The current study utilizes the current COVID-19 pandemic to highlight the importance of accounting for the influence of external political and economic factors in personality public health research. We investigated the extent to which systemic factors modify the relationship between personality and pandemic response. Results shed doubt on the cross-cultural generalizability of common Big Five factor models. Individual differences only predicted government compliance in autocratic countries and in countries with income inequality. Personality was only predictive of mental health outcomes under conditions of state fragility. Our ability to use individual differences to understand policy-relevant outcomes changes based on environmental factors and must be assessed on a trait-by-trait basis, thus supporting the inclusion of systemic political and economic factors in individual differences models.
AschwandenD.StrickhouserJ. E.SeskerA. A.LeeJ. H.LuchettiM.StephanY.SutinA. R.TerraccianoA. (2020). Psychological and behavioural responses to coronavirus disease 2019: The role of personality. European Journal of Personality, 35(1), 51–66.
3.
BetancourtT. S.BrennanR. T.VinckP.VanderWeeleT. J.Spencer-WaltersD.JeongJ.Akinsulure-SmithA. M.PhamP. (2016). Associations between mental health and Ebola-related health behaviors: A regionally representative cross-sectional survey in post-conflict Sierra Leone. PLoS Medicine, 13(8), e1002073.
4.
BishA.MichieS. (2010). Demographic and attitudinal determinants of protective behaviours during a pandemic: A review. British journal of Health Psychology, 15(4), 797–824.
5.
BlagovP. S. (2020, March28). Adaptive and dark personality traits in the Covid-19 pandemic: Predicting health-behavior endorsement and the appeal of public-health messages. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/chgkn
6.
BlumG. S.RauthmannJ. F.GöllnerR.LischetzkeT.SchmittM. (2018). The nonlinear interaction of person and situation (NIPS) model: Theory and empirical evidence. European Journal of Personality, 32(3), 286–305.
7.
BoggT.MiladE. (2020, April3). Slowing the spread of COVID-19: Demographic, personality, and social cognition predictors of guideline adherence in a representative U.S. sample. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/yc2gq
8.
BronfenbrennerU.MorrisP. A. (2006). The bioecological model of human development. In DamonW.LernerR. M. (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology, Vol. 1: Theoretical models of human development (6th ed., pp. 793–828). Wiley.
9.
BrouardS.VasilopoulosP.BecherM. (2020). Sociodemographic and psychological correlates of compliance with the Covid-19 public health measures in France. Canadian Journal of Political Science [Revue Canadienne de Science Politique], 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0008423920000335
10.
CarletonR. N. (2016). Into the unknown: A review and synthesis of contemporary models involving uncertainty. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 39, 30–43.
11.
CarletonR. N.NortonM. P. J.AsmundsonG. J. (2007). Fearing the unknown: A short version of the IUS scale. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 21(1), 105–117.
12.
CarvalhoL. de F.PianowskiG.GonçalvesA. P. (2020). Personality differences and COVID-19: Are extroversion and conscientiousness personality traits associated with engagement with containment measures? Trends in psychiatry and psychotherapy. https://doi.org/10.1590/2237-6089-2020-0029
Center for Systemic Peace. (2020). POLITY5 political regime characteristics and transitions, 1800-2018 [Data file and users’ manual]. http://www.systemicpeace.org/inscrdata.html
15.
Central Intelligence Agency. (2020). The world factbook 2020. Skyhorse Publishing.
16.
ChengC.CheungM. W. (2005). Psychological responses to outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome: A prospective, multiple time-point study. Journal of Personality, 73(1), 261–285.
17.
CheungG. W.RensvoldR. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(2), 233–255.
18.
ColumbusS. (2020, March24). Who hoards? Honesty-humility and behavioural responses to the 2019/20 coronavirus pandemic. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/8e62v
19.
DenissenJ. J. A.GeenenR.SotoC. J.JohnO. P.van AkenM. A. G. (2020). The Big Five Inventory–2 (BFI-2): Replication of psychometric properties of the Dutch adaptation and first evidence for the discriminant predictive validity of the facet scales. Journal of Personality Assessment, 3, 309–324.
20.
De RaadB.BareldsD. P.LevertE.OstendorfF.MlačićB.BlasL. D.…KatigbakM. S. (2010). Only three factors of personality description are fully replicable across languages: A comparison of 14 trait taxonomies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98(1), 160.
21.
ErikssonM.GhazinourM.HammarströmA. (2018). Different uses of Bronfenbrenner’s ecological theory in public mental health research: What is their value for guiding public mental health policy and practice?Social Theory & Health, 16(4), 414–433.
22.
GarbeL.RauR.ToppeT. (2020, April13). Influence of perceived threat of Covid-19 and HEXACO personality traits on toilet paper stockpiling. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/eyur7
23.
GaygısızÜ.GaygısızE.ÖzkanT.LajunenT. (2012). Individual differences in behavioral reactions to H1N1 during a later stage of the epidemic. Journal of Infection and Public Health, 5(1), 9–21.
24.
GurvenM.Von RuedenC.MassenkoffM.KaplanH.Lero VieM. (2013). How universal is the big five? Testing the five-factor model of personality variation among forager–farmers in the Bolivian Amazon. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104(2), 354.
25.
HalamaP.KohútM.SotoC. J.JohnO. P. (2020). Slovak adaptation of the Big Five Inventory (BFI-2): Psychometric properties and initial validation. Studia Psychologica, 62, 74–87.
26.
JorgensenT. D.PornprasertmanitS.SchoemannA. M.RosseelY. (2020). Semtools: Useful tools for structural equation modeling [R package version 0.5-3]. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=semTools
27.
KangM.KimJ. R.ChaH. (2018). From concerned citizens to activists: A case study of 2015 South Korean MERS outbreak and the role of dialogic government communication and citizens’ emotions on public activism. Journal of Public Relations Research, 30(5-6), 202–229.
28.
KroenckeL.GeukesK.UteschT.KuperN.BackM. (2020, May10). Neuroticism and emotional risk during the COVID-19 pandemic. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/8c6nh
29.
LauJ. T. F.GriffithsS.AuD. W. H.ChoiK. C. (2011). Changes in knowledge, perceptions, preventive behaviours and psychological responses in the pre-community outbreak phase of the H1N1 epidemic. Epidemiology & Infection, 139(1), 80–90.
30.
LauJ. T.KimJ. H.TsuiH. Y.GriffithsS. (2007). Anticipated and current preventive behaviors in response to an anticipated human-to-human H5N1 epidemic in the Hong Kong Chinese general population. BMC Infectious Diseases, 7(1), 1–12.
31.
LaverdièreO.MorinA. J.St-HilaireF. (2013). Factor structure and measurement invariance of a short measure of the big five personality traits. Personality and Individual Differences, 55(7), 739–743.
32.
LeungG. M.LamT. H.HoL. M.HoS. Y.ChanB. H. Y.WongI. O. L.HedleyA. J. (2003). The impact of community psychological responses on outbreak control for severe acute respiratory syndrome in Hong Kong. Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health, 57(11), 857–863.
33.
LiJ. B.YangA.DouK.WangL. X.ZhangM. C.LinX. (2020). Chinese public’s knowledge, perceived severity, and perceived controllability of the COVID-19 and their associations with emotional and behavioural reactions, social participation, and precautionary behaviour: A national survey. BMC Public Health, 20(1), 1589.
34.
LungF. W.LuY. C.ChangY. Y.ShuB. C. (2009). Mental symptoms in different health professionals during the SARS attack: A follow-up study. Psychiatry Q, 80(2), 107–116.
35.
MarshH. W.NagengastB.MorinA. J. (2013). Measurement invariance of big-five factors over the life span: ESEM tests of gender, age, plasticity, maturity, and la dolce vita effects. Developmental Psychology, 49(6), 1194.
36.
MarshallM. A.BrownJ. D. (2006). Trait aggressiveness and situational provocation: A test of the traits as situational sensitivities (TASS) model. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32(8), 1100–1113.
37.
McCraeR. R. (2002). NEO-PI-R data from 36 cultures. In McCraeR. R.AllikJ. (Eds.), The five-factor model of personality across cultures (pp. 105–125). Springer.
38.
MinkovM.van de VijverF. J.SchachnerM. (2019). A test of a new short big-five tool in large probabilistic samples from 19 countries. Personality and Individual Differences, 151, 109519.
39.
PatelV.BurnsJ. K.DhingraM.TarverL.KohrtB. A.LundC. (2018). Income inequality and depression: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the association and a scoping review of mechanisms. World Psychiatry, 17(1), 76–89.
40.
PilkonisP. A.ChoiS. W.ReiseS. P.StoverA. M.RileyW. T.CellaD., & PROMIS Cooperative Group. (2011). Item banks for measuring emotional distress from the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS®): Depression, anxiety, and anger. Assessment, 18(3), 263–283.
41.
RammstedtB.DannerD.SotoC. J.JohnO. P. (2020). Validation of the short and extra-short forms of the Big Five Inventory-2 (BFI-2) and their German adaptations. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 36, 149–161.
42.
RosseelY. (2012). Lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1–36. http://www.jstatsoft.org/v48/i02/
43.
SaticiB.SaricaliM.SaticiS. A.GriffithsM. D. (2020). Intolerance of uncertainty and mental wellbeing: Serial mediation by rumination and fear of COVID-19. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 1–12.
44.
SchmittN.GolubovichJ.LeongF. T. (2011). Impact of measurement invariance on construct correlations, mean differences, and relations with external correlates: An illustrative example using big five and RIASEC measures. Assessment, 18(4), 412–427.
45.
ShchebetenkoS.KaluginA. Y.MishkevichA. M.SotoC. J.JohnO. P. (2020). Measurement invariance and sex and age differences of the Big Five Inventory–2: Evidence from the Russian version. Assessment, 27, 472–486.
46.
ShookN.SeviB.LeeJ.FitzgeraldH. N.OosterhoffB. (2020). Who’s listening? Predictors of concern about COVID-19 and preventative health behaviors[Preprint]. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/c9rfg
47.
SotoC. J.JohnO. P. (2017). Short and extra-short forms of the Big Five Inventory–2: The BFI-2-S and BFI-2-XS. Journal of Research in Personality, 68, 69–81.
48.
StadlerM.NiepelC.BotesE.DörendahlJ.KriegerF.GreiffS. (2020, March31). Individual psychological responses to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: Different clusters and their relation to risk-reducing behavior. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/k8unc
49.
TahaS.MathesonK.CroninT.AnismanH. (2014). Intolerance of uncertainty, appraisals, coping, and anxiety: The case of the 2009 H1 N1 pandemic. British Journal of Health Psychology, 19(3), 592–605.
50.
TehseenS.RamayahT.SajilanS. (2017). Testing and controlling for common method variance: A review of available methods. Journal of Management Sciences, 4(2), 142–168.
51.
TettR. P.BurnettD. D. (2003). A Personality trait-based interactionist model of job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(3), 500–517. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.3.500
52.
van der WeerdW.TimmermansD. R.BeaujeanD. J.OudhoffJ.van SteenbergenJ. E. (2011). Monitoring the level of government trust, risk perception and intention of the general public to adopt protective measures during the influenza A (H1N1) pandemic in the Netherlands. BMC Public Health, 11(1), 575.
53.
VedelA.WellnitzK. B.LudekeS.SotoC. J.JohnO. P.AndersenS. C. (2020). Development and validation of the Danish Big Five Inventory-2: Domain-and facet-level structure, construct validity, and reliability. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 37(1), 1–10.
54.
XieX. F.StoneE.ZhengR.ZhangR. G. (2011). The ‘Typhoon eye effect’: Determinants of distress during the SARS epidemic. Journal of Risk Research, 14(9), 1091–1107.
55.
YangJ. Z.ChuH. (2018). Who is afraid of the Ebola outbreak? The influence of discrete emotions on risk perception. Journal of Risk Research, 21(7), 834–853.
56.
ZettlerI.SchildC.LilleholtL.BöhmR. (2020, March23). Individual differences in accepting personal restrictions to fight the COVID-19 pandemic: Results from a Danish adult sample. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/pkm2a
