Motivation and emotion/Book/2024/Life satisfaction and personality

Life satisfaction and personality:
What is the relationship between personality and life satisfaction?

Overview

Case study

Mark and John have been best friends and work colleagues for 15 years. Both men are married, have two children, see their friends and family regularly, and exercise multiple times a week. When described by others, Mark and John are both friendly and agreeable, although John is often the quieter of the two. Recently, however, Mark has never been happier with how his life is progressing, yet John feels dissatisfied and stuck in a never-ending cycle.

Welcome to the complex world of life satisfaction - where two individuals living seemingly identical lives can have vastly different levels of life satisfaction.

According to the American Psychological Association (2018), life satisfaction is the extent to which a person finds life rich, meaningful, full, or of high quality. Life satisfaction is a cognitive, global assessment of one's overall quality of life, influenced by personality, sociodemographic factors (health, family, culture, age etc.), and other characteristics such as lifestyle and leisure enjoyment (Malvaso & Kang, 2022). Due to its individualistic and subjective nature, life satisfaction is often measured through self-report questionnaires ranging in length from single-item to multiple-item measures (Jovanović & Lazić, 2020).

Life satisfaction has an immense influence on an individual's physical and psychosocial health. High life satisfaction has been linked to better outcomes regarding physical health, such as lower mortality, fewer chronic health conditions, and improved sleep, as well as psychosocial indicators, including a greater purpose in life, higher positive affect, lower depression, and reduced levels of loneliness (Kim et al. 2021). As a result, understanding the factors that influence life satisfaction, and what causes it to vary amongst individuals, is critical in improving physical and psychosocial health at a personal level, and therefore flowing onto a community level (Kim et al. 2021).

This chapter highlights and explores the relationship between life satisfaction and personality. Drawing upon psychological science and personality research, we [Use third person perspective] delve into the processing models, personality traits, and the societal and individual characteristics that vary individuals' experience of life and their satisfaction with it.

Focus questions:

What is life satisfaction?
How do the top-down and bottom-up processing models explain life satisfaction?
How does the Big Five theory of personality explain life satisfaction?
How much variation in life satisfaction can be explained by personality?
What factors mediate the relationship between personality and life satisfaction?

Life satisfaction

Life satisfaction has different definitions. In positive psychology research it is often intertwined with the concepts of happiness and well-being (see Figure 2) (Klement, 2022). A common definition of life satisfaction is "the overall appreciation of one's life as a whole". (Sameer et al. 2023, p. 3). An individual's life satisfaction tends to have minor fluctuations over time, however, research has demonstrated that generally, in the long run, even painful or traumatic experiences do not change it significantly (Okwaraji et al. 2017).

Explaining life satisfaction

To assist in explaining why life satisfaction changes and varies among individuals, researchers have investigated and discussed two prominent theories: the top-down theory and the bottom-up theory (Malvaso & Kang, 2022). The top-down theory views life satisfaction as a result of personality (Loewe et al. 2014), as an individual’s personality influences their perception of many aspects of life satisfaction, hence influencing the overall experience of life satisfaction (Erdogan et al. 2012). Top-down factors may influence life satisfaction by shaping an individual’s view of life domains, such as work, family, and leisure (Malvaso & Kang, 2022).

The bottom-up theory looks at overall life satisfaction as a function of several aspects of life satisfaction (Erdogan et al. 2012). While some people consider health to be the most essential aspect of their life, others may prioritise family, their job, or leisure. If individuals are satisfied with domains consistent with their core values, they will be more satisfied with their lives overall.

While much research has tested both theories separately, Malvaso and Kang (2022) wanted to test the individual predictive value of both models and, further, test whether an integrated model would provide a better account of variances in life satisfaction. They used data collected from the British Household Panel Study in 2005-2006 in the United Kingdom (N = 5,928). For personality, participants completed a Likert scale ranging from 1 (“disagree strongly”) to 5 (“agree strongly”), and for areas of life satisfaction a Likert scale ranging from 1 (“not satisfied at all”) to 7 (“completely satisfied”). The results demonstrated that the Big Five personality traits explained 14.8% of life satisfaction variance (Malvaso & Kang, 2022). Agreeableness, extraversion, conscientiousness and openness were positively correlated with life satisfaction, meaning as these variables increased so did life satisfaction (Malvaso & Kang, 2022). Neuroticism was negatively correlated with life satisfaction, meaning as an individual’s neuroticism score increased their life satisfaction decreased, and vice-versa (Malvaso & Kang, 2022). This study showed that personality is useful for explaining some variation in life satisfaction, however, a comprehensive understanding of this variation includes other variables such as demographics and satisfaction in other life areas (work, family, health).

The integrated model of top-down and bottom-up perspectives of life satisfaction by Malvaso and Kang was supported, with demographic, personality, and areas of life satisfaction as predictors explaining 53.0% of overall life satisfaction. Malvaso and King's study supports previous research that while both processing models can explain some of the variance in life satisfaction, neither a top-down nor bottom-up approach can adequately explain life satisfaction on their own (Malvaso & Kang, 2022). For further reading into both models, see Loewe et al. (2013) for the bottom-up perspective, and Erdogan et al. (2012) for a discussion of both perspectives.

Personality

Like many psychological concepts, personality does not have a standard definition, however, for this chapter the following definition will be adopted. An individual's personality is the enduring set of traits and styles that they exhibit, which characteristics represent dispositions and the ways in which this person differs from the "standard normal person" in their society (Bergner, 2020).

Unlike other psychological theories, the Big Five personality theory did not arise from a pre-existing theory; rather, it was developed based upon empirical findings of lexical studies. Throughout history different researchers have analysed and reduced Allport and Odbert's initial list of 4,504 adjectives describing observable and relatively permanent traits, eliminating similar words by creating clusters or factors. For a comprehensive account on how 4,504 adjectives were consolidated into five factors, see Big Five personality traits. The Big Five factors are Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Neuroticism, and Openness to experience (Figure 3).

To assist in measuring the Big Five personality traits and the six sub-facets of each trait, researchers Costa and McCrae published the Neuroticism Extraversion Openness Personality Inventory-Revised (NEO-PI-R, embed link) in 1992. The NEO-PI-R has high internal consistency for the five core traits, ranging from .86 to .92, and moderate to high internal consistency for the facet scales ranging from .56 to .81 (McCrae & Costa, 2010). Table 1 defines the Big Five traits and the six sub-facets that compose each trait.

*Table 1:* Big Five Trait Definitions and Sub-Facets
Trait	Definition	Sub-Facets
Extraversion	Extroverts have the tendency to be sociable, outgoing, warm-hearted, pleasant, and be attentive to and energised by other people and their social cues. The personality traits associated with extraversion focus on the quantity and quality of interpersonal relationships, the energy involved in engaging with these relationships, positive emotionality, and excitement seeking.	Warmth, gregariousness, assertiveness, lively temperament, excitement seeking, and cheerfulness.
Agreeableness	Individuals who are highly agreeable can be perceived by others as good team members, easy to socialise with, and focused on group harmony. The personality traits associated with high agreeableness focus on the quality of interpersonal relationships, including warmth, empathy, cooperation with others, and trust in others.	Trust in others, morality, altruism, cooperation, modesty, and sympathy.
Conscientiousness	Individuals who are highly conscientious can be characterised as loyal, dedicated, reliable, and able to effectively engage in impulse control and gratification delay behaviours.	Self-efficacy, orderliness, sense of duty, achievement striving, self-discipline, and cautiousness.
Neuroticism	Highly neurotic individuals experience emotional and behavioural difficulties, including frustration, distress, anxiety, and aggression during stressful situations. The personality traits associated with neuroticism focus primarily on how an individual does or doesn’t adjust when faced with difficulty and stress.	Anxiety, hostility, depression, self-consciousness, impulsiveness, and fear.
Openness to experience	Openness to experience involves individuals being willing to try and adapt to new approaches to thinking and behaving. This trait includes different aspects of intelligence, creativity, culture, openness to change, attempting new tasks, and novel experiences. Those who score low on this trait often confine themselves to following conventional ways of acting or approaching a situation.	Imagination, artistic interest, emotionality, adventurousness, curiosity, and values.

The next section investigates whether these five factors and sub-facets explain variances in life satisfaction and, if so, the extent.

Relationship between personality and life satisfaction

This chapter adopts a top-down perspective and consider the predictive and explanatory value of personality in life satisfaction variation. The research presented will consider studies across cultures to gain a more informed understanding of the relationship between personality and satisfaction.

Big Five traits and life satisfaction variation

In 2008, Steel and colleagues conducted a meta-analysis of 249 studies which investigated the extent to which the Big Five personality traits could explain the variance in life satisfaction. The results of the meta-analysis revealed that the Big Five traits explained 18% of total variance in life satisfaction, with neuroticism being the most related, followed by extraversion, conscientiousness, openness, and agreeableness being the least related (Steel et al. 2008). This study supports previous research which asserts that neuroticism and extraversion have the greatest influence on life satisfaction among the Big Five traits (Steel et al. 2008).

A study by Okwaraji and colleagues (2017) sampled 480 Nigerian students ranging from 10-19 years old to investigate the relationship between personality and life satisfaction. Students completed a 44-item inventory that measured their personality using the Big Five dimensions on a Likert scale in combination with the Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS). The results of this study demonstrated that all personality traits besides Neuroticism had a positive correlation with subjective well-being and life satisfaction, a finding consistent with previous research (Okwaraji et al. 2017).

A study by Joshanloo in 2022 investigated whether the Big Five personality traits could moderate the relationship between negative affect and life satisfaction. The study comprised 4,888 German participants between 18 to 70 years old. Life satisfaction was measured using a single question, being, “All things considered, how satisfied are you with your life as a whole nowadays”, with participants responding on a scale from 0 ("extremely dissatisfied") to 10 ("extremely satisfied") (Joshanloo 2022, p. 3). To measure negative affect, participants reported how often they experienced negative affective states during the previous seven days. A multi-level analysis showed that only neuroticism and openness moderated the relationship between negative affect and life satisfaction, with high levels of these traits demonstrating a stronger relationship (Joshanloo, 2022). Neuroticism and openness are associated with maladaptive emotional regulation strategies, thus individuals who score highly in these traits often experience exacerbated effects of negative hedonic experiences (Joshanloo, 2022). This study beneficially demonstrates the relationship between personality and life satisfaction by outlining the effect that certain traits have on emotion and behaviour, and how these factors can influence one's perception of their life.

A study by Røysamb et al. (2018) had Norwegian twins respond to the NEO-PI-R[explain?] and the SWLS[explain?] to identify the personality facets that contribute to variance in life satisfaction. The Big Five personality traits explained 32% of the variance in life satisfaction, primarily driven by Extraversion and Neuroticism which explained 24% of this variance (Røysamb et al. 2018). This study was instrumental as it analysed the individual facets which underlie the Big Five personality traits, demonstrating that the anxiety and depression facets of neuroticism, and positive emotions and activity facets of extraversion are uniquely important when explaining life satisfaction. The first three facets explicitly refer to affective tendencies (positive or negative), and the fourth facet (activity) gives vigour, energy, and liveliness to an individual when high (Røysamb et al. 2018). These findings suggest that an individual’s cognitive evaluation of their life and satisfaction is partly influenced by their personality and emotional tendencies described in the Big Five model.

Røysamb et al.'s (2018) findings are consistent with previous research, such as that by Baudin et al. (2011), which found that personality explained both life and sports satisfaction, with extraversion and neuroticism being the best predictors. Further, the amount of variance in life satisfaction accounted for (7%) was greater, however, still minimal, when considering the facets described in the NEO-PI-R than simply considering the five traits (Baudin et al. 2011).

Test yourself!

Limitations and other considerations

An individual’s personality is an adequate predictor for understanding some individual differences in life satisfaction, as it is able to predict between 7% and 32% of variation. However, solely considering personality negates many other crucial predictors. While investigating the direct link between personality and overall life satisfaction is important, as demonstrated above with the Røysamb study (2018) among other presented research, it is paramount to consider the interactional and indirect effects of factors such as the presence or absence of various life circumstances.

Previous research has demonstrated that different individual characteristics have moderating or mediating effects on the relationship between personality and life satisfaction (Malvaso & Kang, 2022). For example, a study by Gutiérrez et al. (2005) investigated the association between the Big Five dimensions, demographic factors (sex, age, and relationship status) and subjective well-being. The results of this study demonstrated that the demographic variables were differentially associated with different elements of subjective well-being, largely being explained by the relationship between demographic variables and personality, particularly extraversion and neuroticism (Gutiérrez et al. 2005).

Further, studies by Park et al. (2004), and Diener and Diener (2009) emphasise the impact of cultural background and cross-cultural differences in life satisfaction. Various cultures interpret life satisfaction differently, for example, people living in individualistic societies (United States, Australia, New Zealand etc.) are more focused on their personal aims, interests, and goals (Park et al. 2004). Individuals in collectivistic societies (China, Japan, India etc.) value family satisfaction and the well-being of their community more than personal factors (Park et al. 2004). Loewe et al. (2014) discovered that individuals living in individualistic cultures report higher levels of life satisfaction than those living in collectivistic cultures. This may be explained by the fact that the personal, goal-oriented perspective found in individualistic cultures can contribute to self-referred attribution of failure and success, leading to better overall life satisfaction compared to those in collectivistic cultures (Loewe et al. 2014).

There are numerous limitations that future research should address. Firstly, the majority of data collected in personality research is self-reported, which is understandable considering the difficulties of reporting someone else's personality when observing them. However, self-reported data can be biased, and may be more favourable indicators of life satisfaction in individualistic cultures, as traits related to the self are easier to report on then traits relating to others. Secondly, dispositional factors and situational elements such as critical life experiences and other environmental effects may be difficult to manipulate and measure, or may be unethical to manipulate. Both factors are relevant in determining how an individual evaluates their life satisfaction, thus they should be considered. Future research should address both of these limitations, if it is unable to then researchers, organisations and individuals should be aware of the limitations when interpreting data and making informed decisions.

Conclusion

Life satisfaction is an individual's overall appreciation of their life by undertaking a cognitive assessment of different life domains, which is influenced by their personality. When considering research, it appears the link between personality and life satisfaction is a complicated network containing direct and indirect relationships and effects. The research presented throughout this chapter demonstrates that personality, particularly extraversion and neuroticism, can assist in explaining some of the variations in overall life satisfaction, however, it is not a sufficient measure on its own. One should consider how other factors including age, sex, culture, and familial relationships influence their satisfaction as, when combined with personality, this yields a more complete overview of individual life satisfaction differences.

Review questions

Test yourself!

References

American Psychological Association. (2018, April 19). Life satisfaction. https://dictionary.apa.org/life-satisfaction

Baudin, N., Aluja, A., Rolland, J.-P., & Blanch, A. (2011). The role of personality in satisfaction with life and sport. Behavioral Psychology, 19(2), 333–345.

Bergner, R. M. (2020). What is personality? Two myths and a definition. New Ideas in Psychology, 57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.newideapsych.2019.100759

Diener, E., & Diener, M. (2009). Cross-Cultural Correlates of Life Satisfaction and Self-Esteem. In E. Diener (Ed.), Culture and Well-Being. (pp. 71-91). Springer Science + Business Media. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1007/978-90-481-2352-0_4

Erdogan, B., Bauer, T. N., Truxillo, D. M., & Mansfield, L. R. (2012). Whistle while you work: A review of the life satisfaction literature. Journal of Management, 38(4), 1038-1083. https://doi-org.ezproxy.canberra.edu.au/10.1177/0149206311429379

Gutiérrez, J. L. G., Jiménez, B. M., Hernández, E. G., & Puente, C. P. (2005). Personality and subjective well-being: Big five correlates and demographic variables. Personality and Individual Differences, 38(7), 1561–1569. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2004.09.015

Joshanloo, M. (2022). Neuroticism and openness moderate the relationship between negative affect and life satisfaction: A multi-level Bayesian analysis. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 17, 3381-3391. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-022-10069-5

Jovanović, V., & Lazić, M. (2020). Is longer always better? A comparison of the validity of single-item versus multiple-item measures of life satisfaction. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 15(3), 675–692. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-018-9680-6

Kim, E. S., Delaney, S. W., Tay, L., Chen, Y., Diener, E., & Vanderweele, T. J. (2021). Life satisfaction and subsequent physical, behavioural, and psychosocial health in older adults. The Milbank Quarterly, 99(1), 209-239. doi: 10.1111/1468-0009.12497

Klement, J. (2022). Life satisfaction and economic growth in the context of societal and ecological transformation processes [Dissertation, Schumpeter School of Business and Economics]. https://d-nb.info/1297789598/34

Loewe, N., Bagherzadeh, M., Araya-Castillo, L., Thieme, C., & Batista-Foguet, J. M. (2014). Life domain satisfactions as predictors of overall life satisfaction among workers: Evidence from Chile. Social Indicators Research, 188, 71-86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-013-0408-6

Malvaso, A., & Kang, W. (2022). The relationship between areas of life satisfaction, personality, and overall life satisfaction: An integrated account. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.894610

McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (2010). NEO Inventories professional manual for the NEO Personality Inventory-3, NEO Five-Factor Inventory-3, and NEO Personality Inventory-Revised. Lutz, FL: PAR.

Okwaraji, F. E., Nduanya, C. U., Okorie, A., & Okechukwu, H. E. (2017). Personality traits, happiness and life satisfaction, in a sample of Nigerian adolescents. The Journal of Medical Research, 3(6), 284-289. https://d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront.net/96966756/JMR_20176_09-libre.pdf

Park, N., Huebner, E. S., Laughlin, J. E., Valois, R. F., & Gilman, R. (2004). A Cross-Cultural Comparison of the Dimensions of Child and Adolescent Life Satisfaction Reports. Social Indicators Research, 66(1-2), 61–79. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:SOCI.0000007494.48207.dd

Røysamb E., Nes, R. B., Czajkowski, N. O., & Vassend, O. (2018). Genetics, personality and wellbeing. A twin study of traits, facets and life satisfaction. Scientific Reports, 8(1). doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-29881-x

Sameer, Y., Eid, Y., & Veenhoven, R. (2023). Perceived meaning of life and satisfaction with life: A research synthesis using an online finding archive. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.957235

Steel, P., Schmidt, J., & Shultz, J. (2008). Refining the relationship between personality and subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 134(1), 138-161. DOI: 10.1037/0033-2909.134.1.138

External Links

How a sense of oneness can lead to greater life satisfaction (American Psychological Association)
How to lead a happier, more fulfilling life (TED Audio Collective)
Personality and life satisfaction across adulthood (American Psychological Association)
What makes a good life? (TED Talk)