ROMANIAN JOURNAL OF

EXPERIMENTAL APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY

VOL. 7, ISSUE 1 – www.rjeap.ro

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15303/rjeap.2016.v7i1.a4

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HEXACO MODEL OF

PERSONALITY AND EMPLOYEE WELL-BEING

ADRIANA BUCĂ, MARIANA CĂLIN, LARISA MINCU*

University of Bucharest, Department of Psychology

Abstract

This research aims to test the relationship between personality factors of the

HEXACO model and employees’ well-being. The HEXACO Personality Assessment

Inventory and Ryff”s Psychological well-being scale were applied to a batch of 34

employees. Study results showed that the factor Honesty is not in relation to any of

the dimensions of employees’ well-being. Factors Extraversion, Agreeableness,

and Openness are positively related to well-being. In conclusion, results of this

study represent a starting point in studying the relationship between personality

and well-being in an organizational context.

Cuvinte cheie: Modelul HEXACO de personalitate, starea de bine psihologic,

starea de bine psihologicîn contextul muncii.

Keywords:HEXACO personality model, psychological well-being, job-related

well-being.

1. INTRODUCTION

The HEXACO was introduced in personality research by Lee and Ashton

(2004) who, after analyzing several studies validating the model with five factors

of personality (Big Five) in several languages and cultures, noted that the results of

factorial analyzes in many cases, proposed models with six personality factors.

Thus, Ashton and Lee concluded that the already established Big Five model

is not as comprehensive as was originally thought, and when the model is validated

in different cultures, yields results that suggest different factorial structure. Thus,

Lee and Ashton (2004) considered it necessary to reorganize the Big Five model,

* Corresponding author

27

based on the results obtained in certain cultures. The two authors have compared

several six factors factorial structures obtained in many countries (France,

Germany, Korea, Poland, Hungary) noting that all proposed the same factorial

structure. The authors have conducted numerous studies to investigate the 6 factors

structure, reaching a final model consisting of the following factors: Honesty,

Modesty, Emotionality, Extraversion, Openness to experience, Agreeableness and

Conscientiousness. Based on this model, the HEXACO Personality Assessment

Inventory was built.

The first factor, Honesty is the main breakthrough compared to traditional Big

Five model. People with high scores on the honesty factor do not manipulate others

to achieve their goals are not tempted to violate laws and regulations, are not

interested in material wealth and luxury and are not interested in acquiring a high

social status. In contrast, people with low scores on this factor manipulate others to

get what they want, are willing to violate laws and regulations for personal gain

and place great value on material things (Lee and Ashton, 2004). This factor

contains the dimensions Sincerity, Honesty, Modesty and Avoidance of greed.

The second factor is called Emotionality. Lee and Ashton (2004) state that

although many authors have described this factor as analog to the Neuroticism

factor of the Big Five, this factor differs substantially from the neuroticism factor.

The authors argue that Emotionalty does not measure temperamental aspects of

anger and increased irritability that are included in neuroticism factor. Firstly, this

factor measures sensitivity, dependence, fear, and thus differs significantly from

neuroticism. Facets of this factor are fear, anxiety, addiction and sentimentality.

People with high scores on Emotionality feel fear for physical hazards experience

anxiety in response to requests from everyday life, feel the need for emotional

support from others and feel emotionally attached to others. On the other hand,

people with very low scores on this scale are not deterred by the prospect of

physical danger, are not worried by stressful situations, do not feel the need to

share their concerns with others and feel emotionally disconnected from others

(Lee and Ashton, 2004).

The third factor is extraversion. This factor does not differ substantially from

the classical Big Five theory extraversion factor. Facets of this factor are social

self-esteem, social boldness, sociability and vivacity. People with high scores on

the extraversion factor have self-confidence, master themselves when working with

a group or addressing a large number of people, they want as many social

interactions as possible and are characterized by positive feelings, enthusiasm and

28

energy. People with low scores on this factor consider themselves unpopular, feel

uncomfortable in the spotlight, avoid social activities and feel less lively and less

optimistic than others (Lee and Ashton, 2004).

The fourth factor is the factor Agreeableness, which is similar to the

Agreeableness factor of the Big Five. The dimensions of this factor are forgiveness,

gentleness, flexibility and patience. People with high scores on the Agreeableness

factor easily forgive the mistakes of others, are lenient in judging others, are

willing to compromise and cooperate with others and control their temper easily.

People with very low scores hold grudges against those who have done them

wrong and are stubborn in defending their point of view (Lee and Ashton, 2004).

The 5th factor is Conscientiousness, which is similar to that of the Big Five.

Its dimensions are organizing, diligence, perfectionism, caution. People with high

scores on the Conscientiousness factor organize their time and environment,

working in a very disciplined and organized manner to achieve their objectives,

strive to achieve perfection in their work and are always careful when making

decisions. Low scorers are not organized and often avoid difficult or challenging

tasks, are satisfied with a work that contains mistakes or errors and take impulsive

decisions (Lee and Ashton, 2004).

The sixth factor is Openness, similar to the one from the Big Five. Facets of

this factor are aesthetic appreciation, curiosity, creativity and nonconformity.

People with high scores on the Openness to experience factor are absorbed by the

beauty of art and nature, are curious about certain areas of knowledge, have a rich

imagination and are interested in ideas and unconventional people. People with low

scores on this factor are not impressed by artwork, have no intellectual curiosity,

creativity and avoid activities, being characterized by a high degree of conventional

thinking (Lee and Ashton, 2004). From the factorial analysis of multiple answers to

some of the HEXACO test forms, the authors discovered a facet that was noted in

several studies, but was not subject to any of the six factors due to decreased

correlations, the authors viewing that a solution could be the existence of another

factor in the vocabulary of the English language that has yet to be conceptualized.

This scale is called altruism. The Altruism interstitial scale measures the tendency

of a person to be attentive and interested in helping others. People with high scores

are very generous to those who need help, while those with low scores are not

disturbed by the prospect of hurting others and are usually uninterested in the

problems and needs of others (Lee and Ashton 2004).

29

In the past 10 years, researchers interested in the lexical model of personality

wanted to examine the possible validity and usefulness of the HEXACO

personality inventory, achieving numerous studies in order to demonstrate the

predictive validity and cross-cultural development of this test (Hopwood and

Donnellan, 2010; Boies, Yoo, Ebacher, Lee and Ashton, 2004; Lee and Ashton,

2005; Szarota, Ashton and Lee, 2007; O'Neill, Lewisşi Carswell, 2011; Gaughan,

Miller and Lynam, 2012; Ogunfowora, Bourdage and Nguyen, 2013; Bresin and

Gordon, 2011; Marcus, Ashton and Lee, 2013; Leone, DeSimone and Chirumbolo,

2012; Ashton, Lee, Visser Pozzebon, 2008; De Vries, Lee and Ashton, 2008;

Tybur & de Vries 2013; Loehlin, 2012).

Specific to this personality model is the new empirically validated factor

called Honesty. In recent years researchers have shown that this factor predicts a

variety of important social behaviors. A positive relationship was identified

between Honesty and psychological wellbeing (well-being (Aghababaei & Arji,

2014; Aghababaei & Błachnio, 2015. Dangi & Nagle, 2015 Aghababaei &

Wasserman, 2013 Pollock, Noser, Holden & Zeigler- Hill, 20016).

Therefore, in since it is known that there is a positive relationship between

well-being and work performance (Wright & Cropanzano, 2000), it is important to

know predictors of well-being on the organizational level. Therefore, the objective

of this study is to investigate the relationship between personality factors of the

HEXACO model and well-being among employees.

2. OBJECTIVE

This study aims to investigate the relationship between personality factors of

the HEXACO model and employees' well-being. It will investigate to what extent

the Honesty factor is a positively related to well-being.

3. MEHTOD

3.1. PARTICIPANTS

The study included 34 participants, of which 17 male (50%) and 17 female

(50%), aged between 22 and 54 years (mean 39.59, 10.390 standard deviation) .

Participants come from both rural and urban areas.

30

3.2. MEASURES

To determine personality characteristics the short form of the HEXACO

Personality Assessment Inventory (HEXACO Personality Inventory - HEXACO-

PI-R) (Lee and Ashton, 2004), consisting of 60 items scored on Likert scale with

five levels of response from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).

Ryff’s Pychological well-being scale contains 42 items with six response

options (1 = strong disagree, 6 = strong agree) (Ryff& Keyes, 1995). The measure

is composed of six dimension of psychological well-being:Autonomy,

Environmental Mastery, Personal Growth, Positive Relations with Others, Purpose

in Life and Self-Acceptance Item questionnaire were adapted so as psychological

well-being to be assessed in an organizational context by adding the construction

“at work “to each questionnaire’s item.. Internal consistency ranged between .83 to

.92.

3.3. PROCEDURE

Information about the study were collected from subjects on a voluntary basis.

The tools were published in Google Docs platform, within 1 weeks. Before

completing the questionnaires, subjects were presented instructions for use, and

were asked for their consent to participate in questionnaires completion,

information on data privacy, and options to refuse participation in research.

4. RESULTS

Table 1. Means, standard deviations for the variables and indicators of distribution of study variables

Mean Std. Deviation Skewness Kurtosis

Honesty 33.02 5.76 .47 .403 .26 .78

Emotionality 34.79 6.79 .41 .403 -.72 .78 Extraversion 31.23 5.17 .53 .403 .25 .78

Agreeableness 29.08 7.58 -.54 .403 .46 .78

Conscientiousness 30.67 5.01 -.49 .403 -.32 .78 Openness 29.55 5.29 .16 .403 -.07 .88

Autonomy 26.44 4.57 .81 .403 -.39 .88

Environmental Mastery 27.11 3.94 .70 .403 -.24 .88 Personal Growth 26.85 4.34 .73 .403 2.62 .88

Positive Relations 27.05 4.14 .77 .403 1.09 .88

Purpose in Life 27.52 5.77 -.33 .403 -.26 .88 Self-Acceptance 26.08 5.04 .54 .403 -.04 .88

Table 1 presents means, standard deviation and distribution indicators. Thus,

it appears that the values of skewness and kurtosis are within normal range.

31

Figure 1. Graphical representation regarding Honesty-Humility distribution

In Figure 1 it can be seen the graphical representation regarding Honesty-Humility

distribution.

Figure 2. Graphical representation regarding Emotionality distribution

32

In Figure 2 it can be seen the graphical representation regarding Emotionality

distribution.

Figure 3. Graphical representation regarding Extraversion distribution.

In Figure 3 it can be seen the graphical representation regarding Extraversion

distribution.

Figure 4. Graphical representation regarding Agreeableness distribution.

33

In Figure 4 it can be seen the graphical representation regarding

Agreeableness distribution.

Figure 5. Graphical representation regarding Conscientiousness distribution.

In Figure 5 it can be seen the graphical representation regarding

Conscientiousness distribution.

Figure 5. Graphical representation regarding Openness distribution.

In Figure 6 it can be seen the graphical representation regarding Openness

distribution.

34

Table 2. Inter-correlations among study variables

Variable Autonomy Control Personal Growth Relations Purpose Self-Acceptance

Honesty .13 .38 .15 .25 .11 .17

Emotionality -.82 -.08 -.21 .07 -.03 -.36*

Extraversion .-19 .31* .43* .70** .15 .29 Agreeableness -.76 .63** .21 .59** -.08 -.26

Conscientiousness -.88 .06 .36 .69* .27 -.01

Openness .07 .30* .26 .41** -.04 .61

*p<.05; **p<.01

Table 2 provides the correlations between HEXACO personality factors and

psychological well-being dimensions. It can be seen that the Honesty-Humility

factor did not relate to none of psychological well-being dimension. There was a

negative association between Emotionality and self-acceptance. Extraversion was

positively related to control, personal growth and Relations with other. Moreover,

it can be seen that there was a positive relationship between Agreeableness and

Control and between Agreeableness and Relations with other as well as between

Conscietniousness and Relations with others. There was a positive relationship

between Openness and Control and between Openness and Relations with others.

5. DISCUSSION

The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between the

HEXACO model of personality and psychological well-being in an organizational

context. The results of this research have shown that Extraversion, Agreeableness

and Openness are the strongest correlates to psychological well-being in an

organizational context. These findings are consistent with the results of other

research (Aghababaei & Arji, 2014) that were realized in a non-organizational

context. Therefore, the importance of personality contribues in a very simillar

manner to the psychological well-beings of the employees as in the case of general

psychological well-being. An interesting finding is that there was no relationship

between the Honesty-Humility factor and employee psychological well-being.

Other research finding have shown that the Honesty-Humility factor is a strong

predictor of psychological well-being in a social and general life context

(Aghababaei & Błachnio, 2015). An explanation for this finding may be that

behaviors specific to the Honesty factor such as being modest, fair and non-greedy

do not contribute to employee happiness at work. Therefore, even if has been

shown that Honesty-Humility is positively related to job performance (Zettler,

Friedrich & Hilbig, 2011) this does not mean that Honesty behaviors contribute to

employee well-being.

35

This study has a numer of limitations. In the first place, the research sample

consisted only of 34 participants. This aspect leaves room for biased results do to

variabile variance. In the second place, we tested the link betwwen HEXACO

personality factors and employee psychological well-being only in terms of

bivariate correlations, which means that we are not able to make causal inferences

relieing on these correlations. Therefore, conducting new studies with more

consistent research samples and using more sophisticated statistical approaches

should bring new and unbiased knowledge in the area of emplyee psychological

well-being.

In conclusion, this study showed that extraversion, agreeableness and

openness are strong correlates of employee psychological well being and that

Honesty-Humility did not relate to none of the psychological well-being

dimensions. Moreover, Emotionality was negatively related to Self-Acceptance.

These findings may represent a starting point for more robust studies in the area of

employee well-being.

REFERENCES Aghababaei, N., &Arji, A. (2014). Well-being and the HEXACO model of

personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 56, 139-142.

Aghababaei, N., &Błachnio, A. (2015).Well-being and the dark triad. Personality and

Individual Differences, 86, 365-368.

Aghababaei, N., & Wasserman, J. A. (2013). Attitude toward euthanasia scale:

Psychometric properties and relations with religious orientation, personality, and life

satisfaction. American Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine, 30, 781-785.

Ashton, M. C., Lee, K., Visser, B. A., și Pozzebon, J. A. (2008). Phobic tendency within

the Five-Factor and HEXACO models of personality structure. Journal of Research in

Personality, 42, 734-746.

Boies, K., Yoo, T.-Y., Ebacher, A., Lee, K., şi Ashton, M. C. (2004).Psychometric

properties of the French and Korean versions of the HEXACO Personality

Inventory.Educational and Psychological Measurement, 64, 992-1006.

Bresin, K., și Gordon, K. H. (2011). Characterizing pathological narcissism in terms of

the HEXACO model of personality. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral

Assessment, 33, 228-235.

Dangi, S., & Nagle, Y. K. (2015). Personality factors as determinants of psychological

well being among adolescents. Indian Journal of Health & Wellbeing, 6, 369-373.

De Vries, R.E., Lee, K., şi Ashton, M. C. (2008). The Dutch HEXACO Personality

Inventory: Psychometric properties, self-other agreement, and relations with psychopathy

36

among low and high acquaintanceship dyads. Journal of Personality Assessment, 90, 142-

151.

Gaughan, E. T., Miller, J. D., și Lynam, D. R. (2012). Examining the utility of general

models of personality in the study of psychopathy: A comparison of the HEXACO-PI-R

and NEO PI-R. Journal of Personality Disorders, 26, 513-523.

Hopwood, C. J., şi Donnellan, M. B. (2010). How should the internal consistency of

personality inventories be evaluated? Personality and Social Psychology Review, 14, 332-

346.

Lee, K., și Ashton, M. C. (2005). Psychopathy, Machiavellianism, and Narcissism in the

Five-Factor Model and the HEXACO model of personality structure. Personality and

Individual Differences, 38, 1571-1582.

Lee, K., și Ashton, M., (2004). Psychometric Properties of the Hexaco Personality

Inventory, Multivariate Behavioral Research, 39(2), 329-358.

Leone, L., Desimoni, M., și Chirumbolo, A. (2012). HEXACO, social worldviews, and

socio-political attitudes: A mediation analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 53,

995-1001.

Loehlin, J. C. (2012). How general across inventories is a general factor of personality?

Journal of Research in Personality, 46, 258-263.

Marcus, B., Ashton, M. C., și Lee, K. (2013). A Note on the Incremental Validity of

Integrity Tests beyond Standard Personality Inventories for the Criterion of

Counterproductive Behaviour. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 30, 18-25.

Ogunfowora, B., Bourdage, J.S., și Nguyen, B. (2013). An exploration of the dishonest

side of self-monitoring: Links to moral disengagement and unethical business decision

making. European Journal of Personality, 27, 532-544.

O'Neill, T. A., Lewis, R. J., și Carswell, J. J. (2011). Employee personality, justice

perceptions, and the prediction of workplace deviance. Personality and Individual

Differences, 51, 595-600.

Pollock, N. C., Noser, A. E., Holden, C. J., & Zeigler-Hill, V. (in press). Do orientations

to happiness mediate the associations between personality traits and subjective well-

being? Journal of Happiness Studies.

Ryff, C. D., & Keyes, C. L. M. (1995). The structure of psychological well-being

revisited. Journal of personality and social psychology, 69(4), 719.

Szarota, P., Ashton, M. C., și Lee, K. (2007). Taxonomy and structure of the Polish

personality lexicon. European Journal of Personality, 21, 823-852..

Tybur, J. M., & de Vries, R. E. (2013). Disgust sensitivity and the HEXACO model of

personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 55, 660-665.

Wright, T. A., &Cropanzano, R. (2000).Psychological well-being and job satisfaction as

predictors of job performance. Journal of occupational health psychology, 5(1), 84.

37

REZUMAT

Această cercetare și-a propus să testeze relația dintre factorii de

personalitate din modelul HEXACO și well-being-ul angajaților. Inventarul de

evaluare a personalității HEXACO PI și Ryff”s Psychological well-being scale au

fost aplicate unui lot de 34 de angajați. Rezultatele studiului au arătat că factorul

Onestitate nu se află în relație cu niciuna dintre dimensiunile well-being-ului la

angajați. Factorii Extraversie, Agreabilitate și Deschidere se află într-o relație

pozitivă cu well-beingul. În concluzie, rezultatele acestui studiu reprezintă un

punct de plecare în studierea relației dintre personalitate și well-being în context

organizațional.