Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T09:16:37.488Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

From the Big Five to the General Factor of Personality: a DynamicApproach

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 October 2014

Joan C. Micó ,
Salvador Amigó  and
Antonio Caselles
Joan C. Micó
Affiliation:
Universitat Politècnica de València (Spain)
Salvador Amigó
Affiliation:
Universitat de València (Spain)
Antonio Caselles*
Affiliation:
Universitat de València (Spain)
*
*Correspondence concerning this articleshould be addressed to Antonio Caselles. Departament de MatemàticaAplicada. Universitat de València. Dr. Moliner, 50. 46100. Valencia(Spain). Fax: 34–963543922. E-mail: Antonio.Caselles@uv.es
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An integrating and dynamic model of personality that allows predicting theresponse of the basic factors of personality, such as the Big Five Factors (B5F)or the general factor of personality (GFP) to acute doses of drug is presentedin this paper. Personality has a dynamic nature, i.e., as a consequence of astimulus, the GFP dynamics as well as each one of the B5F of personalitydynamics can be explained by the same model (a system of three coupleddifferential equations). From this invariance hypothesis, a partial differentialequation, whose solution relates the GFP with each one of the B5F, is deduced.From this dynamic approach, a co-evolution of the GFP and each one of the B5Foccurs, rather than an unconnected evolution, as a consequence of the samestimulus. The hypotheses and deductions are validated through an experimentaldesign centered on the individual, where caffeine is the considered stimulus.Thus, as much from a theoretical point of view as from an applied one, themodels here proposed open a new perspective in the understanding and study ofpersonality like a global system that interacts intimately with the environment,being a clear bet for the high level inter-disciplinary research.

Keywords

general factor of personalitybig fiveunique personality trait theorydynamics of personalitycaffeine
Type
Research Article
Information
The Spanish Journal of Psychology , Volume 17 , 2014 , E74
Copyright
Copyright © Universidad Complutense de Madrid and Colegio Oficial de Psicólogos de Madrid 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Amigó, S. (2005). La teoría del rasgo único de personalidad. Hacia una teoría unificada del cerebro y la conducta [The unique-trait personality theory. Towards a unified theory of brain and conduct]. Valencia, Spain: Editorial de la Universidad Politécnica de Valencia.Google Scholar
Amigó, S., Caselles, A., & Micó, J. C. (2008). A dynamic extraversion model: The brain’s response to a single dose of a stimulant drug. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 61, 211–231. http://dx.doi.org/10.1348/000711007X185514 Google Scholar
Amigó, S., Caselles, A., & Micó, J. C. (2010). The General Factor of Personality Questionnaire (GFPQ): Only one factor to understand the personality? The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 13, 5–17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1138741600003644 Google Scholar
Amigó, S., Caselles, A., & Micó, J. C. (2013). The self-regulation therapy to reproduce drug effects: A suggestion technique to change personality and the DRD3 gene expression. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 61, 282–304. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00207144.2013.784094 Google Scholar
Amigó, S., Caselles, A., Micó, J. C., & García, J. M. (2009a). Dynamics of the unique trait of personality: Blood’s glutamate in response to methylphenidate and conditioning. Revista Internacional de Sistemas, 16, 35–40.Google Scholar
Amigó, S., Micó, J. C., & Caselles, A. (2009b). Five adjectives to explain the whole personality: A brief scale of personality. Revista Internacional de Sistemas, 16, 41–43.Google Scholar
Becker, P. (1999). Beyond the Big Five. Personality and Individual Differences, 26, 511–530. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(98)00168-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brody, N., & Ehrlichman, H. (1998). Personality psychology. The science of individuality. New Jersey, NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc.Google Scholar
Caselles, A. (1992a). Structure and behavior in general systems theory. Cybernetics and Systems: An International Journal, 23, 549–560. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01969729208927481 Google Scholar
Caselles, A. (1992b). Simulation of Large Scale Stochastic Systems. In Trappl, R. (Ed.), Cybernetics and systems’92 (pp. 221–228) Singapore, Republic of Singapore: World Scientific.Google Scholar
Caselles, A. (1993). Systems decomposition and coupling. Cybernetics and Systems: An International Journal, 24, 305–323. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01969729308961712 Google Scholar
Caselles, A. (1994). Improvements in the systems-based models generator SIGEM. Cybernetics and Systems: An International Journal, 25, 81–103. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01969729408902317 Google Scholar
Caselles, A. (1995). Systems autonomy and learning from experience. Advances in Systems Science and Applications, Special Issue I, 1–6.Google Scholar
Caselles, A. (2008) Modelización y simulación de sistemas complejos [Modeling and simulation of complex systems]. Valencia, Spain: Universitat de València.Google Scholar
Caselles, A., Micó, J. C., & Amigó, S. (2010). Cocaine addiction and personality: A mathematical model. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 63, 449–480. http://dx.doi.org/10.1348/000711009X470768 Google Scholar
Caselles, A., Micó, J. C., & Amigó, S. (2011). Dynamics of the general factor of personality in response to a single dose of caffeine. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 14, 675–692. http://dx.doi.org/10.5209/rev_SJOP.2011.v14.n2.16 Google Scholar
Childs, E., & de Wit, H. (2006). Subjective, behavioral, and physiological effects of acute caffeine in light, nondependent caffeine users. Psychopharmacology, 185, 514–523. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00213-006-0341-3 Google Scholar
Corr, P. J., & Kumari, V. (2000). Individual differences in mood reactions to d-amphetamine: A test of three personality factors. Journal of Psychopharmacology, 14, 371–377. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/026988110001400406 Google Scholar
Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). NEO-PIR: Professional Manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
Digman, J. M. (1990). Personality structure: Emergence of the Five-Factor Model. Annual Review of Psychology, 41, 417–440. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ps.41.020190.002221 Google Scholar
Digman, J. M. (1997). Higher-order factors of the Big Five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 1246–1256. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.73.6.1246 Google Scholar
Eysenck, H. J. (1991). Dimensions of personality: 16, 5 or 3? Criteria for a taxonomic paradigm. Personality and Individual Differences, 12, 773–790. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(91)90144-Z Google Scholar
Eysenck, H. J. (1992). A reply to Costa and McCrae. P or A and C–the role of theory. Personality and Individual Differences, 13, 867–868. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(92)90003-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Figueredo, A. J., Vásquez, G., Brumbach, B. H., Schneider, S. M. R., Sefcek, J. A., Tal, I. R., … & Jacobs, W. J. (2006). Consilience and life history theory: From genes to brain to reproductive strategy. Developmental Review, 26, 243–275. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2006.02.002 Google Scholar
Forrester, J. W. (1961). Industrial dynamics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Forrester, J. W. (1970). Urban dynamics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Grossberg, S. (2000). The imbalanced brain: From normal to schizophrenia. Biological Psychiatry, 48, 81–98. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0006-3223(00)00903-3 Google Scholar
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1987). Validation of the Five-Factor model of personality across instruments and observers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 81–90. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.52.1.81 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1997). Personality trait structure as a human universal. American Psychologist, 52, 509–516. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.52.5.509 Google Scholar
McNair, D. L. M., & Droppleman, L. (1971). Profile of mood states. San Diego, CA: Educational and Industrial Testing Service.Google Scholar
Micó, J. C., Amigó, S., & Caselles, A. (2008, December). Biological and dynamic nature of personality: A dynamic system approach. Paper presented at the VII Congress of the European Systems Union. Lisboa, Portugal.Google Scholar
Micó, J. C., Amigó, S., & Caselles, A. (2012). Changing the general factor of personality and the c-fos expression with methylphenidate and self-regulation therapy. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 15, 850–867. http://dx.doi.org/10.5209/rev_SJOP.2012.v15.n2.38896 Google Scholar
Micó, J. C., Caselles, A., Amigó, S., Cotolí, A., & Sanz, M. T. (2013). A mathematical approach to the body–mind problem from a system personality theory (a systems approach to the body–mind problem). Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 30, 735–749. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sres.2241 Google Scholar
Musek, J. (2007). A general factor of personality: Evidence for the big one in the Five-Factor model. Journal of Research in Personality, 41, 1213–1233. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2007.02.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nehlig, A. (1999). Does caffeine lead to psychological dependence? Studies in animals and humans reveal that it may lead to dependence only at very high doses. CHEMTECH, 29, 30–35.Google Scholar
Pelechano, V. (1973). Personalidad y adaptación: Tres escuelas y un modelo [Personality and adaptation: Three schools and one model]. Barcelona, Spain: Vicens Vives.Google Scholar
Pelechano, V. (2000). Psicología sistemática de la personalidad [Systematic psychology of personality]. Barcelona, Spain: Ariel.Google Scholar
Rushton, J. P., Bons, T. A., & Hur, Y-M (2008). The genetics and evolution of the general factor of personality. Journal of Research in Personality, 42, 1173–1185. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2008.03.002 Google Scholar
Rushton, J. P., & Irwing, P. (2008). A general factor of personality (GFP) from two meta-analyses of the Big Five: Digman (1997) and Mount, Barrick, Scullen, and Rounds (2005). Personality and Individual Differences, 45, 679–683. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2008.07.015 Google Scholar
Sanz, M. T., Micó, J. C., Caselles, A., & Soler, D. (2014). A stochastic model for population and well-being dynamics. Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 38(2), 75–94.Google Scholar
Saucier, G., & Goldberg, L. R. (2003). The structure of personality attributes. In Barrick, M. R. & Ryan, A. M. (Eds.), Personality and work (pp. 1–29). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Schutte, N. S., Malouff, J. M., Segrera, E., Wolf, A., & Rodgers, L. (2003). States reflecting the Big Five dimensions. Personality and Individual Differences, 34, 591–603. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(02)00031-4 Google Scholar
Solomon, R. L., & Corbit, J. D. (1974). An opponent-process theory of motivation I. Temporal dynamics of affect. Psychological Review, 81, 119–145. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0036128 Google Scholar
Wiggins, J. S., & Trapnell, P. D. (1996). A dyadic-interactional perspective on the Five-Factor Model. In Wiggins, J. S. (Ed.), The Five-Factor Model of personality. Theoretical perspectives (pp. 88–162). New York, NY: Guilford.Google Scholar
Zuckerman, M., & Lubin, B. (1965). Manual for the Multiple Affect Adjective Check List. San Diego, CA: Edits.Google Scholar