11–20 of 261 posts
not personality trait obviously, but in terms of success IQ probably matters more than big 5. I think personality can be improved or changed though effort but intelligence cannot. Someone who is introverted can make an effort to be extroverted in situations where it matters.
They could just be out to sell books though, too; I don't have a strong opinion either way.
The premise of this article is ridiculous. Your personality doesn’t cause you to be autistic. The personality traits are almost certainly caused by the “outcomes” the author is assessing, or both are caused by some other hidden variables. Personality tests are just reading the tea leaves of self-reported questionnaires.
Conscientiousness is by far the least popular but has the highest income. That is not at all surprising. Objectivity, right and wrong as reflected by a balance of measures, is a rare and unpopular innate personality trait that allows for making micro-decisions many people might find abhorrent, more typically based upon evidence.
According to the same chart, conscientious people also seem to perform significantly better in college than everyone else. In the modern world, better GPAs are usually correlated with higher income. Interestingly, those people don't seem to do particularly well in the SAT. Perhaps their abilities are "unlocked" to the fullest only after they get into college and get a chance to make independent decisions.
Or maybe the SAT is just a shitty test.
It's impossible to take this seriously when it's using profiles of random famous people as if that means anything. If that wasn't done by actually interviewing them, then however it was done, the methodology diverges and is already invalid but even worse, it was just third-person subjective nonsense. Edit: Why would Reimersholme's comment be buried? Neuroticism is what it's usually called in Big Five. [1][2] 1. https…
The personality traits of famous historical people are well established and widely available online. I have no idea how accurate they are, but they do fulfill their role as easily recognizable stereotypes. In any case the author probably used a publicly available dataset and didn't just make it up.
not personality trait obviously, but in terms of success IQ probably matters more than big 5. I think personality can be improved or changed though effort but intelligence cannot. Someone who is introverted can make an effort to be extroverted in situations where it matters.
Sure, a smart introvert can learn how to act like an extrovert. But this will never be natural to him and will cause an additional cognitive load.
not personality trait obviously, but in terms of success IQ probably matters more than big 5. I think personality can be improved or changed though effort but intelligence cannot. Someone who is introverted can make an effort to be extroverted in situations where it matters.
If IQ is important, maybe it's just that intelligent people know how to take personality tests.
not personality trait obviously, but in terms of success IQ probably matters more than big 5. I think personality can be improved or changed though effort but intelligence cannot. Someone who is introverted can make an effort to be extroverted in situations where it matters.
Is there data on that? Perceptions of intelligence are variable to practice and preparation if the measure is nonrandomized convergent standardized tests, which is not IQ but is the more accepted assessment of intelligence. IQ only seems to matter up to 135 after which other factors become more dominant in determining success.
I look at it like this, for creative, intellectually demanding work IQ is a necessary but perhaps insufficient condition. You need to be smart to achieve success cause you are competing with other people, so smarter people will have an edge. Google is not hiring people with 90-110 iqs. So having a high IQ is needed to at least be sufficiently proficient in coding, to be considered for a good paying job, but not guarantee you will be hired, but being smart sure helps.
For instance, take a Big Five trait such as agreeableness. How do we know that a person is agreeable? Because we define agreeableness in a certain way and then measure the degree to which someone conforms to the definition. If that measurement includes questions such as, "Do others find you easy to get along with?" then of course there's going to be a negative correlation with loneliness, because you've essentially defined it that way.
I am the author of Correlated.org, which commits many different types of statistical errors for humor's sake, so this leaps out at me. By the way, for a surprisingly vast number of things, agreeableness is quite predictive. Food preferences, public policy positions, and even willingness to answer poll questions :)