Shackman Psyc210 Module02 Impact

Hi All!
Please complete the anonymous questionnaire available from Alex

We will use the data later in the semester for some in-class demos
Return to Alex at the end of class
Nuts & Bolts Plan for

Today
Self-report data collection for

future demos
Lecture on the impact of T&P
Please have a low threshold for asking

questions!!
PSYC 210:
Is T&P Impactful?
Do traits really matter?
AJ Shackman
29 January 2015
Conceptual Roadmap
Historical perspective: Is T&P a useful predictor of
feelings, thoughts, and actions? Or are these largely
driven by the situation?
Case studies: Illustrate impact
Drill down: Assess the consequences of individual
differences in Conscientiousness/Self-Control (Moffitt
PNAS 2011)
Ways in which features of contemporary culture potentially
amplify the impact of T&P
Impact on health, wealth, and public safety
Summary: key take home points
Conceptual Roadmap
Which really matters?

The
cookies
Drill
down:
Assess the consequences of individual

The tendency to violently
2011)
eatPNAS
cookies
Or both?
Conceptual Roadmap
PNAS 2011)
Conceptual Roadmap
PNAS 2011)
Discuss some ways in which features of contemporary
culture can amplify the impact of C/SC
Examine impact of C/SC on health, wealth, and public safety
Conceptual Roadmap
PNAS 2011)
Discuss some ways in which features of contemporary
culture can amplify the impact of C/SC
Examine impact of C/SC on health, wealth, and public safety
Is behavior largely determined

by the situation?
Yes!?
In
his In
highly
his highly
influential
influential
1968 1968
book, book,
Personality and Assessment, Walter
Mischel argued that personality traits
have limited utility in predicting behavior
Correlational upper limit =~ .30 (~10%

variance)
See also Kenrick & Funder Amer Psychol 1988; Roberts et al.

by the situation?
Yes!? In his highly influential 1968 book,


by the situation?

Correlational upper limit =~ .30 (only

~10% variance in behavior can be
predicted by T&P)
Whadya mean variance accounted

for ?
nce Accounted For

he amount of variation in one measure (e.g., weight) predicted by another (e.g.,
qual to the correlation squared
o, for a correlation of .30

.30 x .30 = .09 = 9% of the variance is shared, explained or predicted
Examples of
Correlations
Weight
nce Accounted For

he amount of variation in one measure (e.g., weight) predicted by another (e.g.,
qual to the correlation squared
100%
64%
16%
0%
Height
o, for a correlation of .30

.30 x .30 = .09 = 9% of the variance is shared, explained or predicted

by the situation?


predicted by T&P)
Therefore, other factors (i.e., situation!),

must be responsible for the vast
amounts of variance that are
unaccounted for

by the situation?


predicted by T&P)
Therefore, other factors (i.e., situation!),

must be responsible for the vast
amounts of variance that are
unaccounted for
For the next several decades, research

on T&P languished because of this
apparently devastating critique (The
10% Barrier)
Students
What do you think?
Is the situation really all powerful or are trait-like individual differences in T&P predictive and impactful?
T&P is
impactful
Academic Performance
ased on a meta-analysis of personality-academic performance relationships base

on the Five Factor Model of T&P and data from more than 70,000 subjects
cademic performance in college was predicted by individual differences in

Conscientiousness; more Conscientious students achieved higher performance
emarkably, the size of the Personality-Performance correlation was similar in size
Studentswho are low on Conscientiousness [are]nearly twice as likely to fail

a pretty whopping effect
lysis: statistical technique for combining results from multiple studies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Me
odel = Big 5 = OCEAN (Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, Neurot








tudents low in Conscientiousness arenearly twice as likely to fail



tudents low in Conscientiousness arenearly twice as likely to fail

Marital Stability & Satisfaction
Marital Stability & Satisfaction
Based on a meta-analysis of 115 longitudinal studies

incorporating ~45,000 couples
elation With Marital Stability (+ = Stable; - = Divor
Examined a whole slew of differ

factors to see which predicted
future divorces
Individual differences in
Neuroticism are among the
strongest predictors of divorce

future divorces
Neuroticism were among the
Husbands and wives with highe

levels of Neuroticism were muc
more likely to divorce

future divorces


future divorces

Neuroticism out-predicts factor

such as age at marriage, paren
divorce, and pre-marital
cohabitation

future divorces

Neuroticism out-predicts factor

such as age at marriage, paren
divorce, and pre-marital
cohabitation
Mental Health
Mental Health
nalysis of 20,692 Swedish twins
&P measured at baseline; Clinical follow-up >25 years later
n increase of 1 SD in Neuroticism scores was associated with

31% greater risk of depression
Mental Health
alysis of 20,692 Swedish twins
&P measured at baseline; Clinical follow-up >25 years later
increase of one unit (1 SD) in Neuroticism was associated w

1% greater risk of depression
Mental Health
For comparison purposes, a

Cohens d of 1.04 is
equivalent to r = .46, or
about 21% shared variance
Can also be framed as a ~1
SD difference
Pretty whopping effects!
Lahey Amer P

Cohens d of 1.04 is
SD or 1 standard unit
difference
Lahey Amer P

Cohens d of 1.04 is
SD or 1 standard unit
difference
Lahey Amer P
Physical Illness (Morbidity)
Based on physician ratings of illness from primary

care patients (n=449; 65-97 years old) once a year
for 4 years
T&P strongly predicted illness
Disagreeable persons aged33% faster than
Agreeable persons
At the final follow-up, a person high in Neuroticism

and low in Conscientiousness and Agreeableness
showed morbidity comparable to a peer with average

care patients, (n=449; 65-97 years old) once a year
for 4 years
Agreeable persons
At the final follow-up, a person high in Neuroticism

and low in Conscientiousness and Agreeableness
showed morbidity comparable to a peer with average

care patients, (n=449; 65-97 years old) once a year
for 4 years
Agreeable persons
Individuals high in Neuroticism and low in

Conscientiousness and Agreeableness showed illness
levels comparable to a peer with average personality
Based on a 4 year study of 6,904 older adults

T&P at baseline strongly predicted the onset of new
illnesses
A one unit (SD) increase in Conscientiousness
decreased the odds of a stroke by 37%, high blood
pressure by 27%, diabetes by 20%, and arthritis by
23%
A one unit (SD) increase in Neuroticism increased the
odds of a heart condition by 24%, lung disease by

illnesses
A one unit (SD) increase in Conscientiousness
23%
A one unit (SD) increase in Neuroticism increased the
odds of a heart condition by 24%, lung disease by

illnesses
A one unit (1 SD) increase in Conscientiousness
23%
A one unit (1 SD) increase in Neuroticism increased
the odds of a heart condition by 24%, lung disease by

illnesses
A one unit (1 SD) increase in Conscientiousness
23%
A one unit (1 SD) increase in Neuroticism increased
the odds of a heart condition by 24%, lung disease by
Death (Longevity)
d 2008; see also Shipley et al PM 2007; Neeleman et al PM 2002; Martin et al HP 2007; Roberts et al PPS 2007; Deary et al PS 2008; Jackson et al PS 2015; Turian
Death (Longevity)
2,000 older residents of Baltimore
sessed T&P at baseline and mortality 18 years later
decrease of 1 unit (SD) in Conscientiousness was associated

27% greater risk of dying
increase of 1 unit (SD) in Neuroticism was associated with a

Death (Longevity)
2,000 older residents of Baltimore
ssessed T&P at baseline and mortality 18 years later
decrease of 1 unit (SD) in Conscientiousness was associated

n increase of 1 unit (SD) in Neuroticism was associated with

Death (Longevity)
Death (Longevity)
158 older residents of Chicago

the 6 year follow up, 39.5% of the sample had died
ubjects with high Neuroticism were 33% more likely to die th

hose with low Neuroticism
Death (Longevity)


Death (Longevity)


Tremendous Economic Impact
uroticism is associated with smoking, physical illness, and

sychiatric disorders
is is tremendously expensive!
2007 dollars, each individual in the top 5% imposed an econ

urden $12, 362 in excess costs (e.g., direct/indirect medical c
ss of productivity and work absences)
e total excess costs of neuroticism resulting from the 25% hi

corers was about
AGP$1.4B
2010; cf. Lahey Amer Psych 2009; Mroczek HP 2015; Kotov et al Psych Bu
uroticism, for example, is associated with smoking, substanc

hysical illness, and psychiatric disorders
is is tremendously expensive!


orers was about
$1.4B
AGP 2010; cf. Lahey Amer Psych 2009; Mroczek HP 2015; Kotov et al Psych Bu

you can imagine, this is tremendously expensive!


orers was about
$1.4B
AGP 2010; cf. Lahey Amer Psych 2009; Mroczek HP 2015; Kotov et al Psych Bu

you can imagine, this is tremendously expensive!


orers was ~$1.4B
AGP 2010; cf. Lahey Amer Psych 2009; Turiano HP 2015; Kotov et al Psych Bul
Drill down into Moffitt 11:

Conscientiousness / Self-Control (C/SC)
Self Control (SC)

Effortful regulation of behavior, emotional, & cognitive impulses to
achieve long-term goals
Extremely broad, relatively messy broad-band construct
Folk psychology (Ben Franklin) / Philosophy / Character: willpower, selfcontrol, self-discipline
Developmental / Temperament: delay of gratification
Psychoanalytic: ego
Cognitive Neuroscience: executive control, hierarchical control models
Behavioral Economic Theory: opt in vs. opt out; intertemporal delay/discounting
Personality: Conscientiousness
responsibility, industriousness, and orderliness.
Self Control (SC)

Effortful regulation of behavior, emotional, & cognitive impulses to
achieve long-term goals
Extremely broad, but relatively messy construct
Folk psychology (Ben Franklin) / Philosophy / Character: willpower, selfcontrol, self-discipline
Developmental / Temperament: delay of gratification
Psychoanalytic: ego
Cognitive Neuroscience: executive control, hierarchical control models
Behavioral Economic Theory: opt in vs. opt out; intertemporal delay/discounting
Personality: Conscientiousness
responsibility, industriousness, and orderliness.
Are individual differences

in C/SC important?
It seems that less-evolved species are not tortured in the same

way as we humans, who struggle to stay on diets, kick smoking
habits, stop biting our nails, put an end to procrastinating, control
our
tempers, and otherwise follow through on resolutions we know
Students:
will improve our overall well-being. We human beings often
want,
andsome
want intuitive
to want, ways
different
thingsC/SC
... might be
What are
in which
important, aside from academic performance and
Moffitt
et al. provide convincing evidence that some of us are
mortality?
better than others at doing what we want to want and
that the capacity to govern ourselves effectively in the face of
temptation has profound benefits across every major domain of
life functioning.
Maybe important?

our
tempers,
otherwisespecies
follow through
on resolutions
we know
It seems
that and
less-evolved
are not tortured
in the same
will
our overall
beings
often
wayimprove
as we humans,
whowell-being.
struggle toWe
stayhuman
on diets,
kick smoking
want,
...
habits, and
stop want
biting to
ourwant,
nails, different
put an endthings
to procrastinating,
control
our tempers, and otherwise follow through on resolutions we know
Moffitt
et al. our
provide
convincing
evidence
that some
of us
are
will improve
overall
well-being.
We human
beings
often
better
othersto
at want,
doing what
we want
to want
want, than
and want
different
things
... and
IF TIME: http://
that the capacity
to govern ourselves effectively in the face of
www.youtube.com/watch?v=QX_oy9614H
temptation has
Q profound benefits across every major domain of
life functioning.
Maybe important?

our
tempers,
otherwisespecies
follow through
on resolutions
we know
It seems
that and
less-evolved
are not tortured
in the same
will
our overall
beings
often
wayimprove
as we humans,
whowell-being.
struggle toWe
stayhuman
on diets,
kick smoking
want,
...
habits, and
stop want
biting to
ourwant,
nails, different
put an endthings
to procrastinating,
control
our tempers, and otherwise follow through on resolutions we know
Moffitt
et al. our
provide
convincing
evidence
that some
of us
are
will improve
overall
well-being.
We human
beings
often
better
othersto
at want,
doing what
we want
to want
want, than
and want
different
things
... and
IF TIME: http://
that the capacity
to govern ourselves effectively in the face of
www.youtube.com/watch?v=QX_oy9614H
temptation has
Q profound benefits across every major domain of
life functioning.
Profound implications for societies where tax payers are
asked to fund public education, public penal systems, and
public health insurancewere all in it together, at least
monetarily
The public (you and me!) is now a significant stakeholder
because were on the hook
Duckworth PNAS 2011; see also
Modern society amplifies T&Ps

impact
This is a really big deal because of how modern society is
structured:
#1. Increased cumulative impact: Live much longer, requiring
individuals to pay strategic attention to their health and wealth to
avoid disability and poverty in old age

impact
structured:
#2. Increased risk exposure: Modern history has also seen
marked increases in food availability, sedentary occupations,
access to harmful addictive substances, ease of divorce, selfmanagement of retirement savings, and imprisonment of lawbreakers

impact
structured:
#3. Mood and anxiety disorders: As we have conquered many
of the diseases of early life and middle age, mood and anxiety
disorders are now a leading source of sickness, disability, and
mortality in the developed and developing world

impact
structured:
#3. Mood and anxiety disorders: As we have conquered many
of the diseases of early life and middle age, mood and anxiety
disorders are now a leading source of sickness, disability, and
mortality in the developed and developing world
Together, these historical shifts are enhancing the
potential impact of individual differences in C/SC and
http://www.moffittcaspi.com
Avshalom Caspi & Temmi Moffitt

(Duke/Kings College, London)
- a.k.a. Shackmans undergraduate
advisors
-
Caspi was the instructor for my

Personality class
http://www.moffittcaspi.com
Students
What was the basic design and aim of the Moffitt et al study?
Dunedin
Study
Dunedin
Study
Large, representative birth cohort
* The 1037 babies born in Dunedin, New Zealand between 1 April
1972 and 31 March 1973 at the Queen Mary Maternity Hospital.
* 535/502 boys/girls; 1,013/24 singletons/twins; 1014 of the original
cohort are still alive (~2% mortality @ 32 yrs)
* Assessments: 3,5,7,9,11,13,15,18,21,26,32 yrs
* Very low attrition rate: Study Members come back to the
Dunedin research unit for a one-day assessment from wherever in the
world they are living - an impressive exercise considering more than
50 of them now live in the UK alone! Once in Dunedin, almost all
aspects of their physical and mental health are examined - this
includes cardiovascular, dental, respiratory, sexual and mental health,
psychosocial well-being, and detailed interviews about relationships,
behavior and family.
* NZ: Centralized crime registry, etc, enriches the information that
Dunedin
Study
* Assessments: 3,5,7,9,11,13,15,18,21,26,32 yrs
Dunedin
Study
* Assessments: 3,5,7,9,11,13,15,18,21,26,32 yrs
Dunedin
Study
* Assessments: 3,5,7,9,11,13,15,18,21,26,32 yrs
Dunedin
Study
* Assessments: 3,5,7,9,11,13,15,18,21,26,32 yrs
Students:
What is the scientific value of a longitudinal sample,
where subjects are repeatedly assessed over time?
Put another way, why is a longitudinal study better than alternative study
designs, such as collecting data in adulthood and then getting
retrospective measures of childhood T&P?
Students:
OK, so why isnt every study longitudinal?
Students:
OK, so why isnt every study longitudinal?
Whats the key scientific limitation of a longitudinal study ?
Students
How did Moffitt and colleagues quantify childhood self-control?
Age appropriate, multi-occasion, multi-informant

composite
Consistency across settings, rater, assessment tech.,
and ages
Not just self-report!
Increases likelihood that T&P will be predictive
Moffitt
Age appropriate, multi-occasion, multi-informant

composite
Consistency across settings, rater, assessment tech.,
and ages
Not just self-report!
Increases likelihood that T&P will be predictive
Moffitt
Does childhood self-control predict

later health, wealth, and crime?
Similarly at all points along the selfcontrol gradient?
Moffitt

Moffitt

Yes! Suggests that interventions that

achieve even small improvements could
shift the entire distribution of outcomes in a
favorable direction. Further, associations
Moffitt
What mediates the link connecting childhood

self-control to deleterious outcomes in midlife?
Assessed teen smoking, drop out, teen

parenting, enabling authors to test
whether these youthful mistakes close
doors of opportunity and ensnare victims
in deleterious lifestyles (snowball/cascade)
Moffitt
Utopian Subsample: Children who avoided

teen mistakes (smoking, dropping out of
school, teen parenthood)
Grew up to be adults with better health,
greater wealth,
and lower crime conviction than those with
similar self-control levels who did not avoid
these pitfalls
Moffitt

greater wealth,
these teen snares
Moffitt

greater wealth,
these teen snares
Statistically controlling for the snares reduced
the effect of C/SC on health by 32%,
substance dependence by 63%, SES by 35%,
financial struggles by 47%, and crime by 42%.
BUT the influence self-control remained
statistically significant for nearly every
outcome measure
Moffitt

greater wealth,
these teen snares
Statistically controlling for the snares reduced
the effect of C/SC on health by 32%,
substance dependence by 63%, SES by 35%,
financial struggles by 47%, and crime by 42%.
BUT the influence self-control remained
statistically significant for nearly every
outcome measure
Suggests that interventions aimed at
preventing teen snares would partially but not
completely prevent deleterious outcomes
Perhaps better to intervene earlier and target
Moffitt
the root cause (low C/SC) rather than treating
Key Take Home Points

1. Situation/context is not king! Individual
differences in T&P are robust predictors of a
variety of practically important outcomes, e.g.,
-
academic performance (NB: above and beyond IQ)

marital stability (divorce)
health (mortality / longevity) and dependence on health
care system
wealth and dependence on social services
public safety (incarceration, contact with criminal justice
system)

1. Situation/context is not king! Individual
differences in T&P are robust predictors of a
variety of practically important outcomes, e.g.,
-
academic performance (NB: above and beyond IQ)

marital stability (divorce)
health (morbidity and mortality) and dependence on
health care system
wealth and dependence on social services
public safety (incarceration, contact with criminal justice
system)

2. Three key features of our culture magnify the
influence of T&P
-
Longevity
-
Risk exposure and temptation: Lifestyle diseases

-
more time for cumulative consequences to build up

need to be more planful (e.g., retirement) and disciplined
fast-food nation
ready access to substances
easy to divorce
Increased importance of psychiatric disorders

2. Three key features of our culture magnify the
influence of T&P
-
Longevity
-
Risk exposure and temptation: Lifestyle diseases

-
more time for cumulative consequences to build up

need to be more planful (e.g., retirement) and disciplined
fast-food nation
ready access to substances
easy to divorce
Increased importance of psychiatric disorders

3. The influence of childhood C/SC on adult outcomes
is partially explained by teen snares (smoking, drop
out, parenthood)
Kids with Low C/SC Ensnared as Teens Poor Adult Outcomes
BUT, much of the association is not

explained by these adolescent symptoms,
highlighting the importance of intervening
early and targeting the root cause, low C/SC
We will revisit this issue in the Lecture on
Interventions

3. The influence of childhood C/SC on adult outcomes
is partially explained by teen snares (smoking, drop
out, parenthood)
Kids with Low C/SC Ensnared as Teens Poor Adult Outcomes
BUT, much of the association is not

explained by these adolescent symptoms,
highlighting the importance of intervening
early and targeting the root cause, low C/SC
We will revisit this issue in the lecture on
Interventions
Critical Thinking
Questions
This is just to provide some examples of

what they will look like starting next week
Please do not complete this assignment
Critical Thinking
Questions
1. The Moffitt PNAS study and other research
has sparked some remarkable partnerships
between psychological scientists, public
policy makers, and non-profit groups, such
as the Sesame Street Workshop. A central
goal of these partnerships is prevention
early interventions aimed at enhancing C/SC.
What do you think? What are some pros and cons

of trying to modify childhood self-control? (e.g.,
What kinds of assumptions and cost/benefit
analyses underlie such efforts? How might we think
about this from the perspective of sensitivity,
specificity, or effecthttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9PnbKL3wuH
sizes?)
Critical Thinking
Questions
1. The Moffitt PNAS study and other research
has sparked some remarkable partnerships
between psychological scientists, public
policy makers, and non-profit groups, such
as the Sesame Street Workshop. A central
goal of these partnerships is prevention
early interventions aimed at enhancing C/SC.
What do you think? What are some pros and cons
of trying to modify childhood self-control? (e.g.,
What kinds of assumptions and cost/benefit
analyses underlie such efforts? How might we think
about this from the perspective of sensitivity,
specificity, or effect sizes?)
Critical Thinking
Questions
2. Constraint/Conscientiousness/Self-control
(C/SC)
is just one dimension of T&P. As we will discuss next
time, Extraversion/Positive Emotionality (E/PE) and
Neuroticism/Negative Emotionality are the other
components of the Big 3 and each of these broadband factors is comprised of narrower facets (e.g.,
dominance, fear, anger, sociality) that may resonate
more closely with your interests.
What do you think? Briefly discuss the merits of
interventions for another dimension or facet of T&P. If
you like, you can focus on clinical interventions,
educational interventions, or cognitive remediation
(computerized/game-based skill training).
Critical Thinking
Questions
2. Constraint/Conscientiousness/Self-control
(C/SC)
is just one dimension of T&P. As we will discuss next
time, Extraversion/Positive Emotionality (E/PE) and
Neuroticism/Negative Emotionality are the other
components of the Big 3 and each of these broadband factors is comprised of narrower facets (e.g.,
dominance, fear, anger, sociality) that may resonate
more closely with your interests.
What do you think? Briefly discuss the merits of
interventions for another dimension or facet of T&P. If
you like, you can focus on clinical interventions,
educational interventions, or cognitive remediation
(computerized/game-based skill training).
Critical Thinking
Questions
PNAS 2015
3. Personality and privacy.

In a recent high-profile report, investigators compare[d] the accuracy of
human and computer-based personality judgments, using a sample of
86,220 volunteers who completed a 100-item personality questionnaire
[They showed]that computer predictions based on a generic digital
footprint (Facebook Likes) are more accuratethan those made by the
participants Facebook friends[and] computer personality judgments
[better predict important]life outcomes such as substance use, political
attitudes, and physical health [compared to friend reports][in some cases]
they even outperform [self-report]Computers outpacing humans in
personality judgment presents significant opportunities and challenges in
the areas of psychological assessment, [medicine], marketing, and privacy.
What do you think? What are the positive and negative implications of
automated personality assessments based on generic on-line information
(tracking cookies, likes, FB posts, etc.)? Assuming it works as advertised,
what new vistas and opportunities would this afford?
Critical Thinking
Questions
PNAS 2015

attitudes, and physical health [compared to friend reports][in some cases]
they even outperform [self-report]Computers outpacing humans in
personality judgment presents significant opportunities and challenges in
the areas of psychological assessment, [medicine], marketing, and privacy.
automated personality assessments based on generic on-line information
(tracking cookies, likes, FB posts, etc.)? Assuming it works as advertised,
what new vistas and opportunities would this afford?
Critical Thinking
Questions
PNAS 2015

attitudes, and physical health [compared to friend reports][in some
cases] they even outperform [self-report]Computers outpacing humans
in personality judgment presents significant opportunities and challenges
in the areas of psychological assessment, [medicine], marketing, and
privacy.
automated personality assessments? Assuming it works as advertised,
what new opportunities would this technology afford?
Critical Thinking
Questions
Length: 1 paragraph per question (i.e.,
total of 2 separate paragraphs) for a total of
~0.5 1 page (12 pt font; single-spaced)
Due: by 9:00am next Thursday
Submit: Assignment tab in Canvas
Grading: 1 (full credit), 12 (half-credit), 0
(no credit). At the end of the semester, your
two lowest response grades will be dropped.
The End
Things to Consider Revising for

Future Semesters
Definitely Add this next

time

time
As in Study 1, our analyses showed that from adolescence

to midlife, participants with low self-control experienced
1.6 times as many months of unemployment as those with
high self-control. participants in the low-self-control
group were disproportionately more likely to become
unemployed after the onset of the recession.

time

time
used data from a 75-year longitudinal study (the Kelly/Connolly

Longitudinal Study on Personality and Aging). In that study, 600
participants were observed beginning in 1935 through 1938, when
they were in their mid-20s, and continuing through 2013. Male
participants seen by their friends as more conscientious and open
lived longer, whereas friend-rated emotional stability and
agreeableness were protective for women. Friends ratings were
better predictors of longevity than were self-reports of personality,
in part because friends ratings could be aggregated to provide a
more reliable assessment.
Male participants seen by their friends as more conscientious
(Fig. 1) and open tended to live longer: A 1-SD
increase in conscientiousness was associated with a 29%
decrease in mortality risk
nitely Add this next

time

time
A sample (N = 6,904) of participants from the Health and
Retirement Study, a longitudinal study of older adults,
completed personality measures and reported on current
health conditions. Four years later, participants were
followed up to see if they developed a new disease.
A one unit (SD) increase in Conscientiousness decreases the
odds of a stroke diagnosis by 37%, high blood pressure
diagnosis by 27%, diabetes by 20%, and arthritis by 23%
A one unit (SD) increase in Neuroticism increased the odds of
a heart condition diagnosis by 24%, lung disease diagnosis
by 29%, high blood pressure by 37%, and arthritis by 25%
For Future GRAD seminars add the

small effects are important slides back
in but leave out for ugrad class
Caveats
(Skip this if low on time)
Composite Childhood SelfControl: Tiny Effects
Moffitt
Tiny Effects Can Be

Practically Importan
Meyer et al Amer
Tiny Effects Can Be

Practically Important and Cost Effective
Dollars & Cents analysis

Return on investment
Small effects are important if intervention is cheap (aspirin for
heart disease), or if downstream consequences of inaction are
expensive (prison)
E.g., Ken Dodges Fast Track intervention
$40k annually per kid for a few years of childhood
$47k for one year of incarceration, as well as loss of
productivity etc.
Financial break point might be as small as a 3% reduction in
chronic crime
Kendler & gardner ajp 1014
Extra / Unused Slides
Some subjects showed changes in selfcontrol, enabling authors to test whether

increases are associated with enhanced
health, wealth, and public safety
Increased C/SC
Decreased C/SC
Provides additional evidence that

interventions targeting childhood
C/SC are likely to be beneficial
Future Challenges
Understand at a more granular level the proximal mechanisms
mediating personality-outcome relationsall of these involve the
brain as a key intermediary
Some Pathways-1) Risk exposure
T&P may alters exposure to risk (e.g., stress, dangerous activities) via
instrumental behaviors
2) Reactivity & Regulation
T&P may shape reactions to others behavior specifically and emotional
perturbation more generally
) e.g., escalate negative affect during conflict
) E.g., differences in emotional reactivity or regulation
) Likely reflect differences in both emotion and cognition (e.g., cognitive
control; Shackman et al Nat Rev Neurosci 2011)
3) Shared genes or direct pathogenesis
) e.g., higher basal cortisol, altered HPA activity, altered immune function
4)
Evocative Effects
Roberts et al. Amer Psychol 2007; Lahey Amer Psy
Stability and Intervention
Wortman et al Psychol
Aim 1
Test: Does childhood self-control
predict later health, wealth, and crime
similarly at all points along the selfcontrol gradient?
E.g., Composite Physical Health Scale
Metabolic abnormalities (including
overweight), airflow limitation, periodontal
disease, STD, and C-reactive protein
(blood protein marker of inflammation)
Moffitt
Aim 1
Impact: If yes, interventions that
achieve even small improvements
individuals could shift the entire
distribution of outcomes in a salutary
direction
Moffitt
Aim 2
Test: Some Ss evinced increased selfcontrol, enabling authors to test
whether this is associated with better
health, wealth, and public safety
Impact: Correlative evidence that
interventions would be beneficial
Moffitt
Aim 3
Test: Assessed teen smoking, drop out,
teen parenting, enabling authors to
test whether these youthful mistakes
close doors of opportunity and ensnare
victims in deleterious lifestyles
(snowball/cascade)
Impact: Correlative evidence that early
interventions would be especially
helpful
Moffitt
Aim 4
Assessed self-control @ 3 yrs,
enabling authors to test whether
EARLY differences predict ADULT
outcomes
Impact: Correlative evidence
suggesting the need for early
intervention
Moffitt
Aim 5
Controlling for differences in IQ and SES,
which are relatively cheap and easy to
measure
Dunedin: Self-control associated with
increased SES (R2 = 6%) and IQ (R2 = 19%)
Impact: Allow authors to reject the
possibility that self-control is just a proxy
for IQ/SES
Moffitt
Aim 6: Sibs Sub-Study

Examine discordant self-control while controlling for
shared childhood environment
E.g., Sister 1 = Higher; Sister 2 = Lower
But parents, family SES, etc. is approximately matched
Environmental Risk (E-Risk) Longitudinal Twin Study
nationally representative birth cohort of 2,232 British kids
born in 1994-1995 (23).
Impact: Stronger evidence for the specificity of selfcontrol effects
Moffitt
Results
Moffitt
Risk vs. Odds Ratio

Cancer
Smoking
0% of Smokers and 1% of Non-Smokers develop cancer
atio = 0.20/0.01 = 20
re (20/80 = 0.25 and 1/99 = .0101), so Odds Ratio = .25/.0101 = 24.75
Lewis R. Goldberg (Oregon)

- closely associatedwith theBig Five
taxonomy of personality (he coined the
term "Big Five")
- creator of the
International Personality Item Pool
(IPIP),a website that provides publicdomain personality measures (open
B&S: T&P-Outcome Models

Researchers began to proposed some models for how T&P might
influence health outcomes
1) Direct pathogenesis or biological mechanisms that directly physically
promote disease
E.g., natural killer cell activity or cortisol
2)
Health-promoting or health-damaging behaviors
3)
Reactions to illness
e.g., coping with illness, adherence to treatment
E.g., individuals with low conscientiousness/self-control (C/SC) may

have trouble keeping appointments with health care professionals or
taking their meds
This pathways may differ across facets of T&P (e.g., conscientiousness vs.
neuroticism)
Roberts et al.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=9PnbKL3wuH4
intervention would be a good take-home question; and this would be a fun way
class
Death (Longevity)
Death (Longevity)
424 subjects from the British Health and Lifestyle Survey
ortality at the 21 year assessment
increase of 1 SD in Neuroticism was associated with a

% greater risk of dying (all causes) and a 12% increase in de
om cardiovascular disease
Death (Longevity)
424 subjects from the British Health and Lifestyle Survey
ortality at the 21 year assessment
increase of 1 SD in Neuroticism was associated with a

% greater risk of dying (all causes) and a 12% increase in de
om cardiovascular disease

Shackman Psyc210 Module02 Impact

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Shackman Psyc210 Module02 Impact

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Hi All!

Please complete the anonymous questionnaire available from Alex

Nuts & Bolts Plan for

Self-report data collection for

Please have a low threshold for asking

Summary: key take home points

Which really matters?

Assess the consequences of individual

Summary: key take home points

Summary: key take home points

Summary: key take home points

Summary: key take home points

Is behavior largely determined

Correlational upper limit =~ .30 (~10%

Is behavior largely determined

Yes!? In his highly influential 1968 book,

Is behavior largely determined

Yes!? In his highly influential 1968 book,

Correlational upper limit =~ .30 (only

Whadya mean variance accounted

nce Accounted For

o, for a correlation of .30

nce Accounted For

o, for a correlation of .30

Is behavior largely determined

Yes!? In his highly influential 1968 book,

Correlational upper limit =~ .30 (only

Therefore, other factors (i.e., situation!),

Is behavior largely determined

Yes!? In his highly influential 1968 book,

Correlational upper limit =~ .30 (only

Therefore, other factors (i.e., situation!),

For the next several decades, research

ased on a meta-analysis of personality-academic performance relationships base

cademic performance in college was predicted by individual differences in

emarkably, the size of the Personality-Performance correlation was similar in size

Studentswho are low on Conscientiousness [are]nearly twice as likely to fail

odel = Big 5 = OCEAN (Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, Neurot

ased on a meta-analysis of personality-academic performance relationships base

cademic performance in college was predicted by individual differences in

emarkably, the size of the Personality-Performance correlation was similar in size

Studentswho are low on Conscientiousness [are]nearly twice as likely to fail

odel = Big 5 = OCEAN (Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, Neurot

ased on a meta-analysis of personality-academic performance relationships base

cademic performance in college was predicted by individual differences in

emarkably, the size of the Personality-Performance correlation was similar in size

Studentswho are low on Conscientiousness [are]nearly twice as likely to fail

odel = Big 5 = OCEAN (Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, Neurot

odel = Big 5 = OCEAN (Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, Neurot

ased on a meta-analysis of personality-academic performance relationships base

cademic performance in college was predicted by individual differences in

emarkably, the size of the Personality-Performance correlation was similar in size

tudents low in Conscientiousness arenearly twice as likely to fail

odel = Big 5 = OCEAN (Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, Neurot

ased on a meta-analysis of personality-academic performance relationships base

cademic performance in college was predicted by individual differences in

emarkably, the size of the Personality-Performance correlation was similar in size

tudents low in Conscientiousness arenearly twice as likely to fail

odel = Big 5 = OCEAN (Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, Neurot

Marital Stability & Satisfaction

Marital Stability & Satisfaction

Based on a meta-analysis of 115 longitudinal studies

elation With Marital Stability (+ = Stable; - = Divor

Examined a whole slew of differ