BookPDF Available

Our Constellations. A Primer for Of Anchors & Sails: Personality-ability trait constellations

Authors:

Abstract

Tall - short, introverted - extroverted, smart - simple; the range of differences between people is stunning. But have you ever wondered why we're so different? For the past fourteen years, our team worked to unravel this mystery through the world’s largest set of meta-analyses delving into the connections between personality and intelligence. By meticulously gathering data from millions of people across more than 50 countries over the past century, we conducted 3,500+ meta-analyses. Each meta-analysis served as a pixel in the panorama of human diversity. The resulting picture revealed profound patterns and a unifying theory that explains why we're all so different.
1
Our Constellations
1
A Primer for
Preface
Even after more than 12,000 generations, humanity still does not know
its purpose. Indeed, many people go through their whole life without ever
establishing their own reason for being. Is the point longevity? Procreation?
1
This work should be cited as: Stanek, K. C. & Ones, D. S. (2023). Our Constellations. A Primer
for Of Anchors & Sails: Personality-ability trait constellations. Pleiades Press.
https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/9D8XK
Our Constellations A Primer for "Of Anchors & Sails" by Kevin C. Stanek and Deniz S. Ones
2
Material wealth? Happiness? Living in harmony with nature? Following holy
precepts?
But if we don’t understand our purpose or ourselves, how can we
expect to live effectively and attain what we seek? Not only do we need to
greatly expand our understanding of these ultimate questions, but we also
need to give much more thought to the practical matters of who we are, what
we want out of life, and how we will get from here to there.
“Of Anchors & Sails” offers perspective on these enigmas by examining
the architecture of individuality and its variations across individuals. The
patterns in these designs reflect greater forces, including evolutionary
pressures, and harbor clues about our enduring purpose.
Two of the most defining features of an individual are their personality
and their cognitive ability. Our personality reflects our typical emotions,
thoughts, and actions, defining if we are extraverted, polite, persistent,
curious, or anxious. Cognitive ability refers to the array of human capabilities
for navigating complexity, be it manipulating visual imagery, articulating
language, grasping intricate mathematics, or drawing logical conclusions. Not
only do these domains define our individuality, but they also predict important
life outcomes from health to divorce to wealth to athletic achievement to work
performance to longevity, among many others. Therefore, we ventured to
conduct the broadest and deepest analysis of the intersections between these
two domains, in order to decipher a core part of the schematic for individuals.
By uncovering hidden connections, we reveal universal patterns that
harken back to our evolutionary roots and have profound implications for
humanity’s present and future. Our research findings have far-reaching
implications for psychology, economics, medicine, and education, among
others the beginnings of which we discuss in this brief primer. The findings
also have practical applications, from tailoring education to individual needs,
to improving mental health interventions, to making workplaces more
inclusive and productive.
2
From your own life to bygone societies to the future
of our species, this book illuminates deep truths about whoand whywe
are.
2
They also offer a goldmine of insights for creators of artificial intelligence. In contrast to
today’s sterile AIs, developers could design more authentic entities with a diverse range of
personalities and capabilities (e.g., tailored to the user and context), pushing the boundaries
of what artificial intelligence is and can achieve.
Our Constellations A Primer for "Of Anchors & Sails" by Kevin C. Stanek and Deniz S. Ones
3
Background (Chapters 1 2)
“Who are you?”
This is perhaps the most commonly asked question among humans.
Despite countless answersfrom names to religious beliefs, from character
descriptions to life histories—a deeper question that is never asked is “Why
are you?”. This book builds on a century of science describing who people
are to see the broader patterns in why they are.
Personality and cognitive ability are two of the most defining sets of
differences between individuals (1). “Of Anchors & Sails” presents the most
comprehensive examination of their relations. Cognitive abilities describe
what an individual is cognitively capable of. Personality traits describe what
an individual typically does. These domains encompass some of the most
potent predictors of important behaviors and outcomes in educational,
occupational, and personal life domains (2, 3). They influence our life
trajectories, including what activities we prefer, what environments we
gravitate toward, who we are drawn to associate with, and how well we
perform our work (411). They are also key determinants of physical,
mental, and even financial health (12, 13). Although considerable research
has separately examined the correlates and consequences of cognitive
abilities and personality traits (1417), much less is known about
connections between the two domains.
In fact, many people still believe that intelligence and personality are
separate and independent. We posit that there are significant connections
between these pillars of individuality. Further, our research suggests there
is an overarching structure and purpose to their trait constellations, shaped
by evolutionary forces. These inferences are founded on a higher resolution
panorama of these domains than any previous investigation (18). This
landmark study is broad and deep, examining 173 personality traits and
cognitive abilities with more data than ever amassed before.
What is Intelligence?
In the pantheon of individual differences, cognitive ability/intelli-
gence occupies an elevated position (19). Cognitive ability does not simply
refer to “book smarts” or “school learning”. Instead, it refers to a diverse set
of hierarchically arranged abilities that index the capacity of an individual’s
Our Constellations A Primer for "Of Anchors & Sails" by Kevin C. Stanek and Deniz S. Ones
4
brain to decipher information and navigate complexity effectively, whether
that complexity is recalling information from short-term memory,
processing visual scenes, reproducing learned facts, extrapolating patterns,
reasoning inductively or deductively, perceiving similarities and differences,
or any other complexity. From our theoretical perspective, intelligence
involves using information to know what to preserve and what to change in
order to maximize the probability of achieving goals in given environments
(see summary of Chapter 6 below).
General mental ability (often simply referred to as "g") is an
overarching construct that “involves the ability to reason, plan, solve
problems, think abstractly, comprehend complex ideas, learn quickly and
learn from experience.” (20). In this book, the term “cognitive ability” refers
to the hierarchy of interrelated abilities with a general mental ability factor
(g) at the apex (2123). General mental ability arises from causal
connections between specific abilities (e.g., high fluid abilities leading to
greater acquisition of knowledge) as well as common factors underlying
brain development (e.g., neural connectivity).
In the last 100 years, scientific research has established cognitive
ability as a key factor in educational success, occupational success, career
success, socio-economic success, exceptional attainments, mental health,
and physical health (3, 7, 9, 12, 13, 2430). In characterizing general mental
ability, Linda Gottfredson noted, “no specific ability, personality trait, social
advantage, or fund of experience has been identified that can compensate
for mental powers too weak to lift a task’s cognitive load” (31). Indeed, the
measurement of cognitive ability has been hailed “as the most
practical contribution made to humanity by all of psychology” (32).
What is Personality?
Personality is a set of enduring tendencies to feel, think, and act in
certain ways (e.g., to be extraverted, compassionate, tidy, anxious,
rebellious [3438]). Personality traits have wide-ranging, consequential
impacts on behaviors and outcomes across a variety of domains, from
education and career path choices, to art preferences, to invention and
creativity, to job performance, and even to longevity (3, 12, 14, 3944). The
research literature incorporating personality constructs is vast: tens of
thousands of research studies in diverse fields include a plethora of
personality constructs.
Our Constellations A Primer for "Of Anchors & Sails" by Kevin C. Stanek and Deniz S. Ones
5
Unified CHC cognitive abilities taxonomy (33).
Note: See “Of Anchors & Sails” Appendix A for construct definitions. Shaded boxes group abilities invoking similar brain functions. Dashed lines group abilities that are
conceptually related.
Our Constellations A Primer for "Of Anchors & Sails" by Kevin C. Stanek and Deniz S. Ones
6
Stanek & Ones (33) Pan-Hierarchical Five Factor Model of personality.
Note: Construct names in italics indicate those with consistent loadings on other Big Five factors. See “Of Anchors & Sails” Table 1, for compound traits
and their Big Five linkages and Appendix C for definitions of personality traits.
Our Constellations A Primer for "Of Anchors & Sails" by Kevin C. Stanek and Deniz S. Ones
7
The Research This Book is Founded On (Chapter 3)
To paint a high-resolution picture of personality-intelligence
relations, we conducted 3,543 meta-analyses that cumulated the empirical
evidence of relations between 79 personality traits with 97 cognitive
abilities.
3
Through exhaustive search strategies, our research team
identified 1,325 primary studies and datasets that contributed to these
meta-analyses. These studies were conducted in more than 50 countries
and represent millions of participants. Measures in each study were
mapped to personality and cognitive ability constructs in modern
personality and cognitive ability taxonomies (33) to avoid the idiosyncrasies
of specific measures and ensure consistent construct definitions. Most
effect sizes came from unpublished sources, reducing the risk of publication
bias. The resulting meta-analytic database has resolution that is orders of
magnitude greater than previous investigations.
Countries Contributing Effect Sizes to Our Meta-Analyses.
3
Meta-analysis is a method of combining and integrating statistics from across studies to
draw more robust and precise conclusions.
Our Constellations A Primer for "Of Anchors & Sails" by Kevin C. Stanek and Deniz S. Ones
8
Why are Personality and Intelligence Related? (Chapter 6)
Humans as Cybernetic Creatures
Individuals are cybernetic systems that leverage resources to achieve
goals (e.g., survival, reproduction, getting promoted, helping others). They
adjust their goals and strategies
4
based on feedback loops (45). More
specifically, individuals set goals, detect their current state and movement
toward goal states, consider their options, take action to try to advance
toward their goal state, and adjust their behaviors and goals based on
feedback loops. This process can be summarized by three stages, each with
a sub-loop of three steps.
* Includes behaviors, affects, and cognitions.
Note: The cybernetic process may be halted at any step (e.g., if a goal is abandoned).
4
We define a “strategy” as a pattern (e.g., behavioral, cognitive) with a grander purpose.
Our Constellations A Primer for "Of Anchors & Sails" by Kevin C. Stanek and Deniz S. Ones
9
3 Stages of Being: Current State, Transition, and Goal
State
1. The current state describes the present self and its environment,
including the cumulative impact of historical events (e.g., life histories)
as well as forecasts of the future.
2. The transition stage signifies movement between the current state and
goal state, which involves identifying behavioral options that best reduce
the discrepancy between current state and goal state while satisfying
other criteria (e.g., alignment with personal values, availability of
resources).
3. The goal state represents the desired self and/or environment.
Reducing discrepancies between current and goal states may be
achieved by altering actions, changing cognitions, adjusting affect, and/or
transforming desires. Current state vs. goal state discrepancies can also be
decreased or increased by environmental changes, including changing
one’s environment.
Three Steps of Action: Sense, Evaluate, and Decide
Three operational steps occur within each stage.
5
1. Sensing involves perception of current self and environment in the
context of one’s goals, awareness of behavioral options available to
move toward goal states, and vision of desired self and/or environment.
2. Evaluating involves prioritizing a portfolio of goals based on factors like
alignment with identity and importance to future, weighing the value of
behavioral options, and considering the desirability and likelihood of
achieving the goal state compared to alternative outcomes.
3. Deciding involves ongoing decisions to continue pursuing a goal; what
level of energy to commit as well as what actions to take; and whether
the goal has been achieved, is in-progress, or should be altered.
These stages and steps propel the feedback loops that help
individuals set, progress toward, and achieve or alter their goals.
5
While our model bears some passing similarity to decision-making models (e.g., observe-
orient-decide-act; 46, 47), it was developed independently based on empirical observations
and appears to be the most generalizable template of goal pursuit considering both
individual differences and environmental circumstances.
Our Constellations A Primer for "Of Anchors & Sails" by Kevin C. Stanek and Deniz S. Ones
10
Homeostasis vs. Change
At a very broad level, the cycles depicted in the figure above result in
goals, strategies, and behaviors that map to two fundamental axes:
homeostasis vs. change, and internal focus vs. external focus (see below).
These axes define the balances that characterize life. Such a structure is not
meant to imply that the system is hyper-rational; many of these processes
occur outside of awareness or are influenced by irrational or subconscious
factors.
6
Instead, the axes characterize an individual’s strategies for lever-
aging resources in service of self-preservation and self-evolution, with
personality traits and cognitive abilities jointly directing resources.
Life can be viewed as a string of goals, and successful attainment
often hinges on effectively leveraging information to know when/what/how
to preserve and when/what/how to evolve. Feedback loops inform resource
allocation and help balance homeostasis and change, as well as fit between
the individual and environment, rendering the cybernetic system inherently
adaptive.
Cybernetic Trait Complexes Theory
Cybernetic Trait Complexes Theory (CTCT) proposes that covarying
abilities and personality traits can be thought of as constellations that guide
these systems’ self-regulating mechanisms for setting, progressing toward,
and achieving or revising goals via the coordinated use of resources. These
trait constellations serve the functions of 1) maintaining psychological
homeostasis (i.e., sustaining stability) and 2) enabling change (i.e., support-
ing adaptive development and growth). These functions can each be
bifurcated according to whether they focus internally on the individual or
externally on the environment.
Each quadrant in the figure below describes similarly oriented
constellations of individual differences. Each row represents a fundamental
fitness strategy. Homeostasis invokes preservation-focused trait constel-
lations, and change invokes evolution-focused trait constellations. Each
column highlights the focal arena of trait constellations. Self/Internal
involves internally-targeted trait constellations, and environmental/external
involves trait constellations targeting preservation or adaptation to the
environment. It’s worth noting that the fundamental characteristics of
6
Indeed, for many of us change and homeostasis are largely driven by latent hopes and
fears.
Our Constellations A Primer for "Of Anchors & Sails" by Kevin C. Stanek and Deniz S. Ones
11
environments also vary along two major axes: threats and resources, each
varying from none to plentiful, which lead to differing challenges and
opportunities. These axes also apply to macro environments. For example,
one of the most essential challenges for societies is determining how to
allocate resources to address threats and capitalize on opportunities.
Illustration of cognitive ability-personality trait fitness constellations.
Fixed vs. Flexible Selves: Personality and Intelligence
in Cybernetics
Individuals have a limited range of flexibility around their general
tendencies and boundaries to their capabilities (48, 49). Genetic
endowments and external environments provide resources and impart
constraints, favoring different life strategies. The interplay between these
forces results in co-evolution of certain characteristics. That is, evolution
pressures certain trait constellations to come together as viable strategies
for utilizing finite individual and environmental resources to accomplish the
cybernetic steps and stages, and, therefore, goals.
In general, personality traits represent different cybernetic strategies
for sensing, evaluating, and behaving to help individuals effectively balance
homeostasis and change. Personality traits represent typical strategies for
managing both internal (e.g., emotional) and external (e.g., environmental)
stimuli in pursuit of self-preservation and self-evolution. For each individual,
personality traits help identify which goals are attractive and prioritized (i.e.,
considered worthwhile), which actions are preferred, and how uncertainty
Our Constellations A Primer for "Of Anchors & Sails" by Kevin C. Stanek and Deniz S. Ones
12
is weighed. Cognitive abilities index how efficiently, proficiently, and
successfully goals are set, and pursued in complex environments.
7
That is,
cognitive abilities involve deciphering complexity to achieve goals.
8
They
also entail knowing when to strive for change to maximize the probability
of achieving goals in a given environment and when to protect homeostasis.
In a functioning human cybernetic system, both cognitive abilities
and personality traits orchestrate homeostasis and growth in environ-
mentally sensitive ways to increase the odds of surviving and thriving.
Together, these co-influential, and potentially co-dependent, domains
energize action toward goal achievement and help generate new goals,
interpretations, and strategies as goals are attained or obstructed or as
behaviors are determined to be productive/unproductive. For example,
negative emotions can depress cognitive processing and reduce individuals’
abilities to clearly identify their goals, accurately sense their current state,
or productively forecast which actions will advance them toward their goals.
Conversely, higher intelligence may help individuals more clearly see how
to apply their personality tendencies, adjust their behavior based on the
environment, or alter their environment to make progress toward goals.
Complexity arises, in part, from the multiple competing goal states
within and across individuals as well as intra-individual variance in
personality and cognitive abilities, the variety of actions available, the
diversity of environments encountered, and the uncertain consequences of
each action.
In summary, individuals can only be fully understood by considering
both their biology and their environments. We constantly face decisions
about how to use our finite energy to achieve our goals. Our dispositions
and abilities balance the maintenance of homeostasis and pursuit of
change as well as internal vs. external needs. The constellations of traits
that guide us are combinations that have aided previous generations
7
More complex environments have higher information processing needs and demand
higher, and often more differentiated, cognitive abilities.
8
In a universe is full of entropy, more intelligent brains are better able to decipher and
leverage information to employ strategies and behaviors that increase the probability of
goal attainment.
Entropy describes a state where it is very difficult to find patterns or predict outcomes.
Complexity is when seemingly independent elements appear to spontaneously form a
coherent pattern. In both cases, the patterns are there all along, but our limited intelligence
makes it difficult to grasp them, giving the appearance of chaos. Therefore, the reduction
of entropy, which is known as information, is actually just a measure of our understanding.
That is, there is no such thing as ‘noise’, just signal we do not comprehend.
Our Constellations A Primer for "Of Anchors & Sails" by Kevin C. Stanek and Deniz S. Ones
13
achieve goals across varied environments. These constellations can be
grouped into categories focused on supporting psychological stability and
maintaining the individual in varying environments as well as those focused
on fuelling change by energizing adaptation, development, and growth in
environmentally sensitive ways. Indeed, such a self-perpetuating capacity
for the coordinated use of energy to achieve balance between homeostasis
and change is the essence of life.
Illustrative Trait Constellations (Chapter 7)
Contrary to what is commonly believed by many behavioral scientists
and lay people, human cognitive abilities and personality traits are
intrinsically related through biological, developmental, and environmental
pathways. Our encyclopedic quantification of these ability-personality
relations highlights constellations that are critical to fitness of the individual
as well as humanity more broadly.
Constellations for Homeostasis
“Life’s roughest storms prove the strength of our anchors.”
Trait constellations for homeostasis support internal stability and
maintain the individual in ever-changing environments. These constel-
lations likely evolved to cope with resource-scarce and/or high-threat
environments.
Internally-focused homeostasis constellations are evidenced by
neuroticism and its facets’ associations with lower levels of most abilities.
Neuroticism-related traits involve feeling negative emotions (e.g., stress,
anxiety, instability). Negative relations exist for both invested abilities (i.e.,
knowledge) as well as non-invested abilities (e.g., reasoning). In other
words, people who experience high levels of trait depression or anxiety tend
to find it harder to accumulate knowledge or reason logically. Whether it's
piecing together a puzzle through inductive reasoning or deducing con-
clusions based on known facts, these abilities seem to take a hit when
emotions are at the helm.
More than that, emotionally unstable individuals may be suspicious
of others and quick to react with intense, often negative, feelings. Such
Our Constellations A Primer for "Of Anchors & Sails" by Kevin C. Stanek and Deniz S. Ones
14
emotional turbulence can take a toll on individuals’ ability to regulate
psychological processes, including cognitive performance. In other words,
emotionally volatile individuals may find it more challenging to concentrate,
remember things, or solve problems - key components of cognitive per-
formance.
Externally-focused homeostasis constellations involve attributes,
such as being even tempered and non-aggressive, that strengthen the social
ties of the individual and/or enhance their ability to function in groups.
Personality characteristics such as agreeableness (particularly compassion
and cooperation), conscientiousness-related traits, and abilities such as
processing speed and verbal abilities form constellations that facilitate
maintenance of the individual in social environments. These constellations
suggest that the more compassionate, cooperative, and industrious the
individual is, the better their verbal (e.g., vocabulary) and quantitative
(mathematical) knowledge tend to be. The trend is not limited to just verbal
and quantitative knowledge, either - most other acquired knowledge areas
for which data are available show a strong link with these personality traits.
What does this mean? One view is that these traits are personal guides,
directing the investment of your inherent cognitive abilities (e.g., reasoning,
memory, visualization) over decades in the acquisition of new knowledge.
Essentially, those who are industrious and compassionate, tend to be better
at transforming their undeveloped talents into concrete knowledge and
skills that are useful to them and their broader social group.
Constellations for Change
“Hoist your sail when the wind is fair.”
Trait constellations for change energize internal development and
adaptation to changing environmental circumstances. These trait constel-
lations likely evolved to take advantage of opportunity-rich and/or low-
threat environments with higher reward/risk ratios. Generally, traits and
abilities in these constellations contain fluid abilities paired with personality
traits involving behavioral activation and change, as well as acquired
knowledge abilities paired with plasticity traits (i.e., openness and
extraversion traits), industriousness, and activity. Prominent compound
personality traits associated with initiative-taking, behavioral activation, and
proactivity (e.g., achievement via independence) fit into these constel-
lations.
Our Constellations A Primer for "Of Anchors & Sails" by Kevin C. Stanek and Deniz S. Ones
15
Internally-focused change constellations are indicated by the
relations of the intellect aspect of openness and related personality facets
with non-invested abilities such as fluid abilities, memory dimensions, and
processing abilities. These traits and abilities tend to correlate positively and
sizably. Relations are even larger for acquired knowledge, especially verbal
knowledge.
Externally-focused change constellations involve traits associated
with exploration of and responsiveness to physical and social
environmental stimuli (e.g., openness), as well as extraversion-related traits
with non-invested and invested abilities such as processing speed and
verbal abilities. The psychological trait “activity”, a facet of extraversion,
offers a strong example. Active individuals are energetic, enthusiastic, and
fast-moving. They tend to enjoy being busy and juggling multiple activities,
which often translates into an eagerness to engage with the social world
around them. Activity shows strong, positive connections with several
cognitive abilities, indicating that individuals who are active and energetic
tend to have a better command of various cognitive abilities. Most notably,
this includes extensive knowledge, efficient memory retrieval, and
enhanced information processing. Regardless of the subject, active folks
tend to know more about it. This might be due, at least in part, to their
swiftness in processing stimuli and recalling information from long-term
memory. The pattern of findings is in stark contrast to the popular
stereotype of intellectuals closeted away in their rooms. Instead, the results
suggest that high-energy individuals tend to have higher mental
performance, which allows them to swiftly navigate through complexity
with a bank of knowledge at their fingertips.
Constellations for General Fitness
General fitness trait constellations represent individuals’ agility in
effectively moving between a focus on surviving and a focus on thriving as
the environment demands/affords. These trait constellations involve the
joint functioning of emotional stability associated with homeostasis,
extraversion associated with change, and industriousness associated with
the motivation to move between those strategies. This amalgam of
personality traits is best captured by compound personality traits, including
self esteem and internal locus of control. These traits display pervasive
relations with a host of cognitive abilities, especially general mental ability,
Our Constellations A Primer for "Of Anchors & Sails" by Kevin C. Stanek and Deniz S. Ones
16
memory, and processing speed. One illustrative figure who was often
guided by such constellations was Albert Einstein; brilliant, curious, and
creative, he had an inner conviction that helped him overcome doubts and
dogma to transform the field of physical science.
Key Take-Aways (Chapter 8)
Diverse Fitness Strategies: Self-Preservation and Self-
Evolution
The ultimate aim of our research was not limited to understanding
personality-ability relations. Instead, we sought to understand individuality
and the psychological architecture of humans. By studying over 60,000
relations between the full range of cognitive abilities and personality traits
from virtually all accessible, published and unpublished research from the
past 100 years, we discerned trait constellations for self-preservation and
self-evolution. The tensile strength of this dichotomy results in a perpetual
balance that tempers individuals, social groups, and ultimately humankind.
It’s where freedom meets with security; the uncertain victories of ‘bold and
new’ meet with the steadfast foundations of ‘tried and true’. The result is a
resilient and well-tested dynamic that preserves cohesion while driving
progress. This relentless oscillation between change and stability operates
so that while most changes have a low chance of success, but the absence
of change leads to inevitable failure. Like an anchor, cognitive abilities and
personality traits for homeostasis confer stability and help maintain the
individual across environments. Like a sail, cognitive abilities and
personality traits for change underpin activation for adaptation as well as
growth.
Overarching Insights into the Nature of Individuality (Chapter 10)
Energy, Information, Individuals, Environments, and Goals
So why are you the way you are and why do people differ? Although
many studies have examined differences between people and how those
differences are co-related, the fundamental reasons why have remained a
Our Constellations A Primer for "Of Anchors & Sails" by Kevin C. Stanek and Deniz S. Ones
17
mystery. Even large-scale investigations using advanced neuroimaging and
molecular genetics only reveal narrow, intermediary snapshots or
mechanisms like brain area activation and allele expression. Failure to see
the grander architecture hampers individual potential and limits insights
into the broader human condition and purpose.
Integrating concepts from economics, genetics, psychology, biology,
as well as patterns from our thousands of meta-analyses, we presented a
theory that explains why traits intertwine to form constellations that
facilitate adaptations to varying environments. These constellations emerge
from the non-random connections between basic individual differences,
like how we weigh risk and reward, value freedom and order, approach
intrapersonal and social relations, balance desire for power with
corresponding resource constraints, and so forth. Since individuals are goal-
directed systems that self-regulate via feedback, they must prioritize their
finite resources among competing goals and strategies. Individuals follow a
looping process of setting goals, detecting their current state, considering
their options, taking action to try to advance toward their goal state, and
adjusting their behaviors and goals based on feedback.
Constellations of traits form strategies aimed at maximizing the odds
of surviving and thriving. Put simply, personality traits and cognitive
abilities, and likely other attributes such as values and interests, jointly direct
resource prioritization for self-preservation and self-evolution.
Our theory leads to the conclusion that there is no single optimal
human profile since our environments and goals are dynamic. Diversity is
optimal. Our theory also elucidates why traits like high aggression, high
anxiety, and low intelligence persist and why such diversity is valuable. A
species with individuals guided by diverse trait constellations is best suited
to survive and even thrive in diverse futures.
As an individual, you are the steward of one of nature's bets. The
ultimate purpose of these bets is not to accomplish your goals but rather to
ensure that we continually find paths through the crucible of ever-changing
environments. That is, while some have posited that evolutionary
effectiveness is how well you can accomplish your goals, there is also a
meta-purpose to your goals, strivings, and failings: to accomplish nature's
goal of finding viable feature sets to fit with the environment. Since casting
diverse bets ensures the durability of species, our adversaries and those we
Our Constellations A Primer for "Of Anchors & Sails" by Kevin C. Stanek and Deniz S. Ones
18
view as the antitheses of ourselves may actually be our greatest partners in
ensuring the achievement of long-term goals, like the survival of our kin.
No trait is inherently good or bad on its own. Instead, such
evaluations depend on the fit of the individual with the environment,
9
which
depends on the goals and strategies of the former and the resources and
threats of the latter. That is, fitness is how well the characteristics of the
individual align with their environment to enable the achievement of
goals.
10
In this way, fitness manifests in many ways across life domains (e.g.,
mental wellbeing, professional effectiveness, educational attainment, and
even longevity).
Beyond matching individuals with environments, the fit between
individuals’ characteristics, goals, and environments can be optimized by
shifting goals and environments or even modulating expression of trait
constellations. Indeed, the agility to adapt one’s self and goals to various
environments is a common thread of effective individuals. Although we all
have some flexibility to employ different constellations at different times,
our range is constrained and the probability of navigating by each
constellation differs across individuals due to their genetic blueprint and life
histories.
Final Thoughts
At the highest level, life is a constant interplay of concentration and
diversification, ebb and flow, stability and change, where the odds of an
individual surviving and thriving are maximized through the adaptive
orchestration of energy to prioritize homeostasis and growth in
environmentally sensitive ways. Every moment, each of us must prioritize
finite resources among competing goals and strategies. Our trait
constellations guide how we approach these challenges; helping us balance
homeostasis and change in dynamic environments.
9
Indeed, both genes and environment must be considered since nature equipping an
unborn child for fitness is like trying to pack your bag for a camping trip when you do not
know where you are going; some things are generally useful, like drinking water, but others
are best suited to certain environments, like ice picks.
10
This is why it is often said that successful people tend to be those who find or put
themselves in situations whose demands fully align to their strengths.
Our Constellations A Primer for "Of Anchors & Sails" by Kevin C. Stanek and Deniz S. Ones
19
The research presented in "Of Anchors and Sails" proposes that
success is ultimately a matter of effectively setting, pursuing, and ultimately
attaining goals and that this depends on the fit between the resources and
constraints of the environment. How we navigate these challenges and
opportunities depends on our guiding trait constellations, which are
bounded by our biology and life histories. Therefore, the best way to
increase our effectiveness may be to set better-fitting goals and choose or
create more suitable environments. After all, our choices are how we
anchor and sail.
Our Constellations A Primer for "Of Anchors & Sails" by Kevin C. Stanek and Deniz S. Ones
20
References
1. B. W. Roberts, N. R. Kuncel, R. Shiner, A. Caspi, L. R. Goldberg, The power of personality: The comparative validity of
personality traits, socioeconomic status, and cognitive ability for predicting important life outcomes. Perspectives on
Psychological Science 2, 313 (2007).
2. L. S. Gottfredson, Why g matters: The complexity of everyday life. Intelligence 24, 79132 (1997).
3. T. A. Judge, C. A. Higgins, C. J. Thoresen, M. R. Barrick, The big five personality traits, general mental ability, and
career success across the life span. Personnel psychology 52, 621652 (1999).
4. R. M. Webb, D. Lubinski, C. P. Benbow, Spatial ability: A neglected dimension in talent searches for intellectually
precocious youth. Journal of Educational Psychology 99, 397 (2007).
5. A. Furnham, Personality and activity preference. British Journal of Social Psychology 20, 5768 (1981).
6. D. M. Buss, Human mate selection: Opposites are sometimes said to attract, but in fact we are likely to marry
someone who is similar to us in almost every variable. American Scientist 73, 4751 (1985).
7. S. Dilchert, “Cognitive ability” in The SAGE Handbook of Industrial, Work & Organizational Psychology, 2nd Ed., D. S.
Ones, N. Anderson, C. Viswesvaran, H. K. Sinangil, Eds. (Sage, 2018), pp. 248276.
8. H. Le, I. S. Oh, J. Shaffer, F. Schmidt, Implications of methodological advances for the practice of personnel
selection: How practitioners benefit from meta-analysis. Academy of Management Perspectives 21, 615 (2007).
9. D. S. Ones, S. Dilchert, C. Viswesvaran, J. F. Salgado, “Cognitive abilities: Measurement and validity for employee
selection” in Handbook of Employee Selection, J. L. Farr, N. T. Tippins, Eds. (Routledge, 2016).
10. J. F. Salgado, et al., A meta-analytic study of general mental ability validity for different occupations in the European
community. Journal of Applied Psychology 88, 1068 (2003).
11. F. L. Schmidt, J. E. Hunter, The validity and utility of selection methods in personnel psychology: Practical and
theoretical implications of 85 years of research findings. Psychological bulletin 124, 262 (1998).
12. N. R. Kuncel, D. S. Ones, P. R. Sackett, Individual differences as predictors of work, educational, and broad life
outcomes. Personality and Individual Differences 49, 331336 (2010).
13. S. L. Hatch, et al., Childhood cognitive ability and adult mental health in the British 1946 birth cohort. Social science
& medicine 64, 22852296 (2007).
14. D. S. Ones, S. Dilchert, C. Viswesvaran, T. A. Judge, In support of personality assessment in organizational settings.
Personnel psychology 60, 9951027 (2007).
15. M. P. Wilmot, C. R. Wanberg, J. D. Kammeyer-Mueller, D. S. Ones, Extraversion advantages at work: A quantitative
review and synthesis of the meta-analytic evidence. Journal of Applied Psychology 104, 1447 (2019).
16. M. P. Wilmot, D. S. Ones, A century of research on conscientiousness at work. Proceedings of the national academy of
sciences 116, 2300423010 (2019).
17. M. P. Wilmot, D. S. Ones, Agreeableness and Its Consequences: A Quantitative Review of Meta-Analytic Findings.
Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10888683211073008 (2022).
Our Constellations A Primer for "Of Anchors & Sails" by Kevin C. Stanek and Deniz S. Ones
21
18. K. C. Stanek, D. S. Ones, Meta-analytic relations between personality and cognitive ability. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences 120, e2212794120 (2023).
19. C. Viswesvaran, D. S. Ones, Agreements and disagreements on the role of general mental ability (GMA) in industrial,
work, and organizational psychology. Human performance 15, 211231 (2002).
20. L. S. Gottfredson, Mainstream science on intelligence: An editorial with 52 signatories, history, and bibliography.
Intelligence 24, 1323 (1997b).
21. J. B. Carroll, Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor-analytic studies (Cambridge University Press, 1993).
22. W. J. Schneider, K. S. McGrew, “The Cattell-Horn-Carroll model of intelligence” in Contemporary Intellectual
Assessment: Theories, Tests, and Issues, 3rd Ed., D. P. Flanagan, P. L. Harrison, Eds. (Guilford Press, 2012), pp. 99144.
23. C. Spearman, “General Intelligence,” Objectively Determined and Measured. The American Journal of Psychology,
201292 (1904).
24. A. R. Jensen, “Psychometric g and achievement” in Policy Perspectives on Educational Testing, (Springer, 1993), pp.
117227.
25. N. R. Kuncel, S. A. Hezlett, Standardized tests predict graduate students’ success. Science 315, 10801081 (2007).
26. N. R. Kuncel, S. A. Hezlett, D. S. Ones, Academic Performance, Career Potential, Creativity, and Job Performance:
Can One Construct Predict Them All?. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 86, 148 (2004).
27. F. L. Schmidt, J. Hunter, General mental ability in the world of work: occupational attainment and job performance.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 86, 162 (2004).
28. T. Strenze, Intelligence and socioeconomic success: A meta-analytic review of longitudinal research. Intelligence 35,
401426 (2007).
29. D. Lubinski, R. M. Webb, M. J. Morelock, C. P. Benbow, Top 1 in 10,000: a 10-year follow-up of the profoundly gifted.
Journal of applied psychology 86, 718 (2001).
30. L. S. Gottfredson, I. J. Deary, Intelligence predicts health and longevity, but why? Current Directions in Psychological
Science 13, 14 (2004).
31. L. S. Gottfredson, A g theorist on Why Kovacs and Conway’s process overlap theory amplifies, not opposes, g
theory. Psychological Inquiry 27, 210217 (2016).
32. R. D. Roberts, P. M. Markham, G. Matthews, M. Zeidner, “Assessing intelligence: Past, present, and future” in
Handbook of Understanding and Measuring Intelligence, O. Wilhelm, R. Engle, Eds. (Sage Publications, 2004), pp. 333
360.
33. K. C. Stanek, D. S. Ones, “Taxonomies and compendia of cognitive ability and personality constructs and measures
relevant to industrial, work and organizational psychology.” in The SAGE Handbook of Industrial, Work &
Organizational Psychology: Personnel Psychology and Employee Performance, D. S. Ones, C. Anderson, C. Viswesvaran,
H. K. Sinangil, Eds. (Sage, 2018), pp. 366407.
34. G. W. Allport, Personality: A psychological interpretation. (Henry Holt & Co., 1937).
35. R. A. Emmons, “The personal striving approach to personality” in Goal Concepts in Personality and Social Psychology,
L. A. Pervin, Ed. (Psychology Press, 1989), pp. 87126.
Our Constellations A Primer for "Of Anchors & Sails" by Kevin C. Stanek and Deniz S. Ones
22
36. J. A. Johnson, “Units of analysis for the description and explanation of personality” in Handbook of Personality
Psychology, (Elsevier, 1997), pp. 7393.
37. W. Revelle, The contribution of reinforcement sensitivity theory to personality theory. The reinforcement sensitivity
theory of personality, 508527 (2008).
38. D. G. Winter, O. P. John, A. J. Stewart, E. C. Klohnen, L. E. Duncan, Traits and motives: Toward an integration of two
traditions in personality research. Psychological review 105, 230 (1998).
39. A. E. Poropat, A meta-analysis of the five-factor model of personality and academic performance. Psychological
Bulletin 135, 322338 (2009).
40. B. S. Connelly, D. S. Ones, An other perspective on personality: Meta-analytic integration of observers’ accuracy and
predictive validity. Psychological bulletin 136, 1092 (2010).
41. A. Furnham, T. Chamorro-Premuzic, Personality, intelligence, and art. Personality and Individual Differences 36, 705
715 (2004).
42. F. Barron, D. M. Harrington, Creativity, intelligence, and personality. Annual review of psychology 32, 439476 (1981).
43. A. Furnham, V. Bachtiar, Personality and intelligence as predictors of creativity. Personality and individual differences
45, 613617 (2008).
44. T. Bogg, B. W. Roberts, Conscientiousness and health-related behaviors: a meta-analysis of the leading behavioral
contributors to mortality. Psychological bulletin 130, 887 (2004).
45. C. G. DeYoung, Cybernetic big five theory. Journal of Research in Personality 56, 3358 (2015).
46. J. Boyd, Patterns of conflict (1986). http://www.ausairpower.net/JRB/poc.pdf
47. J. Royce, A. Powell, Theory of Personality and Individual Differences: Factors, Systems, and Processes (Prentice-Hall,
1983).
48. W. Fleeson, Toward a structure-and process-integrated view of personality: Traits as density distributions of states.
Journal of personality and social Psychology 80, 1011 (2001).
49. D. Lykken, A. Tellegen, Happiness is a stochastic phenomenon. Psychological science 7, 186189 (1996).
Our Constellations A Primer for "Of Anchors & Sails" by Kevin C. Stanek and Deniz S. Ones
23
About the Authors
Kevin C. Stanek is a researcher focused on understanding individual
differences and how they relate to behavior, cognition, and outcomes in the
workplace and in life more broadly. Fundamentally, his research aims to
decipher and predict human behavior. His work ranges from the investigation
of counterproductive behavior across life domains to the genetics of job
satisfaction, and it has been used to design selection systems, improve meta-
analytic methodologies, and connect disparate literatures and disciplines. He
earned his doctorate in individual differences and industrial/organizational psychology at the
University of Minnesota, his Master’s in behavioral genetics at the University of Minnesota, and
bachelor’s degrees in economics and psychology at the University of Southern California. Kevin works
at a Fortune 100 company managing human capital analytics and research. Additionally, he consults
with organizations on people analytics topics, such as personnel assessment, talent management
research, retention prediction, and employee experience design.
Deniz S. Ones is a Professor of Psychology at the University of Minnesota,
where she holds multiple distinguished professorships. She is globally
recognized for her extensive research on individual differences in employee
selection. Focusing on the assessment of individual differences in the context of
employee staffing and talent management, her work includes the measurement
of personality, integrity, and cognitive ability. She aims to predict work
behaviors and outcomes, with a particular interest in counterproductive work
behaviors. Her significant contributions to Industrial and Organizational Psychology have earned her
recognition as one of the field’s most influential scholars. With hundreds of articles and book chapters
to her credit, she has been cited tens of thousands of times in scientific literature, placing her in the
top 1% of management and business citations worldwide. She has received numerous awards
acknowledging the excellence and importance of her scientific contributions. A fellow of three
divisions of the American Psychological Association Personality & Social Psychology, Industrial-
Organizational Psychology, and Quantitative and Qualitative Methods she also holds an Honorary
Doctorate from Leuphana University Lüneburg, Germany, for her exceptional scientific contributions.
Contact: Stane040@umn.edu and Onesx001@umn.edu
Copyright © 2023 Kevin C. Stanek and Deniz S. Ones
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0
International License.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Chapter
Full-text available
Personality and cognitive ability are two of the most important domains of differences between individuals. These domains have been studied for over 100 years and yet there is no definitive list of constructs within each domain or taxonomy of how they're organized. There are even more measures of each construct, but again, there is little connection across instruments or models. This situation fragments research efforts and leads to confusion (e.g., two measures that claim to measure extraversion might actually measure distinct constructs). To provide a common set of defined terms, more comprehensive taxonomy, and Rosetta Stone to understand how constructs are related, we have examined dozens of personality and cognitive ability models and thousands of empirical studies to produce the Updated Cattell-Horn-Carroll Model of cognitive abilities and the Pan-Hierarchical Five Factor Model of personality traits. To provide a common set of defined terms, more comprehensive taxonomy, and Rosetta Stone to understand how measures are related, we have examined thousands of personality and cognitive ability measures, their items, and their nomological networks to connect thousands of cognitive ability and personality measures to constructs in the Updated Cattell-Horn-Carroll Model or the Pan-Hierarchical Five Factor Model.
Article
Full-text available
How and to what extent does extraversion relate to work relevant variables across the lifespan? In the most extensive quantitative review to date, we summarize results from 97 published meta-analyses reporting relations of extraversion to 165 distinct work relevant variables, as well as relations of extraversion's lower order traits to 58 variables. We first update all effects using a common set of statistical corrections and, when possible, combine independent estimates using second-order meta-analysis (Schmidt & Oh, 2013). We then organize effects within a framework of four career domains-education, job application, on the job, and career/lifespan-and five conceptual categories: motivations, values, and interests; attitudes and well-being; interpersonal; performance; and counterproductivity. Overall, extraversion shows effects in a desirable direction for 90% of variables (grand mean ρ̄ = .14), indicative of a small, persistent advantage at work. Findings also show areas with more substantial effects (ρ̄ ≥ .20), which we synthesize into four extraversion advantages. These motivational, emotional, interpersonal, and performance advantages offer a concise account of extraversion's relations and a new lens for understanding its effects at work. Our review of the lower order trait evidence reveals diverse relations (e.g., the positive emotions facet has consistently advantageous effects, the sociability facet confers few benefits, the sensation-seeking facet is largely disadvantageous), and extends knowledge about the functioning of extraversion and its advantages. We conclude by discussing potential boundary conditions of findings, contributions and limitations of our review, and new research directions for extraversion at work. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).
Article
Cognitive ability and personality are fundamental domains of human psychology. Despite a century of vast research, most ability-personality relations remain unestablished. Using contemporary hierarchical personality and cognitive abilities frameworks, we meta-analyze unexamined links between personality traits and cognitive abilities and offer large-scale evidence of their relations. This research quantitatively summarizes 60,690 relations between 79 personality and 97 cognitive ability constructs in 3,543 meta-analyses based on data from millions of individuals. Sets of novel relations are illuminated by distinguishing hierarchical personality and ability constructs (e.g., factors, aspects, facets). The links between personality traits and cognitive abilities are not limited to openness and its components. Some aspects and facets of neuroticism, extraversion, and conscientiousness are also considerably related to primary as well as specific abilities. Overall, the results provide an encyclopedic quantification of what is currently known about personality-ability relations, identify previously unrecognized trait pairings, and reveal knowledge gaps. The meta-analytic findings are visualized in an interactive webtool. The database of coded studies and relations is offered to the scientific community to further advance research, understanding, and applications.
Article
Agreeableness impacts people and real-world outcomes. In the most comprehensive quantitative review to date, we summarize results from 142 meta-analyses reporting effects for 275 variables, which represent N > 1.9 million participants from k > 3,900 studies. Arranging variables by their content and type, we use an organizational framework of 16 conceptual categories that presents a detailed account of Agreeableness’ external relations. Overall, the trait has effects in a desirable direction for 93% of variables (grand mean 𝜌M = .16). We also review lower order trait evidence for 42 variables from 20 meta-analyses. Using these empirical findings, in tandem with existing theory, we synthesize eight general themes that describe Agreeableness’ characteristic functioning across variables: self- transcendence, contentment, relational investment, teamworking, work investment, lower results emphasis, social norm orientation, and social integration. We conclude by discussing potential boundary conditions of findings, contributions and limitations of our review, and future research directions.
Article
A comprehensive meta-analysis of the validity of general mental ability (GMA) measures across 12 occupational categories in the European Community (EC) is presented. GMA measures showed that there is validity generalization and large operational validities for job performance and training success in 11 occupational groups. Results also showed that job complexity moderated the magnitude of the operational validity of GMA tests across three levels of job complexity: low, medium, and high. In general, results were similar to those found in the United States, although the European findings showed a slightly larger magnitude of operational validity in some cases. Theoretical and practical implications of these findings for personnel selection are discussed.