Running head: NEUROTICISM, SELF-DISCIPLINE AND HAPPINESS

Neuroticism and Self-Discipline as Predictors of Happiness: a Mediation Model 201132 9 May 2011 Boston University Psychology Department

NEUROTICISM, SELF-DISCIPLINE AND HAPPINESS Abstract Previous research has revealed negative correlations between neuroticism and both self-discipline and happiness, and a positive correlation between self-discipline and happiness. The present research sought to replicate these findings and further explore the relationships between

neuroticism, self-discipline and happiness. Of particular interest was the conscientiousness facet of self-discipline, and how this variable might affect happiness in neurotic individuals. One hundred and seventy-two participants completed an Internet survey including measures of neuroticism, selfdiscipline and happiness. Negative correlations were observed between neuroticism and both selfdiscipline and happiness, and a positive correlation was obtained between self-discipline and happiness, as prior research has indicated. Self-discipline was found to have a mediating effect on the inverse relationship between neuroticism and happiness; neurotic individuals who are more self-disciplined are happier. This finding has implications for increasing happiness in neurotic individuals through learned, controllable behaviors and cognitions related to self-discipline. Of interest may be training in time management and study skills, or therapy designed to reduce antecedents of procrastination such as task aversion and fear of failure. Future research should consider a longitudinal approach to explore how changing environmental task demands may affect the relationships between neuroticism, self-discipline and happiness.

NEUROTICISM, SELF-DISCIPLINE AND HAPPINESS Neuroticism and Self-Discipline as Predictors of Happiness: a Mediation Model Previous studies have revealed negative correlations between neuroticism and both selfdiscipline and happiness, and a positive correlation between self-discipline and happiness. The present research further explored these relationships in an attempt to understand how these three constructs may be interrelated. For instance, although neuroticism and self-discipline tend to be

negatively correlated, it is possible for an individual to possess both characteristics. In such a case, does self-discipline serve to protect the neurotic individual from unhappiness? Understanding the answer to this question may have implications for increasing happiness in neurotic individuals through learned, controllable behaviors and cognitions related to self-discipline. Of interest may be training in time management and study skills, or therapy designed to reduce antecedents of procrastination such as task aversion and fear of failure. Neuroticism, a Big Five personality factor, refers to an individuals degree of emotional instability. Neurotic individuals are psychologically troubled, have unrealistic ideas, extreme cravings or impulses, and poor coping responses. Other characteristics of neuroticism include worrying, nervousness, emotionality, and feelings of inadequacy (Costa & McCrae, 1985). Neuroticism has been negatively associated with self-discipline (Pearman & Storandt, 2005). Self-discipline, a facet of the Big Five factor of conscientiousness, is described as the ability to begin tasks and carry them through to completion despite boredom and other distractions (Costa & McCrae, 1998, p. 127). Self-discipline is most generally referred to in a work-oriented context, and is related to productivity. Those who lack self-discipline are sometimes described as self-defeating and have a tendency to procrastinate (Costa & McCrae, 1998). Johnson and Bloom (1995) conducted a correlational study to examine the relationships

NEUROTICISM, SELF-DISCIPLINE AND HAPPINESS between procrastination and various personality constructs. Two hundred undergraduate psychology students with a mean age of 19.28 years completed self-report measures of procrastination and the Big Five personality factors with subscales for different facets. Selfdiscipline was negatively correlated with procrastination, and was the strongest predictor of procrastination for this sample. There was a significant positive association between neuroticism and procrastination. The latter finding is in line with the inverse relationship between neuroticism and self-discipline found by Pearman and Storandt (2005) because of the strong negative correlation between self-discipline and procrastination. Watson (2001) further explored the correlations between procrastination and the Big Five factors of personality. In Watsons study, 349 university students with a mean age of 21.98 years

completed self-report measures of personality factors and procrastination. As previous research by Johnson and Bloom (1995) indicated, self-discipline was found to have a strong negative correlation with procrastination. However, Watson found a stronger positive correlation between neuroticism and procrastination than did the Johnson and Bloom study. This disparity suggests a need for additional research to further explore the relationship between neuroticism and procrastination. The present study looks at self-discipline rather than procrastination, but the strong negative association between the two constructs indicates that the findings may have implications for procrastination as well. Happiness, another construct that has been studied in relation to neuroticism and selfdiscipline, encompasses overall well-being, subjective quality of life, and positive psychological functioning (Ryff, 1989, p. 1077). According to Ryff, happiness is related to self-acceptance, mastery of ones environment, affect stability, positive relations with others, autonomy, and having a purpose in life. Research has associated happiness with high conscientiousness, the personality

NEUROTICISM, SELF-DISCIPLINE AND HAPPINESS factor that consists of dutifulness, competence, achievement striving, order and self-discipline (Costa & McCrae, 1998). The relationships between happiness and the Big Five personality factors were demonstrated in a correlational study by Hayes (2003). In Hayes study, 129 adults living in

England, with a mean age of 37.77, completed three different self-report measures of happiness, as well as a self-report measure of personality factors. Across the three happiness measures, increased happiness was associated with decreased neuroticism and increased conscientiousness. Hayes acknowledged the negative correlation between conscientiousness and neuroticism, and the possibility that there may be a unique association between happiness and conscientiousness, in addition to the correlations found among the other personality factors. The study did not include a facet-level analysis of the Big Five factors of personality, which would have revealed more specific correlates of happiness (e.g., self-discipline). A correlational study by Bienvenu et al. (2004) added to previous research on the Big Five factors by conducting a more detailed facet-level analysis. The study examined how anxiety and depression is related to different personality constructs. A population-based sample of 731 adults with a mean age of 45 completed a self-report measure of personality traits, and psychiatrists diagnosed those individuals in the sample with anxiety and depressive disorders. On the factor level, all of the chronic anxiety and depressive disorders identified in the study were associated with high neuroticism. The conscientiousness facet that was most often low when associated with the disorders of interest was self-discipline. Since happiness and depression are divergent constructs, these results complement earlier findings indicating a negative association between happiness and neuroticism, and a positive association between happiness and self-discipline. The present study sought to replicate previous findings indicating negative associations

NEUROTICISM, SELF-DISCIPLINE AND HAPPINESS between neuroticism and both self-discipline and happiness, as well as a positive association between self-discipline and happiness. Of particular interest was the correlation between neuroticism and self-discipline, as the literature reviewed did not examine this relationship in depth. Recent research has highlighted the usefulness of analyzing personality constructs in terms

of lower-order facets, which are more specific than the Big Five factors of personality. To build on previous findings, the present study looked at the conscientiousness facet of self-discipline to see how this variable affects happiness in neurotic individuals. Are neurotics who are self-disciplined happier than those who are not? Methods Participants 172 participants were recruited to complete this study. The sample consisted of 102 females (59%) and 70 males (41%) ranging in age from 18 to 61 (M = 25.1, SD = 10). Table 1 summarizes the demographic characteristics of the sample. As can be seen, the average respondent was Caucasian and self-reported as middle or upper middle class. The data set was generated by college students completing a psychology research methods course at a large private urban university in the Northeastern United States for class research projects. Students were required to recruit a minimum of five volunteers, at least two of whom had to be male, to complete a set of self-report measures assessing personality constructs and interpersonal attitudes and behaviors via an online survey presented through SurveyMonkeyTM. Participants were provided with a digital informed consent form prior to starting the survey. They were debriefed at the end of the survey with a page describing the types of studies being conducted, and whom to contact for results and other relevant information. American Psychological Association ethical guidelines were followed throughout this process.

NEUROTICISM, SELF-DISCIPLINE AND HAPPINESS Measures For the purposes of the present study, data from three of the measures included in the

Internet survey was analyzedspecificallyMini-IPIP, IPIP Self-Discipline Subscale and Oxford Happiness Questionnaire Short-Form. The Mini-IPIP (Donnellan et al., 2006) is a 20-item measure designed to assess The Big Five factors of personality: extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, neuroticism, and openness. For this study, only the four neuroticism items were relevant. Participants responded to the five-point Likert scale by selecting from choices ranging from very inaccurate to very accurate. Items are either positively or negatively associated with the personality factor in question; responses to items with negative associations are reverse coded. Scores for the present sample ranged from 3 to 18, with higher scores indicating higher levels of neuroticism. Donnellan et al. (2006) have demonstrated that the neuroticism subscale of the MiniIPIP is internally consistent, with alphas of at least .60 across five different studies conducted in the same year. Test-retest reliability was established over both a few weeks (r = .80) and several months (r = .82). The Mini-IPIP has shown convergent and criterion-related validity comparable to other Big Five measures. Cronbachs alpha for the Mini-IPIP neuroticism measure for the present sample was .738 (.753 for females and .702 for males). The International Personality Item Pool (IPIP; Goldberg et al., 2006) contains over 2000 items to assess various aspects of personality. For the present study, only the self-discipline subscale was used. Due to an error, only nine of the ten self-discipline items were included in the online survey. Participants responded to the five-point Likert scale by selecting from choices ranging from very inaccurate to very accurate. Items are either positively or negatively keyed to self-discipline; responses to those with negative associations are reverse coded. Scores for the present sample range from 8 to 40, with higher scores indicating higher levels of self-discipline.

NEUROTICISM, SELF-DISCIPLINE AND HAPPINESS The IPIP scales are derived from external parent scales with demonstrated reliability and validity. The IPIP scales correlate highly with their parent scales, and the alpha coefficients of the IPIP scales are comparable to those of the original scales. Exact values of the alpha coefficients for individual subscales are not currently available on the IPIP website, nor are there any published norms (Goldberg et al., 2006). Cronbachs alpha for the IPIP self-discipline measure for the present sample was .877 (.875 for females and .880 for males). The Oxford Happiness Questionnaire Short-Form (OHQ-SF; Cruise & Lewis, 2006) is an eight-item measure designed to assess personal happiness. Participants responded to the six-point Likert scale by selecting from choices ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree.

Reverse coding is used for three items, and scores range from 8 to 48, with higher scores indicating more happiness. Cruise and Lewis (2006) demonstrated that the OHQ-SF has short-term test-retest reliability over two weeks (r = .69) and has acceptable internal consistency reliability (Time 1: = .62; Time 2: = .58). Cronbachs alpha for the OHQ-SF for the present sample was .719 (.739 for females and .698 for males). Results Descriptive statistics for measures of neuroticism, self-discipline and happiness are shown in Table 2. An independent samples t-test was conducted between males and females for all three variables to assess differences in means. Females scored significantly higher than males in neuroticism (Mf = 12.0, SDf = 3.3, Mm = 11.0, SDm = 3.5, t = 2.021, p = .045, Cohens d = .310, mean difference = 1.06). No significant differences were observed between males and females for self-discipline or happiness. Pearson bivariate correlations were computed between neuroticism, self-discipline and happiness. Significant negative correlations were observed between neuroticism and self-discipline

NEUROTICISM, SELF-DISCIPLINE AND HAPPINESS (r = -.296, p < .001, r2 = .088) and neuroticism and happiness (r = -.567, p < .001, r2 = .321). A significant positive correlation was obtained between self-discipline and happiness (r = .306, p < . 001, r2 = .094). A Fisher r-to-z transformation revealed no significant differences between the correlation coefficients for males and females. Happiness was regressed onto neuroticism and self-discipline using a hierarchical linear

regression model to determine if self-discipline had a mediating effect on the relationship between neuroticism and happiness. The combination of neuroticism and self-discipline significantly predicted happiness better than neuroticism or self-discipline alone, indicating a significant mediation effect (R = .585, R2 = .343, F2,169 = 44.047, p < .001). According to the model, if neuroticism is held constant, a one-unit increase in self-discipline predicts a .128 increase in happiness (mpneuros = -.921, t = -7.995, p < .001; self_discipline = .128, t = 2.326, p = .021). Discussion The negative correlations observed between neuroticism and both self-discipline and happiness are consistent with previous findings, as is the positive correlation found between selfdiscipline and happiness. A post-hoc Fisher r-to-z transformation revealed a marginally significant difference between the correlation coefficients for the present sample and the Pearman and Storandt (2005) sample for the relationship between neuroticism and self-discipline. The correlation found in the present study was weaker than the relationship reported by Pearman and Storandt (2005), which may be due to the much higher mean age of their elderly sample (73.2 years). The mediating effect of self-discipline on the relationship between neuroticism and happiness observed in the present study suggests that self-discipline serves to protect neurotic individuals from unhappiness. In other words, neurotic individuals who are also self-disciplined

NEUROTICISM, SELF-DISCIPLINE AND HAPPINESS are happier than those who are not. This mediating effect has implications for methods of

10

increasing happiness in neurotic individuals through behavioral and cognitive interventions in the realm of self-discipline. A behavioral approach may involve teaching self-discipline through time management and study skills. Treatment concerning procrastination may be useful as well, since neuroticism is associated with increased procrastination, and procrastination is negatively associated with self-discipline. Methodical efforts to increase organization and efficiency may include active external structuring via making prioritized to-do lists or following a daily routine (Johnson & Bloom, 1995, p.132). Cognitive interventions may focus on reducing antecedents of procrastination such as task aversion, fear of failure, risk taking, lack of assertion, difficulty making decisions, and lack of independence (Watson, 2001). Rothblum (1990) has suggested using behavioral techniques similar to those used in the treatment of phobias in order to reduce academic procrastination. This approach seems particularly applicable given the educational circumstances of the majority of the present sample. A potential limitation of the present study is that approximately half of the participants were college students, as is often the result when recruiting a convenience sample for academic purposes. The unique environmental and situational factors that college students experience (e.g., frequent exams and pressure to get good grades) may have an impact on the inverse relationship between self-discipline and neuroticism. A student low in self-discipline and other conscientiousness facets may experience increased anxiety and neuroticism when presented with academic tasks, as they often lack the skills necessary for efficient and successful performance. Future research should consider a longitudinal approach to explore how changing environmental task demands may affect the relationships between neuroticism, self-discipline and happiness (Johnson & Bloom, 1995).

NEUROTICISM, SELF-DISCIPLINE AND HAPPINESS Another potential limitation of the present study is the fact that one of the ten IPIP selfdiscipline items was omitted from the online survey due to human error. Although the nine IPIP

11

self-discipline items included in the survey still indicated excellent internal consistency reliability, a replication of this study using all ten of the IPIP self-discipline subscale items would be beneficial to assess the validity of the present findings. The current study sought to replicate previous findings indicating negative associations between neuroticism and both self-discipline and happiness, as well as a positive association between self-discipline and happiness. Of particular interest was the conscientiousness facet of self-discipline, and how this variable might affect happiness in neurotic individuals. Negative correlations were observed between neuroticism and both self-discipline and happiness, and a positive correlation was obtained between self-discipline and happiness, as prior research has indicated. Self-discipline was found to have a mediating effect on the inverse relationship between neuroticism and happiness; neurotic individuals who are more self-disciplined are happier. This finding has implications for increasing happiness in neurotic individuals through learned, controllable behaviors and cognitions related to self-discipline. Of interest may be training in time management and study skills, or therapy designed to reduce antecedents of procrastination such as task aversion and fear of failure. These types of interventions have the potential to decrease stress and improve life-satisfaction in individuals with uncontrollable neurotic tendencies. Future research should consider a longitudinal approach to explore how changing environmental task demands may affect the relationships between neuroticism, self-discipline and happiness.

NEUROTICISM, SELF-DISCIPLINE AND HAPPINESS Table 1 Frequencies and Percentages of Demographic Characteristics of the Sample by Gender Demographic Characteristics Social Class Lower Working Middle Upper Middle/Upper Ethnic Background Caucasian Asian or Asian-American Latino/Hispanic Other 64 14 10 14 62.7 13.7 9.8 13.7 44 8 6 12 62.9 11.4 8.6 17.1 108 22 16 26 62.8 12.8 9.3 15.1 2 12 40 48 2 11.8 39.2 47.1 3 12 26 29 4.3 17.1 37.1 41.4 5 24 66 77 2.9 14 38.4 44.7 Females N % Males N % Total N %

12

______________________________________________________________________________

NEUROTICISM, SELF-DISCIPLINE AND HAPPINESS Table 2 Descriptive Statistics for Neuroticism, Self-Discipline and Happiness by Gender _____________________________________________________________________________ Females _____________ Males _____________ Total _____________

13

Variable M SD M SD M SD ______________________________________________________________________________ Neuroticism Self-discipline Happiness 12.0 25.0 34.5 3.3 6.1 6.1 11.0 24.0 35.6 3.5 6.4 5.9 11.6 24.6 34.9 3.4 6.2 6.0

______________________________________________________________________________

NEUROTICISM, SELF-DISCIPLINE AND HAPPINESS References Bienvenu, O. J., Samuels, J. F., Costa, P. T., Reti, I. M., Eaton, W. W., Nestadt, G. (2004). Anxiety and depressive disorders and the five-factor model of personality: a higher- and lower-order personality trait investigation in a community sample. Depression and Anxiety, 20, 92-97. Costa, P. T., Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1985). The NEO Personality Inventory manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources. Costa, P. T., Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1998). Six approaches to the explication of facet-level traits: examples from conscientiousness. European Journal of Personality, 12, 117-134. Cruise, S. M., & Lewis, C. A. (2006). Internal consistency, reliability, and temporal stability of the Oxford Happiness Questionnaire Short-Form: test-retest data over two weeks. Social Behavior and Personality, 34(2), 123-126. Donnellan, M. B., Oswald, F. L., Baird, B. M., & Lucas, R. E. (2006). The Mini-IPIP scales: Tiny-yet-effective measures of the Big Five factors of personality. Psychological Assessment, 18(2), 192-203. Goldberg, L. R., Johnson, J. A., Eber, H. W., Hogan, R., Ashton, M. C., Cloninger, C. R., & Gough, H. C. (2006). The International Personality Item Pool and the future of publicdomain personality measures. Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 84-96. Hayes, N., & Joseph, S. (2003). Big 5 correlates of three measures of subjective well-being. Personality and Individual Differences, 34, 723-727. Johnson, J. L., & Bloom, A. M. (1995). An analysis of the contribution of the five factors of personality to variance in academic procrastination. Personality and Individual Differences, 18(1), 127-133.

14

NEUROTICISM, SELF-DISCIPLINE AND HAPPINESS Pearman, A., & Storandt, M. (2005). Self-discipline and self-consciousness predict subjective memory in older adults. Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences, 60B(3), 153157. Rothblum, E. D. (1990). Fear of failure: The psychodynamic, need achievement, fear of success, and procrastination models. In M. Leitenberg (Ed.), Handbook of social and evaluation anxiety. New York: Plenum Press. Ryff, C. D. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(6), 10691081. Watson, D. C. (2001). Procrastination and the five-factor model: A facet level analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 30(1), 149-158.

15