability relationship betweenmajors within women
Neuro
-0.8 -0.2 0.4
-0.03 -0.19
-0.4 0.0 0.4
-0.47 0.30
-0.5 0.5
-0.4
0.0
-0.07
-0.8
-0.2
0.4
Agree0.67 0.49 -0.51 -0.77
Extra0.55 -0.53
-0.6
-0.2
0.2
-0.63
-0.4
0.0
0.4
Consc-0.71 -0.54
Intel
-0.4
0.20.6
0.62
-0.4 0.0
-0.5
0.5
-0.6 -0.2 0.2 -0.4 0.2 0.6
FullIQ
14 / 21
Personality structure at multiple levels Data collection using SAPA Results Discussion Supplementary results References
The unweighted Temperament and Ability relationship betweenmajors within men
Neuro
-0.4 0.0 0.4
-0.10 -0.04
-0.6 0.0 0.4
-0.44 0.00
-0.5 0.0 0.5
-0.6
-0.2
0.2
0.01
-0.4
0.0
0.4 Agree
0.61 0.33 -0.32 -0.63
Extra0.36 -0.51
-0.4
0.0
0.4
-0.59
-0.6
0.0
0.4 Consc
-0.49 -0.52
Intel
-0.6
0.0
0.6
0.66
-0.6 -0.2 0.2
-0.5
0.0
0.5
-0.4 0.0 0.4 -0.6 0.0 0.6
FullIQ
15 / 21
Personality structure at multiple levels Data collection using SAPA Results Discussion Supplementary results References
The TAI structure between majors within women
-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3
-3-2
-10
12
3
Personality structure of women majors
Em
otio
nal S
tabi
lity
and
Con
trol
-1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0
-1.0
-0.5
0.0
0.5
1.0
Neuro
Agree
Extra
Consc
Intel
ANiqMXiqR3Diq
VEdiq
Organization
Adventure
Analytic
Leader
Produ
Erudite
Artistic
Altruistic
16 / 21
Personality structure at multiple levels Data collection using SAPA Results Discussion Supplementary results References
The TAI structure between majors within men
-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3
-3-2
-10
12
3
Personality structure of male majors
Em
otio
nal S
tabi
lity
and
Con
trol
-1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0
-1.0
-0.5
0.0
0.5
1.0
Neuro
Agree
Extra
Consc
Intel
ANiqMXiqR3DiqVEdiq
Organization
AdventureAnalytic
LeaderProdu
Erudite
Artistic
Altruistic
17 / 21
Personality structure at multiple levels Data collection using SAPA Results Discussion Supplementary results References
Biplot of the TAI structure between majors within women
-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3
-3-2
-10
12
3
Personality structure of women majors
Em
otio
nal S
tabi
lity
and
Con
trol
Accounting
Aerspc.Eng
Anml.Scncs
Anthroplgy
Art.Histry
Arts.Edu
Art.Theory
Biology
Biomed.Eng
Bz.Admn.Mg
Chem.B.Eng
ChemistryCIS.Generl Civil.Eng
Cgntv.Scnc
Cmmnctn.Sc
Cmmnctn.MS
Comptr.Eng
Cmptr.Grph
Cmptr.Prgr
Crmnl.Js.C
Criminolgy
Dentistry
Design
Drama.Thtr
Economics
Ed.Admnstr
Elctrcl.En
Elmntry.EdEnglishEntrprnrsh
Envrnmnt.S
Fctn.Wrtng
Finance
Fine.Studi
General.Bz
Glgcl.Scnc
Grphc.Arts
Hlth.Scn.G
Hlth.Svc.A
History Hospitalty
HR.Admin
Hmn.Dvlp.F
Indstrl.En
Intl.BsnssJournalism
K.preK.Edu
Lngg.Art.E
Lw.Lgl.Std
Linguistcs
Major.NA
Marketing
Math.Edu
Mathematcs
Mchncl.Eng
Mdcl.Assst
Mdcl.Lb.Tc
MgmtInfSys
Music
Neuroscinc
Nursing
Ntrtn.Wlln
Othr.Bsnss
Other.CIS
Othr.Cmmnc
Othr.C.S.S
Other.Edu
Othr.E.T.M
Othr.Ln.LS
Other.MajrOthr.M.A.H
Othr.Ntr.S
Othr.PrV.A
Othr.Scl.S
Pharmaclgy
Philosophy
Physicl.Ed
Physics
Pltcl.Scnc
PR.Advrtsn
PreMed
Psychology
Rad.TV.Flm
Religion
Secndry.Ed
Social.Wrk
Sociology
Special.Ed
-1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0
-1.0
-0.5
0.0
0.5
1.0
Neuro
Agree
Extra
Consc
Intel
ANiqMXiqR3Diq
VEdiq
Organization
Adventure
Analytic
Leader
Produ
Erudite
Artistic
Altruistic
18 / 21
Personality structure at multiple levels Data collection using SAPA Results Discussion Supplementary results References
Biplot of the TAI structure between majors within men
-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3
-3-2
-10
12
3
Personality structure of male majors
Em
otio
nal S
tabi
lity
and
Con
trol
AccountingAerspc.Eng
Anml.Scncs
Anthroplgy
Art.Histry
Arts.Edu
Art.Theory
BiologyBiomed.Eng
Bz.Admn.Mg
Chem.B.Eng
Chemistry
CIS.GenerlCivil.Eng
Cgntv.Scnc
Cmmnctn.Sc
Cmmnctn.MS
Comptr.Eng
Cmptr.Grph
Cmptr.Prgr
Crmnl.Js.C
Criminolgy
Dentistry
Design
Drama.Thtr
Economics
Ed.Admnstr
Elctrcl.En
Elmntry.Ed
English
Entrprnrsh
Envrnmnt.S
Fctn.Wrtng
Finance
Fine.Studi
General.Bz
Glgcl.Scnc
Grphc.Arts
Hlth.Scn.G
Hlth.Svc.A
History
Hospitalty
HR.AdminHmn.Dvlp.F
Indstrl.En
Intl.Bsnss
Journalism
Lngg.Art.E
Lw.Lgl.StdLinguistcs
Major.NAMarketing
Math.Edu
Mathematcs
Mchncl.Eng
Mdcl.Assst
Mdcl.Lb.Tc
MgmtInfSys
MusicNeuroscinc
Nursing
Ntrtn.WllnOthr.Bsnss
Other.CIS
Othr.Cmmnc
Othr.C.S.S
Other.Edu
Othr.E.T.M
Othr.Ln.LS
Other.Majr
Othr.M.A.H
Othr.Ntr.S
Othr.PrV.AOthr.Scl.S
Pharmaclgy
Philosophy
Physicl.Ed
Physics
Pltcl.Scnc
PR.Advrtsn
PreMed
Psychology
Rad.TV.Flm
Religion
Secndry.Ed
Social.Wrk
Sociology
Special.Ed
-1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0
-1.0
-0.5
0.0
0.5
1.0
Neuro
Agree
Extra
Consc
Intel
ANiqMXiqR3DiqVEdiq
Organization
AdventureAnalytic
LeaderProdu
Erudite
Artistic
Altruistic
19 / 21
Personality structure at multiple levels Data collection using SAPA Results Discussion Supplementary results References
Heat map of the the TAI structure between majors within men
Male -- Between group correlations
Altru.bg
Artis.bg
Erudi.bg
Produ.bg
Leade.bg
Analy.bg
Adven.bg
Organ.bg
VEdiq.bg
R3Diq.bg
MXiq.bg
ANiq.bg
Intel.bg
Consc.bg
Extra.bg
Agree.bg
Neuro.bgNeuro.bg
Agree.bg
Extra.bg
Consc.bg
Intel.bg
ANiq.bg
MXiq.bg
R3Diq.bg
VEdiq.bg
Organ.bg
Adven.bg
Analy.bg
Leade.bg
Produ.bg
Erudi.bg
Artis.bg
Altru.bg -1
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
20 / 21
Personality structure at multiple levels Data collection using SAPA Results Discussion Supplementary results References
Heat map of the the TAI structure between majors within women
Female -- Between group correlations
Altru.bg
Artis.bg
Erudi.bg
Produ.bg
Leade.bg
Analy.bg
Adven.bg
Organ.bg
VEdiq.bg
R3Diq.bg
MXiq.bg
ANiq.bg
Intel.bg
Consc.bg
Extra.bg
Agree.bg
Neuro.bgNeuro.bg
Agree.bg
Extra.bg
Consc.bg
Intel.bg
ANiq.bg
MXiq.bg
R3Diq.bg
VEdiq.bg
Organ.bg
Adven.bg
Analy.bg
Leade.bg
Produ.bg
Erudi.bg
Artis.bg
Altru.bg -1
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
21 / 21
Personality structure at multiple levels Data collection using SAPA Results Discussion Supplementary results References
Molenaar, P. C. (2004). A manifesto on psychology as idiographicscience: Bringing the person back into scientific psychology, thistime forever. Measurement, 2(4), 201–218.
Pedhazur, E. (1997). Multiple regression in behavioral research:explanation and prediction. Harcourt Brace College Publishers.
Revelle, W., Wilt, J., & Rosenthal, A. (2010). Personality andcognition: The personality-cognition link. In A. Gruszka,G. Matthews, & B. Szymura (Eds.), Handbook of IndividualDifferences in Cognition: Attention, Memory and ExecutiveControl chapter 2, (pp. 27–49). Springer.
Robinson, W. S. (1950). Ecological correlations and the behaviorof individuals. American Sociological Review, 15(3), 351–357.
Simpson, E. H. (1951). The interpretation of interaction incontingency tables. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society.Series B (Methodological), 13(2), 238–241.
Yule, G. U. (1903). Notes on the theory of association of attributesin statistics. Biometrika, 2(2), 121–134.
21 / 21