The relationship between early personality and midlife psychological well-being: evidence from a UK birth cohort study
Individual differences in personality influence the occurrence, reporting and outcome of mental health problems across the life course, but little is known about the effects on adult psychological well-being. The aim of this study was to examine long range associations between Eysenck’s personality dimensions and psychological well-being in midlife.
The study sample comprised 1,134 women from the 1946 British birth cohort. Extraversion and neuroticism were assessed using the Maudsley Personality Inventory in adolescence (age 16 years) and early adulthood (age 26). Psychological well-being was assessed at age 52 with a 42-item version of Ryff’s Psychological Well-being Scale. Analyses were undertaken within a structural equation modelling framework that allowed for an ordinal treatment of well-being and personality items, and latent variable modelling of longitudinal data on emotional adjustment. The contribution of mental health problems in linking personality variations to later well-being was assessed using a summary measure of mental health (emotional adjustment) created from multiple time-point assessments.
Women who were more socially outgoing (extravert) reported higher well-being on all dimensions. Neuroticism was associated with lower well-being on all dimensions. The effect of early neuroticism on midlife well-being was almost entirely mediated through emotional adjustment defined in terms of continuities in psychological/ psychiatric distress. The effect of extraversion was not mediated by emotional adjustment, nor attenuated after adjustment for neuroticism.
Individual differences in extraversion and neuroticism in early adult life influence levels of well-being reported in midlife.
Key wordspersonality psychological well-being emotional adjustment mental health birth cohort structural equation modeling
- 1.Abbott RA, Huppert FA, Kuh D (2006) Psychological well-being in mid adult life: findings from a UK birth cohort. Paper presented at the 3rd European Conference on positive psychology. University of Minho, Braga, Portugal, 3rd July, 2006Google Scholar
- 2.Abbott RA, Ploubidis GB, Huppert FA, Kuh DJ, Wadsworth ME, Croudace TJ (2006) Psychometric evaluation and predictive validity of Ryff’s psychological well-being items in a UK birth cohort sample of women. Health Qual Life Outcomes 4:76Google Scholar
- 3.Argyle M (1999) Causes and correlates of happiness. In: Kahneman D, Diener E, Schwarz N (eds) Well-being: the foundations of hedonic psychology. Russell Sage Foundation, New York, pp 365–367Google Scholar
- 8.Costa PT, McCrae RR (1992) Revised NEO personality inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO five-factor inventory (NEO-FFI). Professional Manual Psychological Assessment Resources, OdessaGoogle Scholar
- 11.Diener E, Larsen RJ (1993) The experience of emotional well-being. In: Lewis M, Haviland JM (eds) Handbook of emotions. Guildford, New York, pp 405–415Google Scholar
- 12.Diener E, Lucas RE (1999) Personality and subjective well-being. In: Kahneman D, Diener E, Schwarz N (eds) Well-being: the foundations of hedonic psychology. Sage Found, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- 13.Diener E, Suh EM, Lucas RE, Smith H (1999) Three decades of progress. Psychol Bull 125:276–302Google Scholar
- 19.Helliwell J, Putnam RD (2005) The social context of well-being. In: Huppert FA, Keverne B, Bayliss N (eds) The science of well-being. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
- 20.Huppert FA, Keverne B, Bayliss N (eds) (2005) The science of well-being. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
- 25.McCrae RR, Costa PT (2003) Personality in adulthood: a five-factor theory perspective. The Guildford Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- 26.McDonald RP (1999) Test theory: a unified treatment. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, ManwahGoogle Scholar
- 28.Muthén L, Muthén B (1998–2004) Mplus user guide. Muthén & Muthén, Los AngelesGoogle Scholar
- 29.Myers DG (2000) The funds, friends, and faith of happy people. Am Psychol 55(1):63–65Google Scholar
- 31.Ormel J, Rosmalen J, Farmer A (2004) Neuroticism: a non-informative marker of vulnerability to psychopathology. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 39Google Scholar
- 38.Skrondal A, Rabe-Hesketh S (2004) Generalized latent variable modeling: multilevel, longitudinal and structural equation models. Chapman & Hall/CRC, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
- 39.Springer KW, Hauser RM (2006) An assessment of the construct validity of Ryff’s scales of psychological well-being: method, mode and measurement effects. Soc Sci Res 35:1079–1101Google Scholar
- 41.Vitterso J (2001) Personality traits and subjective well-being: emotional stability, not extraversion, is probably the important predictor. Pers Individ Dif 31(6):903–914Google Scholar
- 43.Wadsworth ME (1991) The imprint of time: childhood, history, and adult life. Clarendon Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
- 45.Wadsworth ME, Kuh DJ, Richards M, Hardy RJ (2006) Cohort profile: the 1946 national birth cohort (MRC national survey of health and development) Int J Epidemiol 31:49–54Google Scholar
- 46.WHO (2001) World Health Organisation: mental health: strengthening mental health promotion. In: WHO Fact Sheet 220Google Scholar
- 47.Wing JK, Cooper JE, Sartorius N (1974) The measurement and classification of psychiatric symptoms. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar