The specialized, personalized report will help you understand your personality in great detail, and aid you substantially in your understanding of others. It will help you determine what jobs suit you and why, what sort of people you are likely to find compatible (and incompatible), where your strengths and weaknesses lie and, perhaps most importantly, just how profound the differences between individuals actually are. It isn’t only that we differ in our opinions. We differ in how we perceive the world, how we filter our facts, and how we arrange our goals and actions. Appreciation for the genuine differences between people can help you orient yourself in the world, and appreciate the truly diverse viewpoints necessary to make the complex systems of society function, as well as increasing your comprehension of the singular and unique combination of basic traits and subsidiary aspects that characterize you, personally.
The Big Five Aspects Scale
You have just completed assessing yourself with 100 phrases. Our systems have compared your-self-ratings to those of thousands of other people. You are being compared to men and women of all ages. This means that if you are young, your scores on neuroticism will be higher and on agreeableness and conscientiousness will be lower than if you were compared to people of your own age (with the reverse being true for older individuals). For men, their scores on agreeableness will be higher and on neuroticism will be lower than if they were just being compared to men. We decided to make the comparisons simple, so that you know where you stand in comparison to the typical person (with age and sex regarded as irrelevant).
Here are your results: You will see below where you stand in comparison to others in the general population on the major traits and their aspects:
• Agreeableness: Compassion and Politeness
• Conscientiousness: Industriousness and Orderliness
• Extraversion: Enthusiasm and Assertiveness
• Neuroticism: Withdrawal and Volatility
• Openness to Experience: Openness and Intellect
Remember that each personality trait and aspect (and your relative position with respect to them) has advantages and disadvantages. It is for that reason that variation exists in the human population: there is a niche for each personality configuration. Much of what constitutes success in life is therefore the consequence of finding the place in relationships, work and personal commitment that corresponds to your unique personality structure. Good luck with your expanded self-understanding!
Note also that if you find that the descriptions harsher than you might consider appropriate this may mean that you were more self-critical than necessary when completing the questions
I think so.
(remember, the results are based on your own self-report, compared to that of others). This can occur if you were feeling temporarily or chronically unhappy or anxious, or hungry, angry or judgmental when you completed the questions.
Agreeableness: Moderately Low
You are moderately low in agreeableness, which is the primary dimension of Interpersonal interaction in the Big Five personality trait scientific model.
I was actually expecting to be ranked moderately high.
Agreeableness has two aspects: compassion and politeness, which will be explained separately. Agreeableness is a very complex trait, with marked positive and negative elements all along its distribution. Because of this, higher scores and lower scores need to be explained at the same time.
People high in agreeableness are nice: compliant, nurturing, kind, naively trusting and conciliatory. However, because of their tendency to avoid conflict, they often dissemble and hide what they think.
I do have a tendency to avoid intimacy.
People low in agreeableness are not so nice: stubborn, dominant, harsh, skeptical, competitive and, in the extreme, even predatory. However, they tend to be straightforward, even blunt, so you know where they stand.
I concur to being stubborn, harsh, skeptical, competitive, and blunt.
Your score puts you at the 23rd percentile for agreeableness. If you were one of 100 people in a room, you would be less agreeable than 76 of them and more agreeable than 23 of them.
People with moderately low levels of agreeableness are seen by others as somewhat competitive, colder and less empathic.
I am competitive by nature.
They are less likely to look for the best in others, and are not particularly tolerant (an attitude that is much valued by agreeable people).
I don’t think I look for the worst in other’s. But my tolerance level is not very high and it does lead me to be a bit confrontational.
They are less concerned about the emotional state of others, willing to engage in conflict, and will sacrifice peace and harmony to make a point or (if conscientious) to get things done.
I am all about getting things done.
People find them straightforward, even blunt. They tend towards dominance, rather than submission (particularly if also below average in neuroticism).
People with moderately low levels of agreeableness are not particularly forgiving, accepting, flexible, gentle or patient.
They nailed it.
They don’t easily feel pity for those who are excluded, punished or defeated. They are also not easily taken advantage of by disagreeable, manipulative or otherwise troublesome people, or by those with criminal or predatory intent. Their skepticism plays a protective role, although it may interfere with their ability to cooperate with or trust others whose intentions are genuinely good.
I feel I should be more skeptical.
They can appreciate cooperation, but like competition, with its clear losers and winners.
They will not easily lose arguments (or avoid discussions) with less agreeable people. They tend to be good at bargaining for themselves, or at negotiating for more recognition or power. They are likely to have higher salaries and to earn more money, in consequence. They are therefore less likely to suffer from resentment or to harbor invisible anger, although this tendency may be increased, if they are very high in neuroticism.
I must be high on neuroticism because I do find it hard to forgive even myself.
In addition, because of their tendency to engage in conflict, when necessary, moderately disagreeable people tend not to sacrifice medium- to long-term stability and function for the sake of short-term peace.
I couldn’t agree more.
This means that problems that should be solved in the present are often solved, and do not accumulate counterproductively across time.
Women are higher in agreeableness than men. The mean percentile for women in a general population (women and men) is 61.5. For men it is 38.5. The fact that men are lower in agreeableness than women helps explain their much higher rates of criminal incarceration (90% male). The primary difference between criminals and non-criminals is disagreeableness. If the typical criminal is more disagreeable than 98% of people in the general population, then almost all those criminals will be male. This difference in agreeableness between men and women is largest in countries such as Norway and Sweden, where the most has been done to ensure equality of outcome between the sexes. This provides strong evidence that biological factors rather than environment and learning account for the dissimilarity.
Agreeableness, per se, is not strongly associated with political liberalism or conservatism, but this is because the aspects of agreeableness predict such political belief in opposite ways, and cancel each other out. Liberals are higher in aspect compassion, and conservatives in aspect politeness. However, alliance with the category of belief that has come to be known as politically correct is strongly predicted by agreeableness (particularly compassion). What this appears to mean is that agreeable people strongly identify with those they deem oppressed, seeing them, essentially, as exploited infants, and demonize those they see as oppressors, seeing them as cruel, heartless predators.
I have had this point of view for a long time, however, as I have become older my definition of oppressed and oppressor has narrowed down significantly.
There are large differences between men and women in terms of spontaneous interest, and these also appear associated with agreeableness. Agreeable people, caring as they do for others, are more likely to enter professions associated with people, such as teaching and nursing, which are dominated by women.
I wanted to be a history teacher when I was younger.
This is true even in the Scandinavian countries, where attempts to produce gender-equal societies has reached a maximum. Disagreeable people, by contrast, appear to prefer systematizing over empathizing, and are more interested in things – machines and technology. In consequence, professions such as engineering and trades associated with construction and machinery tend to be dominated by relatively disagreeable men.
Agreeableness has two aspects: compassion and politeness.
Compassion: Moderately High
You are moderately high in compassion, which is one aspect of Agreeableness. Your score puts you at the 61st percentile for compassion. If you were one of 100 people in a room, you would be more compassionate than 61 of them and less compassionate than 38 of them.
Moderately compassionate people are interested in the problems of other people, and other living things. They are concerned about helping other people avoid negative emotion. They make time and do kind things for others, even when doing so may interfere with fulfilling their own needs and interests. They have a noticeably soft side.
I been called a sweet heart from time to time.
Other people consider them sympathetic and nice, and will turn to them often for a listening ear. They are empathetic and caring. However, because they are so other-oriented, they may find it difficult to negotiate on their own behalf, and may not get what they deserve (for their hard work, for example). This may lead to feelings of resentment.
Personal experience has taught me that if I do not stand up for myself, I become resentful.
Those who are liberal, politically, score somewhat higher in compassion than conservatives.
Women are also higher in compassion than men. The mean percentile for women in a general population (women and men) is 61. For men it is 39.
Politeness: Very Low
You are very low in politeness, which is one aspect of Agreeableness. Your score puts you at the 4th percentile for politeness. If you were one of 100 people in a room, you would be less polite than 95 of them and more polite than 4 of them.
I would not say I am the most polite person in the room but I may have compared myself to the average Japanese person.
People who are very low in politeness are not at all deferential to authority – nor are they obedient. They can be respectful, grudgingly, but only to people who clearly deserve and demand it, and they are very markedly willing to push back when challenged.
Respect is earned and power should not be corrupted.
They are not uncomfortable confronting other people – in fact, they may enjoy it. People very low in politeness are not motivated to avoid conflict, or to steer clear of conflict or fights. They may find themselves frequently in trouble with authority, in consequence. Their skepticism can make it very difficult for them to find a place in the middle or lower in hierarchies of power and dominance. They tend very strongly to be dominant, rather than submissive (particularly if they are also low in neuroticism).
I find it hard to dismiss these results.
Those who are liberal, politically, score somewhat lower in politeness than conservatives (the opposite pattern is seen with compassion).
Women are higher in politeness than men. The mean percentile for women in a general population (women and men) is 59. For men it is 41.
You are low in conscientiousness, which is the primary dimension of dutiful achievement in the Big Five personality trait scientific model. Conscientiousness is a measure of obligation, attention to detail, hard work, persistence, cleanliness, efficiency and adherence to rules, standards and processes. Conscientious people implement their plans and establish and maintain order.
I have only been able to get as far as I can through persistence, hard work, and efficiency. Although I lack adherence to rules and standards, it only applies inefficient guidelines.
Your score puts you at the 11th percentile for conscientiousness. If you were one of 100 people in a room, you would be less conscientious than 88 of them and more conscientious than 11 of them.
People low in conscientiousness do not regard duty as particularly important, and they don’t like to slog away at their tasks. They will only work hard if pushed, generally by outside forces (supervisors, spouses, friends, parents) and don’t mind wasting time.
I may procrastinate at times but I do mind wasting time. It is hard for me to relax on a beach for so long until I begin to want to get to work on some kind of project or task.
They are highly likely to procrastinate (particularly if they are also above average in neuroticism). Even when people with low levels of conscientiousness commit to doing something, there is a good chance they will be late, or delayed, even when there is no real reason for it.
I do need to work on my timeliness.
They tend to formulate and deliver excuses for their failure under such circumstances, typically blaming the situation for the problem. They are not decisive, neat, organized, future-oriented, or reliable, and they find themselves too-easily distracted.
I do not like to give excuses but I still deliver even under less than optimal conditions.
People with low levels of conscientiousness are much less likely to obtain higher grades in academic settings (particularly if they are also less intelligent), and generally require substantial supervision to stay on task.
I did not struggle too much in academics and I do not like to be micro managed.
For this reason, they make sub-optimal managers and administrators. They do not feel compelled to do things by the book, however. This can perhaps be an advantage, if they are engaged in creative tasks, where rules must be broken for advancement to take place.
Creativity is an advantage for both leadership and advancement.
They will rarely make career accomplishment a primary goal, turning instead to pursuit of safety and security (if high in neuroticism), creative accomplishment (if high in openness), establishment of intimate relationships and friendships (if highly agreeable), or social success, excitement and fun (if extraverted). Such people are by no means achievement-oriented.
I do not pursue safety and security. Creative accomplishments fall under career accomplishments in my case. I do find intimate relationships and friendships priceless. I am passed the fun and social success part of life.
People low in conscientiousness tend to relatively be free of guilt, shame, self-disgust and self-contempt. Other people, however, are likely to react negatively to their tendency to slack off and avoid responsibility (particularly if those other people are disagreeable and conscientious).
I wish this were the case for me.
Individuals who are low in conscientious tend not to be concerned by failure. They are not judgmental, to themselves or others, and find and formulate situational explanations for disappointment, frustration or lack of success.
Definitely not true. The only reversal I can think of is embracing failure if it leads me to success.
They can handle periods of inactivity and unemployment with comparative ease. They downplay the relationship between hard work, diligence and success, assuming instead that chance factors and luck in life play a determining role. They live, in large part, for leisure and very much look forward to time off. They can be very good at relaxing, and living in the moment (particularly when low in neuroticism). They are much less concerned than average with cleaning, moral purity and achievement. It’s far more fun to be at the beach or at a party with a person low in conscientiousness – but you might not want to invite them over on moving day.
I think I am somewhere in the middle of all this.
People low in conscientiousness are substantively more likely to be political liberals rather than conservatives. This is particularly true if they are also high in openness.
Women are very slightly more conscientious than men. The mean percentile for women in a general population (women and men) is 51.5. For men it is 49.5.
Conscientiousness has two aspects: industriousness and orderliness.
Industriousness: Moderately Low
You are moderately low in industriousness, which is one aspect of conscientiousness. Your score puts you at the 32nd percentile for industriousness. If you were one of 100 people in a room, you would be less industrious than 67 of them and more industrious than 32 of them.
I was expecting to be moderately high. I do not take a day off work.
People who are lower in industriousness are less likely to be successful in school and in administrative and managerial positions (particularly if they are also less intelligent).
I was quite successful in both.
If they are highly intelligent, they are likely to be regarded as underachievers. They don’t focus on work as much as others and are more likely to procrastinate, miss deadlines, or fail to complete assignments or projects completely. They have a tendency to put off responsibilities, concentrating more on fun, worry, relationships, excitement or creative endeavor. They aren’t particularly concerned with schedules, timelines or efficiency, and may have to be supervised excessively before their tasks will be completed. They lack focus and are easily distracted.
There is some truth to that.
People moderately low in industriousness are not judgmental to themselves or others. They tend to let people, including themselves, off the hook. They are less likely to believe that people fail because they don’t apply themselves or work hard, assuming that chance and luck play the determining roles.
I do believe there is something called laziness and self-sabotage.
They are not prone to guilt, self-disgust or self-contempt, and have a laissez-faire, whatever-will-be-will-be attitude toward life.
I am definitely prone to guilt but I also adapt to the environment, however chaotic.
Those who are liberal and those who are conservatives appear equally industrious.
Men are slightly more industrious than women. The mean percentile for men in a general population (women and men) is 51.5. For women it is 49.5.
Orderliness: Very Low
You are very low in orderliness, which is one aspect of conscientiousness. Your score puts you at the 5th percentile for orderliness. If you were one of 100 people in a room, you would be less orderly than 94 of them and more orderly than 5 of them.
I am not an accountant.
People very low in orderliness are not at all disturbed, upset or disgusted by mess, disorder and chaos. They just don’t notice such things (or, if they do, they don’t at all care). They see the world in shades of grey, not in black and white, and are extremely non-judgmental and devil-may-care in their attitudes toward themselves and others.
This assessment is not at all surprising.
They never use and positively dislike schedules, list, or routines and, even if they plan, almost never implement those plans, preferring to take things as they come, and letting chance determine the outcome. They are not at all oriented toward detail and very rarely abide by rules or procedures.
I do not think I rank that low. I do keep a schedule. However I will admit to there being some truth in the result.
People who are very low in orderliness cannot tolerate or establish any routine or predictability. Their schedules are extremely loose, their time completely unscheduled, and disruption doesn’t bother them in the least. They require constant reminder and supervision to maintain attention and focus, and are continually distracted and off task. They can, however, tolerate the mess, disruption and intervening periods of chaos that may accompany creative endeavor.
I would say that am in the extremes and middle of some of these statements. But I do follow a schedule.
Those who are very low in orderliness are remarkably much less likely to be political conservatives. Orderliness is the second-best predictor of conservatism, after openness to experience.
I am feeling quite conservative these days. Maybe it comes with age and wisdom.
Women are more orderly than men. The mean percentile for women in a general population (women and men) is 54.5. For men it is 45.5. This may account for some of the trouble in relation to housework between women and men. Since women are, on average, more orderly, household disorder will trigger disgust and discomfort in them faster. This may happen with sufficient frequency so they end up doing a disproportionate share of such work (even though if they waited a bit longer their less orderly partners, often men, might end up equally troubled and motivated to fix the problem). Orderly people are more likely to have items such as event calendars, drawer organizers, laundry baskets, irons and ironing boards in their immediate environments.
Extraversion: Moderately High
You are moderately high in extraversion, which is the primary dimension of positive emotion in the Big Five personality trait scientific model. Extraversion is a measure of general sensitivity to positive emotions such as hope, joy, anticipation and approach, particularly in social situations.
Your score puts you at the 60th percentile for extraversion. If you were one of 100 people in a room, you would be more extraverted than 60 of them and less extraverted than 39 of them.
People with moderately high levels of extraversion are quite enthusiastic, talkative, assertive in social situations, and gregarious. They are often energized by social contact, and crave it. They typically like to plan parties, tell jokes, make people laugh and participate in community activities.
Yes, this is all true.
They are somewhat more likely to have positive memories of the past, above-average levels of current self-esteem (particularly if they are low in neuroticism), and to feel optimism about the future.
People who are moderately extraverted don’t often keep things to themselves, tending instead to share what they are thinking with everyone.
Sharing this post should make the above clear.
They are self-disclosing (particularly if also high in neuroticism) and they warm fairly rapidly to other people. They are among the first to speak in meetings. They can be captivating and convincing. They are likely to be among the first to act in an ambiguous situation.
Yes, even to my own embarrassment.
People who are moderately high in extraversion make more enthusiastic employees, and tend to be well-suited to jobs involving sales, persuasion, work in groups and public speaking (particularly, once again, if they are low in neuroticism). They are somewhat less suited to occupations that require a lot of isolated work (such as computer programming or accounting).
A part of the reason why I dropped programming was the isolation.
People moderately high in extraversion have a tendency to be impulsive, particularly when it comes to having fun in social situations. They are somewhat more likely to sacrifice the future to the present, when something social or group-oriented beckons.
A sucker for love.
It can be difficult for them to be alone and to study and work. They can find themselves distracted by opportunities to chat, joke and socialize. This is particularly the case if they are also low in conscientiousness. When individuals are extraverted and conscientious, they are more productive than if they are introverted and conscientious. However, when they are introverted and unconscientious, they are more productive than they are when they are extroverted and unconscientious.
I believe I fall under the extroverted and conscientious sphere.
People moderately high in extraversion are comparatively more dominant in social situations, particularly if they are also low in agreeableness. Less agreeable extraverts tend to be self-centered – something that can be made worse if they are also low in conscientiousness.
I try to listen more these days.
Those who are politically liberal are slightly less extraverted than conservatives.
Women are slightly more extraverted than men. The mean percentile for women in a general population (women and men) is 52. For men it is 48.
Extraversion has two aspects: Enthusiasm and Assertiveness.
Enthusiasm: Moderately High
You are moderately high in enthusiasm, which is one aspect of extraversion. Your score puts you at the 64th percentile for enthusiasm. If you were one of 100 people in a room, you would be more enthusiastic than 64 of them and less enthusiastic than 35 of them.
Individuals moderately high in enthusiasm are somewhat excitable, happy and easier to get to know. They will talk more about everything (particularly other people) than the typical person. They laugh or giggle more than average. They would rather spend time around other people than alone, and they tend to like parties.
Yes I do enjoy laughter and good company. But I much prefer ideas and events over people.
They don’t generally keep people at a distance, and are not too concerned with keeping things private.
This is a strange enigma. Although I am outgoing, I prefer to keep my inner circle tight and not have so many casual friends in my private life.
They are comparatively positive and optimistic. They warm up quickly to other people. They like stimulation, excitement, activity and fun. Enthusiastic people are gregarious, encouraging and people-loving, and tend to be quite positive about what might happen next.
Enthusiasm is not strongly associated with political preference, either conservative or liberal.
Women are higher in enthusiasm than men. The mean percentile for women in a general population (women and men) is 55. For men it is 45.
Assertiveness: Typical or Average
You are typical or average in assertiveness, which is one aspect of extraversion. Your score puts you at the 52nd percentile for assertiveness. If you were one of 100 people in a room, you would be more assertive than 52 of them and less assertive than 47 of them.
People of average assertiveness will sometimes take charge, spontaneously, but often let others step in first. They can put forward their own opinions but do not feel compelled to do so. They are not particularly dominant and do not generally strive to control social situations. At times, they can act in an influential or captivating manner, but it is not habitual. They can act, in ambiguous situations, but will often let others lead the way. They tend not to be particularly impulsive, and tend not to act without thinking.
I can't argue with these results.
You are more assertive than 52 of 100 people
Liberals tend to be slightly less assertive than conservatives.
Women are slightly less assertive than men. The mean percentile for women in a general population (women and men) is 48. For men it is 52.
Neuroticism: Moderately High
You are moderately high in neuroticism, which is the primary dimension of negative emotion in the Big Five personality trait scientific model. Neuroticism is a measure of general sensitivity to negative emotions such as pain, sadness, irritable or defensive anger, fear and anxiety.
I would not argue being low on this trait but I think recent events have had me score higher than normal.
Your score puts you at the 61st percentile for neuroticism. If you were one of 100 people in a room, you would be higher in neuroticism than 61 of them and lower in neuroticism than 38 of them.
People with moderately high levels of neuroticism are somewhat more likely to think that things have gone wrong in the past, are going wrong now, and will continue to go wrong into the future.
I would say that I look at a lot of things in the past as negative but I also reminisce on the positive or the journey thus far. I am much more hopeful of the future and I think that is a big part of why I have been able to reach my goals or not get discouraged when I hit a roadblock.
They are also a bit more likely to be unhappy, anxious and irritable when just thinking or remembering, and when they encounter a genuine problem. They have lower than average levels of self-esteem, particularly when they are also low in extraversion. Neuroticism is a risk factor for anxiety disorders and depression.
I don't think this description fits me. But I will admit to feeling anxious if there is something within my power that I have done wrong or need to do right.
Moderately high levels of neuroticism may interfere somewhat with both success and satisfaction in relationships and career, with the strongest effect on relationships. Moderately high levels of neuroticism are associated with slightly more concern about mental and physical health, as well as more physician and emergency room visits, and higher than average levels of absenteeism at work and at school (particularly if accompanied by below average levels of conscientiousness).
Yes to the relationship, health, and career aspect. No to the doctor visits and absenteeism.
People with moderately high levels of neuroticism appear to be somewhat risk-averse, which means they will be less likely to pursue or enjoy recreational, career, financial and social situations where the possibility of loss is high. Such people appear to be concerned with maintaining their current status, rather than enhancing it. Perhaps this is a good strategy in genuinely dangerous or uncertain times.
Life would be easier for me if this were the case for me. I gamble quite a bit on my career.
Neuroticism is not a powerful predictor of political belief, either conservative or liberal.
Females tend to be higher in neuroticism than males. The typical woman is higher in neuroticism than 60% of the general population of men and women combined. In part, this may be why women report more unhappiness in their relationships, at work, in school and with their health than men, on average, and why women initiate 70% of all divorces. This difference in neuroticism between men and women appears to emerge at puberty. It is largest in countries such as Norway and Sweden, where the most has been done to ensure equality of outcome between the sexes. This provides strong evidence that biological factors rather than environment and learning account for the dissimilarity.
Trait neuroticism is made up of the aspects withdrawal and volatility.
Withdrawal: Typical or Average
You are typical or average in withdrawal, which is one aspect of neuroticism. Your score puts you at the 47th percentile for withdrawal. If you were one of 100 people in a room, you would be higher in withdrawal than 47 of them and lower in withdrawal than 52 of them.
Individuals average in withdrawal may occasionally suffer from anticipatory anxiety, but are generally not impeded by it. They can handle new, uncertain, unexpected, threatening or complex situations quite well. They are not more likely to avoid or withdraw in the face of the unknown and unexpected.
I could not agree more.
People with average levels of withdrawal sometimes feel sad, lonesome, disappointed and grief-stricken, but not too deeply, and not for too long. They experience normal levels of doubt and worry, embarrassment, self-consciousness and discouragement in the face of threat and punishment. They are reasonably but not excessively sensitive to social rejection, and don’t feel hurt too easily. Even when hurt, frightened, or anxious, they can recover in a reasonable amount of time. People with typical levels of withdrawal are not particularly concerned that something bad is going to happen. Technically, withdrawal has been associated with activity in the brain systems that regulate passive avoidance.
I think these results are about right.
Those who are liberal, politically, are slightly higher in withdrawal than conservatives.
Women are higher in withdrawal than men. The mean percentile for women in a general population (women and men) is 60. For men it is 40.
Volatility: Moderately High
You are moderately high in volatility, which is one aspect of neuroticism. Your score puts you at the 72nd percentile for volatility. If you were one of 100 people in a room, you would be more volatile than 72 of them and less volatile than 27 of them.
Individuals moderately high in volatility tend to vary somewhat in their mood. They can be more irritable than the typical person, feeling disappointment, frustration, pain and social isolation somewhat more easily. They are somewhat more likely to act out or verbally express their frustration, disappointment and irritability. When stirred up and upset or angry or irritated, they can take longer to calm down. They are more argumentative than average and can lose their composure. They can sometimes be provocative in a dispute (particularly if also low in agreeableness). Perhaps people moderately high in volatility tend to get upset if something bad does happen, while people moderately high in withdrawal (the other aspect of neuroticism) tend to be concerned that something bad might happen. Technically, volatility has been associated with activity in the brain systems that regulate fight, flight or freeze.
This maybe true but I tend to balance it out with a higher level of consciousness than reported and not show my negative emotions as much as I instinctively desire.
Volatility is not strongly related to political preference, either liberal or conservative.
Women are higher in volatility than men. The mean percentile for women in a general population (women and men) is 57.5. For men it is 42.5.
Openness to Experience: Typical or Average
You are typical or average in openness to experience, which is the primary dimension of creativity, artistic interest and intelligence (particularly verbal intelligence) in the Big Five personality trait scientific model. Openness to experience is a measure of interest in novelty, art, literature, abstract thinking, philosophy as well as sensitivity to aesthetic emotions and beauty.
Your score puts you at the 53rd percentile for openness to experience. If you were one of 100 people in a room, you would be higher in openness to experience than 53 of them and lower in openness to experience than 46 of them.
People with typical levels of openness to experience are as smart and creative as others, on average. They are not generally characterized as exploratory or visionary, but have their moments of insight and realization. They are sometimes interested in learning for its own sake and show some interest in acquiring new abilities and skills. They are not overwhelmingly curious, and are not strikingly interested in abstract thinking, philosophy, or the meaning of belief systems and ideologies. They will attend cultural events such as movies, concerts, dance recitals, plays, poetry readings, gallery openings and art shows, but do not find themselves compelled to do so. They sometimes enjoy writing and will occasionally enjoy encountering and trying to solve a complex problem, or explore abstract ideas.
I was expecting to score higher but I would say that is about right aside from my interest in philosophy and abstract thinking.
OPENNESS TO EXPERIENCE
OPENNESS TO EXPERIENCE
They tend to read an average amount – but more mainstream material. They have a normal range of interests, and a reasonable vocabulary. They can think and learn reasonably quickly. They sometimes find themselves formulating new ideas, and are articulate enough to get their thoughts across (particularly if average or above in extraversion). People average in openness now and then see old things in new ways, but are also satisfied with the tried-and-true. They can solve day-to-day problems well, and sometimes seek out a more difficult challenge.
People who are average or typical in openness to experience can adapt reasonably well to situations or occupations that are routinized and predictable. They have little trouble fitting in at the bottom of hierarchies. They can be better suited than those who are more open to entry-level, repetitive, rote positions, because they aren’t compelled to think up new ways to do things. They are not uncreative thinkers, but are less commonly known as creative or revolutionary. They rarely shake things up, particularly if they are also agreeable and less assertive.
Maybe it is my low score of agreeableness and my higher score of assertiveness but I find it hard to show up to a job that is just routine. I would rather have a machine replace my occupation than show up to an everyday uncreative task.
Individuals average in openness to experience may be entrepreneurial in spirit, but they also appreciate conventional employment. They have no more than average interest in creating new ventures, whether for profit, curiosity, or personal transformation. At least moderately high levels of openness to experience appear necessary to the formation and leadership of business and other forms of complex organization, although conscientiousness appears required for the attention to detail and process management that such organizations also always need.
Yes. I do agree to this part of the assessment.
People typical in openness to experience have an average range of interests. This makes it relatively easy for them to settle on a single path in life, to specialize to a necessary degree, and to create an integrated identity (unless they are very high or above in neuroticism and/or very low or below in conscientiousness). People characterized by the combination of moderately high openness to experience and very high or above levels of neuroticism can undermine their own convictions and beliefs by questioning and making themselves lost and anxious. Open, unconscientious people tend to be “under-achievers” (particularly if also above average in neuroticism). Such people appear to have the capability to succeed, can learn quickly, and are creative, but they can have some trouble implementing their ideas.
They nailed it.
Openness to experience is the dimension that best predicts political allegiance (with conscientiousness, particularly the aspect of orderliness, coming in at second place). Those who are liberal, politically, are very much more likely to be high in openness to experience than conservatives.
Women and men differ very little in openness to experience at the trait level, although there are differences in the aspect levels.
Trait openness to experience is made up of the aspects of intellect and openness.
Intellect: Moderately Low
Note: Do not confuse the personality aspect of Intellect with IQ. Intellect is a measure of interest in abstract ideas, essentially, while IQ is a measure of processing speed, verbal ability, working memory, and problem solving capacity, and is better measured with a formal IQ test. It is perfectly possible to have a high IQ and a low score on the personality trait of Intellect.
You are moderately low in intellect, which is one aspect of openness to experience. Your score puts you at the 28th percentile for intellect. If you were one of 100 people in a room, you would be lower in intellect than 71 of them and higher in intellect than 28 of them.
People moderately low in intellect are less likely to evince interest in ideas and abstract concepts. They tend not to appreciate learning about philosophical ideas. They don’t want to be overloaded with information, particularly if it is complex. They are less intellectually curious, and will rarely voluntarily tackle and solve complex abstract problems. They are less likely to engage in issue-oriented discussions, or to enjoy idea-centered books. They can be somewhat less articulate (particularly if average or lower in extraversion) and may have some difficulty formulating and communicating their ideas. People moderately low in intellect may have a vocabulary of somewhat less than normal breadth and depth, and like to stick with the tried-and-true, rather than learning new ideas and skills. They will be less likely to seek out or generate novel, creative concepts or finding and adapting to new experiences and situations.
I would say I am interested in philosophical ideas and issue oriented discussions. I actually read idea-centered books more often than fiction. I do at times feel my vocabulary is limited and trying to communicate abstract ideas can be difficult but I think I scored myself low there because I am comparing myself to people like Noam Chomsky. I am always trying to learn new ideas and skills even when it works better if I just stick to the tried-and-true. Perhaps there is a battle between low intellect and creativity.
People moderately low in intellect find complex, rapidly changing occupations less to their liking and are less likely to do well at them (unless high in conscientiousness and low in neuroticism). They are better suited to stable, straightforward and more traditional occupations, where the rules for success are well-defined and tend not to change.
I highly disagree with this assessment of my personality. I am pretty sure I was too self-critical and compared myself to the great thinkers of the present.
Liberals are higher in intellect than conservatives (although the biggest difference between the two is openness to experience at the trait level).
Women are lower than men in intellect (although not in IQ). This is probably a difference in interest: people high in intellect, compared to openness, are more likely to prefer the sciences to the arts. The mean percentile for women in a general population (women and men) is 45. For men it is 55.
Openness: Moderately High
You are moderately high in openness, which is one aspect of openness to experience. Your puts you at the 75th percentile for openness. If you were one of 100 people in a room, you would be higher in openness than 75 of them and lower in openness than 24 of them.
The closest synonym for openness (rather than openness to experience, which encompasses openness and intellect) is creativity. Moderately open, creative people find beauty important. Without an outlet for their creative ability they may have some difficulty thriving. They like art or beautiful crafts. They are more sensitive to color and architectural form. They often enjoy collecting. They are comparatively imaginative, and may daydream and reflect on many things. They tend to enjoy music, perhaps of more than one genre, and may be somewhat musical or artistic themselves (both of these are rare in the general population). They can find themselves immersed in a book, or a movie, or in their own thoughts, and become somewhat oblivious to the outside world. They respond well to beauty, creativity and art.
I could not agree more with this part of the assessment.
Moderately open, creative people tend not to be impractical or flighty, however, despite their creative openness (unless they are particularly low in conscientiousness). At least moderate levels of openness appear necessary for entrepreneurial success, and prove comparatively useful at the top of hierarchies, even in very conservative occupations such as banking, accounting and law, which need creative people in leadership positions to provide new vision and direction.
Liberals are higher in openness than conservatives (although the biggest difference between the two is openness to experience, at the trait level).
Women are higher in openness than men. The mean percentile for women in a general population (women and men) is 56.5. For men it is 44.5.
Over the last fifty years, specialists in the measurement of personality (a field known as psychometrics) have been applying advanced statistical techniques such as factor analysis to study the language people use to understand themselves and each other. According to the “lexical hypothesis” – the primary guiding idea behind such work – each and every human language contains a relatively complete description of the important similarities and differences between individuals. Language has encapsulated such description because human beings are exceptionally social, and need to understand each other to cooperate effectively and avoid conflict.
Most of the work done to understand personality has been conducted on the adjectives that people use to describe each other (words such as happy, sad, nice, hard-working, and creative). Psychometric specialists have given extensive lists of such adjectives—sometimes as single words, sometimes as phrases, and sometimes as sentences—to many thousands of people, and used statistical techniques referred to earlier to determine how the words group together. People who are likely to describe themselves as sad, for example, are also more likely to describe themselves as fearful, anxious, uncertain and volatile, and less likely to describe themselves as cool, collected, calm and stable. The same applies in other domains: people who are nice are compassionate, empathic, caring and soft, while their polar opposites are hard, competitive, blunt and tough. Five such dimensions of variation (the “Big Five”) have been identified, cross-culturally. The two just described correspond to neuroticism and agreeableness, respectively. The three remaining dimensions include extraversion, which is a measure of sociability; conscientiousness, a measure of dutifulness and reliability; and openness to experience, a measure of creativity and interest in ideas. The understandmyself.com process, based on a personality scale known as the Big Five Aspects scale (developed by Dr. Colin DeYoung, Dr. Lena Quality, and Dr. Jordan B Peterson in Dr. Peterson's lab) extends the Big Five description, breaking down each of the five traits into two higher-resolution aspects.
You can take the test here.
Cover photo by Steven West