53
IMPACT OF BIG FIVE PERSONALITY TRAITS ON ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE OF UNIVERSITY STUDENTS
Robert TOMŠIK Constantine the Philosopher University, Faculty of Education, Department of Pedagogy, Dražovská 4, Post code: 949 74, Nitra, Slovakia, email:
[email protected]
Abstract: Personality plays a significant role in influencing academic performance. As empirical evidence has been confirmed, with increasing age individuals‘ personality traits have less effect on academic performance. In our study, the first grade university students (N = 402) completed the Five Factor Inventory and reported their grade point average GPA. As the results shows, only personality trait conscientiousness was positively related to academic performance GPA. Also, personality trait conscientiousness has been shown as a statistically significant predictor of academic performance among university students but explained only 2.7% of the variance in grade point average (GPA). Keywords: Personality traits; Big Five; NEO FFI; Academic performance; Academic achievement This study has been written under the project: UGAV/14/2018 Moderate impact of parenting styles and NEO-FFI personality dimensions on motivation for choosing teaching as a profession.
1. Introduction There is an international consensus that intelligence is an important predictor of academic performance. Still, recent research showed that there are also non-cognitive factors responsible for high academic performance: family, parent education, financial status (Englud, Luckner, Whaley & Egeland, 2004; Jovanović et al., 2010), gender (Eysenck & Cookson, 1969; In Sharma, 1985); school (Sakač, 2008), characteristics of the personality (Chamorro-Premuzic & Furnham, 2003, 2003a; De Raad & Schouwenburg, 1996). Along with these, the personality is now an important factor studied in relationship with academic performance. Cattell & Butcher have found that general intelligence, extrovert/introversion personality, strong super ego, compassion and phlegmatic temperament are important factors for academic performance (Butcher, 1968; In Simonović, 2004), however, not for all age groups of students. By summarizing empirical evidence, we have found that some personality traits, such as openness to experience and agreeableness, do not have an impact on academic performance in adolescence, while the personality trait consciousness plays an important role in every age category of students. Based on that, we decided to test the impact of the Big Five personality traits on the academic performance, expressed by the GPA, among university students.
2. Personality and academic achievement: defining the concept One of the general definitions of personality comes from Allport (1937; In Smederevac & Mitrović, 2006), who claims that the personality is the dynamic organization of those psychophysical systems in an individual that determine its characteristic behavior, thinking and adaptation to the environment. Eysenck claims that personality is more or less stable and lasting organization of character, temperament, intellect and body that determines its unique adaptation to the environment (Eysenck, 1953; In Smederevac & Mitrovi , 2006). Both definitions understand the personality as being able to adapt to the environment. Therefore, the personality should play a major role in adapting to the school environment and thereby achieving academic performance. Success or failure generally expresses the relationship of an individual to certain activities, depending on how much he has achieved the established goal. According to the vocabulary (Průcha, Walterová & Mareš, 1995), academic performance can mean that the pupils‘ requirements are met by the pupils, which is reflected in the positive or negative assessment of the pupils‘ benefit and results from the teacher‘s evaluation. On the other hand, school failure is when the pupils‘ performance does not meet these requirements (Kačáni, 1999). Academic performance is still very much debated and still under-clarified term. This term has several alternatives: academic su-
54
ccess (Smidt, 2014), academic performance (Conrad, 2006) or academic achievement (Verešová, 2015). However, in most cases is conceived as GPA, i.e. grade point average. Some theoretical basis claims that the personality is one of the most important predictor of school success (Komarraju, Karau & Schmeck, 2009). However, the personality factors that have an impact on school success are many. For example, according to Kohoutek (2009), too extensive or too narrow extra-curricular interests can also be a source of school failure. Furthermore, Čáp & Mareš (2001), among the risk factors of school failure, also include some temperamental characteristics – neuroticism, thinking based not on reality, but on individual wishes, emotional peculiarities (hostile) individuals, developmental delay, illness, learning disorders, behavioral disorders etc. (Čáp & Mareš, 2001). The influence of psychic qualities and processes – whether the pupil/ student will be successful or unsuccessful, depends on the pupil‘s abilities, character, responsibility, endurance and other personality traits (Čáp, 1983). However, as evidenced, not all personality traits have an impact on school success, as well as not in all age groups of students.
3. Absence of the importance of personality traits by the increasing age of students By summarizing various results (which used the 16PF and Big Five model), Eysenck concluded that for success in secondary school is important personality trait introversion. However, this was not the case with elementary and primary school children. It has turned out that personality trait extraversion is an important predictor of academic performance in elementary and primary school, and that extroverts achieve better results. Eysenck explained this as the faster progress of extroverted children from introverted children. Eysenck believed that extroverts achieve better results than introverts, but this condition lasts about the twelfth year of the child‘s life (Fain, 2001). Furthermore, Eysenck found that between the 13th and 15th years there was no statistically significant correlation between the personality trait extraversion/introversion and academic performance, but after the 16th years of age introverts has shown higher academic performance at school (Fain, 2001). High score of personality trait neuroticism, negatively affects school success in young school age, but has a positive impact in higher grades. However, contrary to the statements of Eysenck, in other studies it was found that personality trait neuroticism negatively impacts on school success in all years at elementary and secondary school (Laidra et al., 2007). Similarly, personality trait psychoticism is in negative correlation with academic performance in all age groups. This can be expected when considering the characteristics of individuals with higher scores of psychoticism (for example, difficult adaptability, which is one of the key skills for progress in school). While personality traits openness to experience and conscientiousness appears as significant predictors in all age groups, personality trait agreeableness is in correlation with academic performance only in the young school age. These theoretical bases do not fit entirely into empirical frameworks (Tab. 1), especially Eysenck‘s claims. For example, it was found that the personality trait extraversion at primary school did not correlate with academic performance (Laidra et al., 2006; Laidra et al., 2007; Neuenschwander et al., 2013). Personality trait extraversion appeared to be a problematic factor in terms of interpretation also for the sample of older students (age 10–18), where different results were found. For example, in most studies, personality trait extraversion did not correlate with academic performance (e.g. Laidra et al., 2007; Zuffiano et al., 2013), while in some studies it was in a positive correlation (e.g. Lounsbury et al., 2003) and in some negative correlation with school success (e.g. Furnham & Monsen, 2009). Research by Furnham & Monsen (2009) therefore supports Eysenck‘s theory that introverts in higher grades achieve better academic performance, while a study by Lounsbury et al. (2003) rebut this fact. As for the Big Five model and adolescence, as good predictors of academic performance are personality traits conscientiousness and openness to experience (Barbanelli et al., 2003). A student with a high level of personality trait conscientiousness has a great self-discipline, perseverance and focus on the goal. All of these factors are very important features to achieve great academic performance; they are one of the constant predictors of high academic performance. Research in Estonia, conducted in the third, fourth, sixth, eighth, tenth and twelfth grades, found that the best predictor of good academic performance was a high score in the personality trait conscientiousness in all age categories. In addition to conscientiousness, important predictors are also openness to experience and agreeableness. Following that, personality trait openness to experience is more important predictor in lower grades. This can be explained by the fact that in these classes (when a child is just beginning to get to know the world around him) is more open and curious than in the higher grades. Neuroticism negatively correlated with academic performance on all age groups (Laidra et al., 2007). As far as the research carried out on the university student population, the results are not consistent but point to the lack of impact of some personality dimensions on academic performance. Again, one of the most important
Robert TOMŠIK
55
predictors was conscientiousness and openness to experience. Negative correlation with neuroticism in this age category does not appear. Likewise, there is no positive correlation with the personality trait agreeableness, while a positive correlation with the
personality trait of openness to experience has been proven only in some researches (e.g. Chomorro-Premuzic & Furnham, 2008, Verešová, 2015), in most cases, among the student population, the predictor of academic performance was only conscientiousness (Tab. 1). From above mention researches and review studies, it is clear that by the age of the student or by changing the type of school to a higher level, the personality traits lose importance in terms of academic performance. Based on previous research, we formulate the following prediction (hypothesis) on the correlation between Big Five personality traits and academic performance GPA: H1: We assume that there is a statistically significant correlation between personality trait conscientiousness and academic performance GPA among university students.
Tab. 1: An overview of research on the relationship between Big Five personality dimensions and GPA.
56
N
446
Neuensch-wander et al. (2013)
1435
Laidra et al. (2007)
10.40
430
Laidra et al. (2006)
12.60
290
Lounsbury et al. (2003)
13.47
170
Zuffiano et al. (2013)
14.90
2746
Laidra et al. (2007)
15.80
212
Furnham & Monsen (2009)
16.94
520
Steinmayr et al. (2011)
17.80
488
Laidra et al. (2006)
19.20
141
Paunonen & Ashton (2001)
19.21
158
Chomorro-Premuzic & Furnham (2008)
19.48
300
Conard (2006)
21
205
Hirsh & Peterson (2008)
21.90
338
Dollinger et al. (2008)
23.25
254
Verešová (2015)
9.40
8.10
Age
+
+
++
0
++
0
+
+
0
-
0
+
0
++
++
-
-
0
0
++
++
+
0
-
0
0
+
0
0
+
0
-
+
0
++
0
0
++
++
0
+
++
0
0
0
0
-
+
0
0
++
0
0
0
0
-
+
+
0
0
0
E
-
0
0
0
A
0
0
N
0
O
++
C
++
E
+
A
+
N
+
O
++
C
C
E
O
A
Elementary and Primary scho
Secondary and High school
College and University
N
*Note: +. correlation is significant at .050 level, ++. correlation is significant at .010 level, -. negative correlation is significant at .050 level.
Robert TOMŠIK
4. Research sample
57
The research sample consists of university students from Slovak universities from the following regions: Nitra, Bratislava, Banská Bystrica, Prešov, Trenčín, Trnava and Žilina. In total 402 adolescents of the first year of bachelor studies were involved in the research. In the academic year 2014/2015 was admitted to the first years around 3300 adolescents. According to the approximation of Morgan and Krejcie (1970; In Tomšik, 2016), at least 346 respondents must be included in the set, with a percentage distribution corresponding to the size of the basic set in each region. This criterion is fulfilled. A research sample consists of 119 male and 266 female respondents (17 uncategorized), with an average age of 20.50 years. During research 500 questionnaires were distributed, which means that the return of the questionnaires was 80.40 %.
5. Methods NEO Five Factor (NEO FFI) is a personality inventory that examines a person‘s Big Five personality traits (openness to experience, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism). The authors of the NEO FFI questionnaire are McCrae and Costa (Slovak version by Ruisel & Halama, 2007). Cronbach‘s alpha of the questionnaire is 0.87 (Costa & McCrae, 1992). Questionnaire consists of 60 items (Likert type), twelve for each personality dimension: • •
Openness to experience: (inventive/curious vs. consistent/cautious). Openness reflects the degree of intellectual curiosity, Conscientiousness: (efficient/organized vs. easy-going/careless). A tendency to be organized and dependable, show self-discipline, act dutifully, aim for achievement, and prefer planned rather than spontaneous behavior.
•
Extraversion: (outgoing/energetic vs. solitary/reserved). Energy, positive emotions, surgency, assertiveness, sociability and the tendency to seek stimulation in the company of others, and talkativeness.
•
Agreeableness: (friendly/compassionate vs. challenging/detached). A tendency to be compassionate and cooperative rather than suspicious and antagonistic towards others.
•
Neuroticism: (sensitive/nervous vs. secure/confident). The tendency to experience unpleasant emotions easily, such as anger, anxiety, depression, and vulnerability.
Academic achievement GPA – a measure of a student‘s academic performance, calculated by dividing the total number of grade points received by the total number attempted. Compared to the NEO FFI inventory, the GPA score is reversed and can range on a scale from 1 to 3 (lower score represents better academic performance).
6. Data analysis For the description of the research data, detecting associations between variables and for detecting differences between research groups were used statistic programs SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Science ver. 20) and STAT 13. MCAR test (Little‘s Missing Completely at Random) was used to verify the missing data. After assuring that the data in the file is missing randomly, the Missing Value Analysis (Expectation-Maximization) method was applied to replace the missing data. To verify the normality of the research data the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test was used. To determine the correlation between personality traits and academic achievement, we used the Pearson coefficient of correlation, while we used linear regression analysis, based on a Breusch-Pagan test of homoscedasticity, to determine the impact of personality traits on academic performance (GPA).
7. Results Table 2 presents descriptive statistics of personality traits and academic performance among research sample. Observing only the average score, we find that the students have reached the highest average score in the personality trait conscientiousness (M = 31.82). Approximately one-and-a-half points below were scaled personality traits extraversion (M = 30.14) and agreeableness (M = 30.07). The lowest average scores were achieved in personality traits openness (M = 27.99) and neuroticism (M = 22.28). Com-
58
pared to the standards presented by Ruisel & Halama (2007) in the handbook, we do not notice significant differences compared to the scores that were measured on our sample. For the age group of individuals aged 15–24, the authors report the following average scores for individual personality traits: neuroticism M = 21.87; extraversion M = 30.05; openness to experience M = 29.45; agreeableness M = 29.69 and conscientiousness M = 29.45. The biggest differences are in personality traits openness to experience and conscientiousness, where students of our research sample have reached about one point higher score compared to norms. Other scores are comparable.
Tab. 2: Descriptive statistics of personality dimensions among university students. Variable
N
MIN
MAX
M
SEM
SD
S
C
Academic performance GPA
374
1
3
1.588
.025
.488
.309
-.617
Openness to experience
402
4
46
27.990
.303
6.070
.246
.137
Conscientiousness
402
13
48
31.820
.336
6.736
.109
-.217
Extraversion
402
5
45
30.140
.326
6.538
-.297
.103
Agreeableness
402
16
46
30.070
.320
6.421
.235
-.742
Neuroticism
402
0
43
22.280
.403
8.077
.000
-.120
*Note: N- number; M- mean; MIN- minimum score; MAX- maximum score; SEM- standard error of the mean; SD- standard deviation; S– skewness; C– kurtosis.
Table 3 summarizes the Pearson correlations between academic performance GPA and Big Five personality traits. The results show that significant positive correlations were obtained between academic performance GPA and conscientiousness (r = -.173, Sig. < .010). However, no significant correlation was found between academic performance GPA and other personality traits of Big Five model.
Tab. 3: Correlation between academic performance GPA and Big Five personality traits among university students. GPA
2
3
1
4
5
6
Academic achievement GPA
Pearson Correlation
-.034
-.173
.015
-.044
.049
Sig.
.512
.001
.770
.401
.340
Openness to experience
Pearson Correlation
1
.194
.207
.133
-.143
Sig.
.000
.000
.008
.004
Conscientiousness
Pearson Correlation
1
.341
.390
-.234
Sig.
.000
.000
.000
Pearson Correlation
1
Extraversion Agreeableness Neuroticism
.385
-.442
Sig.
.000
.000
Pearson Correlation
1
-.198
Sig.
.000
Pearson Correlation
1
Sig. *Note: Score of academic performance GPA is reverse.
Before applying linear regression analysis, we confirmed the homoscedasticity of data using Breusch-Pagan test (chi = 4.680; Sig. = .321). Table 4 shows that independent variable (conscientiousness) significantly predicted academic performance of the participants. In other words, personality trait conscientiousness made significant contribution (β = -.173, t = -3.389; Sig. < .001) to academic performance GPA, where higher conscientiousness increases the GPA. The value of R2 (adjusted) = .027 indicated that conscientiousness accounted for 2.70% of the total variance in academic performance GPA of university students.
59
Robert TOMŠIK
Tab. 4: Linear regression analysis. Predictor
Dependent Variable
Beta
Standardized Beta Coefficients
R
R2
F
Sig.
Conscientiousness
GPA
-.013
-.173
.173
.030
11.516
.001
8. Discussion This study was carried out to examine the relationship between the Big Five personality traits (neuroticism, extraversion, openness to experience, agreeableness and conscientiousness) and students‘ academic performance (GPA). Assumptions for this study are based on the recent empirical evidences that reported the relationship between the Big Five personality traits and GPA. Research was made on a sample of teacher training students and we found that among all personality dimensions, conscientiousness is the only dimension that correlates with GPA, and that conscientiousness is the only personality trait that predicts GPA among university students. There is clearly empirical evidence (e.g. Hirsh & Peterson, 2008; Chomorro-Premuzic & Furnham, 2008; Laidra et al., 2006; Laidra et al., 2007; Verešová, 2015) proving that personality trait has less impact on academic performance with increasing age of students. We assume that this is due to the organization and system of education in our region. Rising to higher levels of education, teachers are losing closer contact with students, teaching is not as personal like at elementary or primary school, and specifically at colleges the teacher and student relationship is more formal. For this reason, the teacher does not have the opportunity to get to know the students more closely and to assess their personality characteristics (for example, whether the individual is neurotic or emotionally stable, open to experience or not interested in studies, etc.). The only feature that plays an important role in higher education is conscientiousness, since conscientious students fulfill their duties more rigorously than easy-going students. It‘s questionable whether it is important for the teacher to recognize the personality qualities of the students or not. We assume that this depends on the study program and professional profile of graduate. As Kasačová (2004) state, the teacher, for the successful performance of the teaching profession, should have an personal characteristics, such as self-confidence, creativity, healthy self-confidence, purposefulness, responsibility, emotional stability, patience, flexibility, sophistication, persuasiveness, consciousness, optimism, foresight; social characteristics: communicativeness, sociability, tolerance, accepting others, empathy, respect for others, agreeableness, affiliation, sense of humor, consideration, justice, love for children, prosociality; and ethical characteristics: altruism, congruence, honesty and straightness. These characteristics are very difficult to examine without the teacher‘s personal contact with the students. Although the Big Five model does not include all the personality traits that are included in the competency models (e.g. Kasačová, 2004), nevertheless Big Five model is a good indicator of work success and job satisfaction so the results of such studies should not be unnoticed. Because personality traits are variable in a certain way and can be developed to a certain extent, study programs, whose graduates should have certain personality qualities, should give greater emphasis on the personality characteristics of students during the process of accepting students on university studies, and greater emphasis on development of personal qualities.
9. Conclusion A study was carried out to examine the relationship between the Big Five personality traits and teacher trainee students‘ academic performance (GPA). While research finds significant correlation and prediction only between personality trait conscientiousness and GPA, there is a need for better acquaintance of the student personality by teachers for adequate development of student personal qualities.
10.
Literature
Barbaranelli, C., Caprara, G.V., Rabasca, A., & Pastorelli, C. (2003). A questionnaire for measuring the Big Five in late childhood. Personality and Individual Differences, 34, 645-664. Chamorro-Premuzic, T., & Furnham, A. (2003). Personality predicts academic perfomance: Evidence from two longitudinal university samples. Journal of Research in Personality, 37, 319-338.
60
Chamorro-Premuzic, T., & Furnham, A. (2003). Personality traits and academic examination perfomance. European Journal of Personality, 17, 237-250. Chamorro-Premuzic, T., & Furnham, A. (2008). Personality, intelligence and approaches to learning as predictors of academic performance. Personality and Individual Differences, 44, 1596-1603. Conard, M. A. (2006). Aptitude is not enough: How personality and behavior predict academic performance. Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 339-346. Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO personality inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor inventory (NEO-FFI). Professional manual. Odessa, FL : Psychological Assessment Resources. Čáp, J. (1983). Psychologie pro učitele. Praha : SPN. Čáp, J., & Mareš, J. (2001). Psychologie pro učitele. Praha : Portál. De Raad, B., & Schouwenburg, H. (1996). Personality in learning and education: a review. European Journal of Personality, 10, 303-336. Dollinger, S. J., Matyja, A. M., & Huber, J. L. (2008). Which factors best account for academic success: Those which college students can control or those they cannot? Journal of Research in Personality, 42, 872-885. Englund, M. M., Luckner, A. E., Whaley, G. J. L., & Egeland, B. (2004). Children‘s Achievement in Early Elementary School: Longitudinal Effects of Parental Involvement, Expectations, and Quality of Assistance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(4), 723-730. Fain, T. (2011). Povezanost Ajzenkovih dimenzija ličnosti i pola sa školskim uspehom na predadolescentnom uzrastu od 13 godina. Novi Sad : Filozofski fakultet, NU. Furnham, A., & Monsen, J. (2009). Personality traits and intelligence predict academic school grades. Learning and Individual Differences, 19, 28-33. Hirsh, J. B., & Peterson, J. B. (2008). Predicting creativity and academic success with a ‘‘Fake-Proof” measure of the Big Five. Journal of Research in Personality, 42, 1323-1333. Jovanović, V., et al. (2010). Predikcija školskog postignuća i konativnog funkcionisanja romske i neromske dece. Primenjena Psihologija, 3, 239-254. Kačáni, V. (1999). Základy učiteľskej psychológie. Bratislava : SPN. Kasáčová, B. (2004). Učiteľská profesia v trendoch teórie a praxe. Prešov : Metodicko – pedagogické centrum v Prešove. Kohoutek, R. (2009). Školní neúspěšnost a diagnostika jejích příčin. Retrieved from: http://rudolfkohoutek.blog.cz/0911/psychologie-skolni-uspesnosti-a-neuspesnosti Komarraju, M., Karau, S. J. & Schmeck, R. R. (2009). Role of the Big Five personality traits in predicting college students‘ academic motivation and achievement. Learning and Individual Differences, 19 (2009), 47–52. Laidra, K., Pullmann, H., & Allik, J. (2007). Personality and intelligence as predictors of academic achievement: A cross-sectional study from elementary to secondary school. Personality and Individual Differences, 42, 441-451. Laidra, K., Pullmann, K., & Allik, J. (2006). Personality and intelligence as predictors of academic achievement: A cross-sectional study from elementary to secondary school Personality and intelligence as predictors of academic. Personality and Individual Differences, 42(3), 441-451. Lounsbury, J. W., Sundstrom, E., Loveland, J. L., & Gibson, L. W. (2003). Broad versus narrow personality traits in predicting academic performance of adolescents. Learning and Individual Differences, 14, 67-77. Neuenschwander, R., Cimeli, P., Röthlisberger, M., & Roebers, C. M. (2013). Personality factors in elementary school children: Contributions to academic performance over and above executive functions? Learning and Individual Differences, 25, 118125. Paunonen, S. V., & Ashton, M. C. (2001). Big Five Predictors of Academic Achievement. Journal of Research in Personality, 35, 78-90. Průcha, J., Walterová, E., & Mareš, J. (1995). Pedagogický slovník. Praha : Portál. Ruisel, I., & Halama, P. (2007). NEO Päťfaktorový osobnostný inventár. Praha: Testcentrum. Sakač, M. (2008). Neki psihološki činioci školskog postignuća. Norma, 13(3), 26-29. Sharma, R. (1985). Enchancing Academic Achievement: Role of Some Personality Factors. New Delhi : Naurang Rai Concept Publishing Company. Simonović, M. (2004). Sklop osobina ličnosti učenika medicinske škole. Godišnjak za psihologiju, 3, 91-111. Smederevac, S., & Mitrović, D. (2006). Ličnost – Metodi i modeli. Beograd : Centar za primenjenu psihologiju. Smidt, W. (2014). Big Five personality traits as predictors of the academic success of university and college students in early childhood education. Journal of Education for Teaching: International Research and Pedagogy 41(4), 385-403.
Robert TOMŠIK
61
Steinmayr, R., Bipp, T., & Spinath, B. (2011). Goal orientations predict academic performance beyond intelligence and personality. Learning and individual differences, 21, 196-200. Tomšik, R. (2016). Štatistika v pedagogickom výskume. Nitra : PF, UKF. Verešová, M. (2015). Learning strategy, personality traits and academic achievement of university students. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 174, 3473-3478 Zuffianò, A. et al. (2013). Academic achievement: The unique contribution of self-efficacy beliefs in self-regulated learning beyond intelligence, personality traits, and self-esteem. Learning and individual differences, 23, 158-62.
