Personality structure at multiple levels Data collection using SAPA Results Discussion Supplementary results References

Multilevel analysis of personality: Personality ofcollege majors

William Revelle and David Condon

Department of PsychologyNorthwestern UniversityEvanston, Illinois USA

Society of Multivariate Experimental PsychologyVancouver, B.COctober, 2012

1 / 21

Personality structure at multiple levels Data collection using SAPA Results Discussion Supplementary results References

Outline

1 Personality structure at multiple levels

2 Data collection using SAPA

3 ResultsBetween subjects pooled within majorsBetween majors

4 Discussion

5 Supplementary results

2 / 21

Personality structure at multiple levels Data collection using SAPA Results Discussion Supplementary results References

Multilevel analysis can yield surprising results

Although it is well known that the structure within a level does notimply anything about the structure at a different level, thisdistinction is frequently forgotten.

1 Various names for the phenomena:Yule-Simpson paradox (Simpson, 1951; Yule, 1903)The fallacy of ecological correlations (Robinson, 1950)The within group–between group problem (Pedhazur, 1997)Ergodicity (Molenaar, 2004)

2 Observed correlations may be decomposed into with groupcorrelations and between group correlations

rxy = etaxwg ∗ etaywg ∗ rxywg + etaxbg ∗ etaybg ∗ rxybgrxywg is the within group correlationrxybg is the between group correlationetaxwg is correlation of the data with the within group valuesetaxbg is correlation of the data with the between group values

3 We consider several examples of multi-level analysis.3 / 21

Personality structure at multiple levels Data collection using SAPA Results Discussion Supplementary results References

Method

1 Synthetic Aperture Personality Assessment (Revelle, Wilt &Rosenthal, 2010) forms large covariance matrices by samplingitems across people

≈ 120/day participants are recruited totest.personality-project.org

Each participant is given 60-70 itemsTotal set of items being analyzed > 500

2 Item content being sampled100 “IPIP” Big 5 items≈ 200 other temperamental items56-80 home brewed ability items92 Oregon Vocational Interest items (ORVIS)

3 Although > 240, 000 participants have been run in all, we willreport only those data from the last 75,000

4 Demographic information includedAge, Gender, Level of education, country of residenceCollege major and broad field (if appropriate)Occupation (if appropriate) 4 / 21

Personality structure at multiple levels Data collection using SAPA Results Discussion Supplementary results References

College major as an example of niche selection

We are analyzing the personality of groups. This is how thecomposition of groups differ in the average personalitycharacteristics of their members.

1 People differ in their temperaments, abilities and interests.

2 College majors differ in their social and intellectual challenges.3 We can see this by examining the TAI mean scores for each of

88 majors.

88 majors had more than 100 studentsData from students who had not declared majors were deleted.

4 Correlations can be found within and between these groups.

5 These between group correlations are not between people butof the means of the majors. This leads to the structure ofgroup differences.

6 Results displayed as heat maps of correlations

5 / 21

Personality structure at multiple levels Data collection using SAPA Results Discussion Supplementary results References

Between subjects pooled within majors

Structure of TAI within college majors is the standard structure

Within group correlations of TAI

Altru.wgArtis.wgErudi.wgProdu.wgLeade.wgAnaly.wgAdven.wgOrgan.wgVEdiq.wgR3Diq.wgMXiq.wgANiq.wgIntel.wg

Consc.wgExtra.wgAgree.wgNeuro.wggender.wg

gender.wg

Neuro.wg

Agree.wg

Extra.wg

Consc.wg

Intel.wg

ANiq.wg

MXiq.wg

R3Diq.wg

VEdiq.wg

Organ.wg

Adven.wg

Analy.wg

Leade.wg

Produ.wg

Erudi.wg

Artis.wg

Altru.wg -1

-0.8

-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

6 / 21

Personality structure at multiple levels Data collection using SAPA Results Discussion Supplementary results References

Between majors

Structure of TAI between college majors is very different

Between group correlations of TAI

Altru.bgArtis.bgErudi.bgProdu.bgLeade.bgAnaly.bgAdven.bgOrgan.bgVEdiq.bgR3Diq.bgMXiq.bgANiq.bgIntel.bg

Consc.bgExtra.bgAgree.bgNeuro.bggender.bg

gender.bg

Neuro.bg

Agree.bg

Extra.bg

Consc.bg

Intel.bg

ANiq.bg

MXiq.bg

R3Diq.bg

VEdiq.bg

Organ.bg

Adven.bg

Analy.bg

Leade.bg

Produ.bg

Erudi.bg

Artis.bg

Altru.bg -1

-0.8

-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

7 / 21

Personality structure at multiple levels Data collection using SAPA Results Discussion Supplementary results References

Between majors

Majors ordered by male and female ability correlate .86 and females>males 76/89 majors

−0.5 0.0 0.5

−0.

50.

00.

51.

0

Majors by male and female ability

Male Ability

Fem

ale

Abi

lity

Accounting

Aerospace.Eng

Animal.Sciences

Anthropology

Art.History

Arts.Edu

Art.Theory

Biology

Biomed.Eng

Biz.Admin.Mgmt

Chem.Bio.Eng

Chemistry

CIS.General

Civil.Eng

Cognitive.Sciences

Communication.Sciences

Communications.MediaStudies

Computer.Eng

Computer.Graphics

Computer.Programming

Criminal.Justice.Corrections

Criminology

Dentistry

Design

Drama.Theater

Economics

Edu.Administration

Electrical.Eng

Elementary.Edu

English

Entrepreneurship

Environmental.Sciences

Fiction.Writing

Finance Fine.Studio

General.Biz

Geological.Sciences

Graphic.Arts

Health.Sciences.General

Health.Svcs.Admin

History

Hospitality

HR.Admin

Human.Development.Family

Industrial.Eng

Intl.Business

Journalism

K.preK.Edu

Language.Arts.Edu

Law.Legal.Studies

Linguistics

Major.NA

Marketing

Math.Edu

Mathematics

Mechanical.Eng

Medical.Assisting

Medical.Lab.Technology

MgmtInfoSystems

Music

Neuroscience

Nursing

Nutrition.WellnessOther.Business

Other.CIS

Other.Communications

Other.Community.Social.Svss

Other.Edu

Other.Eng.Tech.MajorOther.Language.LitStudies

Other.Major

Other.Medicine.Allied.Health

Other.Natural.SciencesOther.PerfVisual.Art

Other.Social.Sciences

Pharmacology

Philosophy

Physical.Edu

Physics

Political.Science

PR.Advertising

PreMed

Psychology

Radio.TV.Film

Religion

Secondary.Edu

Social.Work

SociologySpecial.Edu

8 / 21

Personality structure at multiple levels Data collection using SAPA Results Discussion Supplementary results References

Between majors

Scatter plot and unweighted between group correlations for abilityand Big 5 Temperament (gender = % women in major)

gender-0.4 0.0

0.73 0.82

-0.4 0.2

0.42 0.28

-0.4 0.2 0.8

-0.41

0.2

0.6

1.0

-0.69

-0.4

0.0

Neuro0.39 0.02 -0.21 0.01 -0.35

Agree0.66 0.52 -0.58

-0.6

0.0-0.82

-0.4

0.2 Extra

0.58 -0.59 -0.67

Consc-0.78

-0.4

0.2

-0.63

-0.4

0.2

0.8

Intel0.74

0.2 0.6 1.0 -0.6 0.0 -0.4 0.2 -0.5 0.5

-0.5

0.5FullIQ

9 / 21

Personality structure at multiple levels Data collection using SAPA Results Discussion Supplementary results References

Between majors

Factor structure of TAI based upon mean scores of college majors

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

-3-2

-10

12

3Personality structure of college majors

Social vs. Intellectual Challenge

Em

otio

nal S

tabi

lity

and

Con

trol

-1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0

-1.0

-0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0

Agree

Consc

Extra

Neuro

Intel

ANiqMXiqR3Diq

VEdiq

Produ

AdventureAnalytic

Organization

Leader

Altruistic

EruditeArtistic

10 / 21

Personality structure at multiple levels Data collection using SAPA Results Discussion Supplementary results References

Between majors

Extend the solution to include percent females in each major

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

-3-2

-10

12

3Extend solution to include gender

Social vs. Intellectual Challenge

Em

otio

nal S

tabi

lity

and

Con

trol

-1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0

-1.0

-0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0

Agree

Consc

Extra

Neuro

Intel

ANiqMXiqR3Diq

VEdiq

Produ

AdventureAnalytic

Organization

Leader

Altruistic

EruditeArtisticgender

11 / 21

Personality structure at multiple levels Data collection using SAPA Results Discussion Supplementary results References

Between majors

A biplot of TAI and college majors locates majors in two space

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

-3-2

-10

12

3Personality structure of college majors

Social vs. Intellectual Challenge

Em

otio

nal S

tabi

lity

and

Con

trol

Accounting

Aerspc.Eng

Anml.Scncs

Anthroplgy

Art.Histry

Arts.Edu

Art.Theory

Biology

Biomed.Eng

Bz.Admn.Mg

Chem.B.Eng

Chemistry

CIS.Generl

Civil.Eng

Cgntv.ScncCmmnctn.Sc

Cmmnctn.MS

Comptr.Eng

Cmptr.GrphCmptr.Prgr

Crmnl.Js.C

Criminolgy

Dentistry

Design

Drama.Thtr

Economics

Ed.Admnstr

Elctrcl.En

Elmntry.Ed

English

Entrprnrsh

Envrnmnt.S

Fctn.Wrtng

Finance

Fine.Studi

General.Bz

Glgcl.Scnc

Grphc.Arts

Hlth.Scn.G

Hlth.Svc.A

History

Hospitalty

HR.Admin

Hmn.Dvlp.F

Indstrl.En

Intl.Bsnss

JournalismK.preK.Edu

Lngg.Art.E

Lw.Lgl.Std

Linguistcs

Major.NA

MarketingMath.Edu

Mathematcs

Mchncl.Eng

Mdcl.Assst

Mdcl.Lb.Tc

MgmtInfSys

Music

Neuroscinc

Nursing

Ntrtn.Wlln

Othr.Bsnss

Other.CIS

Othr.Cmmnc

Othr.C.S.S

Other.Edu

Othr.E.T.M

Othr.Ln.LS

Other.MajrOthr.M.A.H

Othr.Ntr.S

Othr.PrV.A

Othr.Scl.S

Pharmaclgy

Philosophy

Physicl.Ed Physics

Pltcl.Scnc

PR.Advrtsn

PreMed

Psychology

Rad.TV.Flm

Religion

Secndry.Ed

Social.Wrk

SociologySpecial.Ed

-1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0

-1.0

-0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0

Agree

Consc

Extra

Neuro

Intel

ANiqMXiqR3Diq

VEdiq

Produ

AdventureAnalytic

Organization

Leader

Altruistic

EruditeArtisticgender

12 / 21

Personality structure at multiple levels Data collection using SAPA Results Discussion Supplementary results References

Talk time = 50% talk, 50% discussion

Questions and Discussion?

13 / 21

Personality structure at multiple levels Data collection using SAPA Results Discussion Supplementary results References

The unweighted Temperament and Ability relationship betweenmajors within women

Neuro

-0.8 -0.2 0.4

-0.03 -0.19

-0.4 0.0 0.4

-0.47 0.30

-0.5 0.5

-0.4

0.0

-0.07

-0.8

-0.2

0.4

Agree0.67 0.49 -0.51 -0.77

Extra0.55 -0.53

-0.6

-0.2

0.2

-0.63

-0.4

0.0

0.4

Consc-0.71 -0.54

Intel

-0.4

0.20.6

0.62

-0.4 0.0

-0.5

0.5

-0.6 -0.2 0.2 -0.4 0.2 0.6

FullIQ

14 / 21

Personality structure at multiple levels Data collection using SAPA Results Discussion Supplementary results References

The unweighted Temperament and Ability relationship betweenmajors within men

Neuro

-0.4 0.0 0.4

-0.10 -0.04

-0.6 0.0 0.4

-0.44 0.00

-0.5 0.0 0.5

-0.6

-0.2

0.2

0.01

-0.4

0.0

0.4 Agree

0.61 0.33 -0.32 -0.63

Extra0.36 -0.51

-0.4

0.0

0.4

-0.59

-0.6

0.0

0.4 Consc

-0.49 -0.52

Intel

-0.6

0.0

0.6

0.66

-0.6 -0.2 0.2

-0.5

0.0

0.5

-0.4 0.0 0.4 -0.6 0.0 0.6

FullIQ

15 / 21

Personality structure at multiple levels Data collection using SAPA Results Discussion Supplementary results References

The TAI structure between majors within women

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

-3-2

-10

12

3

Personality structure of women majors

Em

otio

nal S

tabi

lity

and

Con

trol

-1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0

-1.0

-0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0

Neuro

Agree

Extra

Consc

Intel

ANiqMXiqR3Diq

VEdiq

Organization

Adventure

Analytic

Leader

Produ

Erudite

Artistic

Altruistic

16 / 21

Personality structure at multiple levels Data collection using SAPA Results Discussion Supplementary results References

The TAI structure between majors within men

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

-3-2

-10

12

3

Personality structure of male majors

Em

otio

nal S

tabi

lity

and

Con

trol

-1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0

-1.0

-0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0

Neuro

Agree

Extra

Consc

Intel

ANiqMXiqR3DiqVEdiq

Organization

AdventureAnalytic

LeaderProdu

Erudite

Artistic

Altruistic

17 / 21

Personality structure at multiple levels Data collection using SAPA Results Discussion Supplementary results References

Biplot of the TAI structure between majors within women

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

-3-2

-10

12

3

Personality structure of women majors

Em

otio

nal S

tabi

lity

and

Con

trol

Accounting

Aerspc.Eng

Anml.Scncs

Anthroplgy

Art.Histry

Arts.Edu

Art.Theory

Biology

Biomed.Eng

Bz.Admn.Mg

Chem.B.Eng

ChemistryCIS.Generl Civil.Eng

Cgntv.Scnc

Cmmnctn.Sc

Cmmnctn.MS

Comptr.Eng

Cmptr.Grph

Cmptr.Prgr

Crmnl.Js.C

Criminolgy

Dentistry

Design

Drama.Thtr

Economics

Ed.Admnstr

Elctrcl.En

Elmntry.EdEnglishEntrprnrsh

Envrnmnt.S

Fctn.Wrtng

Finance

Fine.Studi

General.Bz

Glgcl.Scnc

Grphc.Arts

Hlth.Scn.G

Hlth.Svc.A

History Hospitalty

HR.Admin

Hmn.Dvlp.F

Indstrl.En

Intl.BsnssJournalism

K.preK.Edu

Lngg.Art.E

Lw.Lgl.Std

Linguistcs

Major.NA

Marketing

Math.Edu

Mathematcs

Mchncl.Eng

Mdcl.Assst

Mdcl.Lb.Tc

MgmtInfSys

Music

Neuroscinc

Nursing

Ntrtn.Wlln

Othr.Bsnss

Other.CIS

Othr.Cmmnc

Othr.C.S.S

Other.Edu

Othr.E.T.M

Othr.Ln.LS

Other.MajrOthr.M.A.H

Othr.Ntr.S

Othr.PrV.A

Othr.Scl.S

Pharmaclgy

Philosophy

Physicl.Ed

Physics

Pltcl.Scnc

PR.Advrtsn

PreMed

Psychology

Rad.TV.Flm

Religion

Secndry.Ed

Social.Wrk

Sociology

Special.Ed

-1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0

-1.0

-0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0

Neuro

Agree

Extra

Consc

Intel

ANiqMXiqR3Diq

VEdiq

Organization

Adventure

Analytic

Leader

Produ

Erudite

Artistic

Altruistic

18 / 21

Personality structure at multiple levels Data collection using SAPA Results Discussion Supplementary results References

Biplot of the TAI structure between majors within men

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

-3-2

-10

12

3

Personality structure of male majors

Em

otio

nal S

tabi

lity

and

Con

trol

AccountingAerspc.Eng

Anml.Scncs

Anthroplgy

Art.Histry

Arts.Edu

Art.Theory

BiologyBiomed.Eng

Bz.Admn.Mg

Chem.B.Eng

Chemistry

CIS.GenerlCivil.Eng

Cgntv.Scnc

Cmmnctn.Sc

Cmmnctn.MS

Comptr.Eng

Cmptr.Grph

Cmptr.Prgr

Crmnl.Js.C

Criminolgy

Dentistry

Design

Drama.Thtr

Economics

Ed.Admnstr

Elctrcl.En

Elmntry.Ed

English

Entrprnrsh

Envrnmnt.S

Fctn.Wrtng

Finance

Fine.Studi

General.Bz

Glgcl.Scnc

Grphc.Arts

Hlth.Scn.G

Hlth.Svc.A

History

Hospitalty

HR.AdminHmn.Dvlp.F

Indstrl.En

Intl.Bsnss

Journalism

Lngg.Art.E

Lw.Lgl.StdLinguistcs

Major.NAMarketing

Math.Edu

Mathematcs

Mchncl.Eng

Mdcl.Assst

Mdcl.Lb.Tc

MgmtInfSys

MusicNeuroscinc

Nursing

Ntrtn.WllnOthr.Bsnss

Other.CIS

Othr.Cmmnc

Othr.C.S.S

Other.Edu

Othr.E.T.M

Othr.Ln.LS

Other.Majr

Othr.M.A.H

Othr.Ntr.S

Othr.PrV.AOthr.Scl.S

Pharmaclgy

Philosophy

Physicl.Ed

Physics

Pltcl.Scnc

PR.Advrtsn

PreMed

Psychology

Rad.TV.Flm

Religion

Secndry.Ed

Social.Wrk

Sociology

Special.Ed

-1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0

-1.0

-0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0

Neuro

Agree

Extra

Consc

Intel

ANiqMXiqR3DiqVEdiq

Organization

AdventureAnalytic

LeaderProdu

Erudite

Artistic

Altruistic

19 / 21

Personality structure at multiple levels Data collection using SAPA Results Discussion Supplementary results References

Heat map of the the TAI structure between majors within men

Male -- Between group correlations

Altru.bg

Artis.bg

Erudi.bg

Produ.bg

Leade.bg

Analy.bg

Adven.bg

Organ.bg

VEdiq.bg

R3Diq.bg

MXiq.bg

ANiq.bg

Intel.bg

Consc.bg

Extra.bg

Agree.bg

Neuro.bgNeuro.bg

Agree.bg

Extra.bg

Consc.bg

Intel.bg

ANiq.bg

MXiq.bg

R3Diq.bg

VEdiq.bg

Organ.bg

Adven.bg

Analy.bg

Leade.bg

Produ.bg

Erudi.bg

Artis.bg

Altru.bg -1

-0.8

-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

20 / 21

Personality structure at multiple levels Data collection using SAPA Results Discussion Supplementary results References

Heat map of the the TAI structure between majors within women

Female -- Between group correlations

Altru.bg

Artis.bg

Erudi.bg

Produ.bg

Leade.bg

Analy.bg

Adven.bg

Organ.bg

VEdiq.bg

R3Diq.bg

MXiq.bg

ANiq.bg

Intel.bg

Consc.bg

Extra.bg

Agree.bg

Neuro.bgNeuro.bg

Agree.bg

Extra.bg

Consc.bg

Intel.bg

ANiq.bg

MXiq.bg

R3Diq.bg

VEdiq.bg

Organ.bg

Adven.bg

Analy.bg

Leade.bg

Produ.bg

Erudi.bg

Artis.bg

Altru.bg -1

-0.8

-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

21 / 21

Personality structure at multiple levels Data collection using SAPA Results Discussion Supplementary results References

Molenaar, P. C. (2004). A manifesto on psychology as idiographicscience: Bringing the person back into scientific psychology, thistime forever. Measurement, 2(4), 201–218.

Pedhazur, E. (1997). Multiple regression in behavioral research:explanation and prediction. Harcourt Brace College Publishers.

Revelle, W., Wilt, J., & Rosenthal, A. (2010). Personality andcognition: The personality-cognition link. In A. Gruszka,G. Matthews, & B. Szymura (Eds.), Handbook of IndividualDifferences in Cognition: Attention, Memory and ExecutiveControl chapter 2, (pp. 27–49). Springer.

Robinson, W. S. (1950). Ecological correlations and the behaviorof individuals. American Sociological Review, 15(3), 351–357.

Simpson, E. H. (1951). The interpretation of interaction incontingency tables. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society.Series B (Methodological), 13(2), 238–241.

Yule, G. U. (1903). Notes on the theory of association of attributesin statistics. Biometrika, 2(2), 121–134.

21 / 21