Upload
others
View
15
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
The Big Five Model, Criminality and Psychoticism
- 1 -
PREDICTING CRIMINALITY FROM PERSONALITY: BIG FIVE MODEL AND
PSYCHOTICISM AMONG INMATES IN JAMES CAMP PRISON
BY
AGAMA PATRICK EDEM
[10254306]
A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHOLOGY,
UNIVERSITY OF GHANA, LEGON IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE
REQUIREMENT FOR THE AWARD OF THE BACHELOR OF ARTS [HONS] DEGREE
DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHOLOGY
UNIVERSITY OF GHANA
LEGON
MAY 2011
The Big Five Model, Criminality and Psychoticism
- 2 -
DECLARATION AND APPROVAL
I, Agama Patrick Edem, hereby declare that except for the references to other people‟s work
which has been duly acknowledged, the work presented here was done by me as student of the
Department of Psychology, University of Ghana, Legon 2010/2011 academic year. This work
has never been submitted in whole or in part anywhere for a degree. The work is submitted with
the approval of my supervisor, Dr. Adote Anum.
AGAMA PATRICK EDEM DR. ADOTE ANUM
(STUDENT) (SUPERVISOR)
The Big Five Model, Criminality and Psychoticism
- 3 -
DEDICATION
This work is dedicated to the Almighty God who gave me strength to conduct the research. I am
grateful to my parents, Mr. and Mrs. Agama, for their support and encouragement. Finally I
dedicate this work to my supervisor, Dr. Adote Anum, who guided me thoroughly to the end of
this work.
The Big Five Model, Criminality and Psychoticism
- 4 -
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
My sincere gratitude first and foremost goes to Dr. Adote Anum, my supervisor, whose useful
advice, criticisms and commitment has seen me successful through this work.
I am also grateful to Mr. Francis Baah (Ghana Prisons Service) for the immense support and
contribution towards the success of the work.
To my parents Mr. George Agama and Mrs. Emma Afari Agama, I say, God bless you. Also to
my great research assistants (Selasie, Natasha, Sonia and Carl) and to respondents (inmates of
James Camp Prison), I say, thank you all for your time and assistants.
Above all, I am most thankful to the Almighty God for His love and providence which has kept
me going all this while.
The Big Five Model, Criminality and Psychoticism
- 5 -
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this research was to examine changes in levels of Extraversion, Neuroticism and
Agreeableness are associated with levels of Psychoticism among inmates in James Camp Prison.
Forty inmates between the ages of eighteen (18) and seventy (70) were purposively sampled to
respond to the 50-Item Set of IPIP Big-Five Personality Inventory and the short version of the
Psychoticism scale. The data collected was analyzed by correlating the variables of the
hypotheses using the Pearson Product-Moment Correlation. The results showed that there exist
a significant negative relationship between Extraversion and Psychoticism. Contrary to
predictions there was no relation between Agreeableness and Psychoticism. There was also no
relation between Neuroticism and Psychoticism. The findings implied that Neuroticism and
Agreeableness are not good predictors of Psychoticism unlike Extraversion in the Ghanaian
culture.
The Big Five Model, Criminality and Psychoticism
- 6 -
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
The trait approach to personality has the idea that, people have consistent personality
characteristics that can be measured and studied (Kalat, 2002). Personality is associated with
behavior. Therefore individual differences in behavior can be explained by differences in
personality. In that sense, an understanding of one‟s personality may help us predict criminality.
And thus, the current study sought to determine whether levels of agreeableness, neuroticism and
extraversion, which are part of the Big Five dimensions, would be related to levels of
Psychoticism.
Allport and Odbert (1936) as cited by Kalat (2002) plodded through an English dictionary and
found almost 18,000 words that might be used to describe personality. They deleted from this list
words that were merely evaluations such as „pleasant‟ or „nasty‟. They further looked for
synonyms and antonyms such as „affectionate‟, „warm‟ and „loving‟ and accepted only one of
them. As cited by Kalat, (2002), Cattell (1965) narrowed the original list to thirty five (35) traits
using factor analysis method. McCrae and Costa (1985), contemporary researchers, went further
to propose five major clusters of personality traits which became known as the Big Five
personality dimensions (Wade & Tavris, 2000). Hence the focus of this is on the Big Five
dimensions with reference to Personality, Psychoticism and criminality. The Big Five
dimensions include; Neuroticism, which is the tendency to experience unpleasant emotions
relatively easily; Extraversion, which is the tendency to seek stimulation and to enjoy the
company of other people; Agreeableness which is also the tendency to be compassionate towards
others and not be antagonistic; Conscientiousness, the tendency to show self-discipline, to be
The Big Five Model, Criminality and Psychoticism
- 7 -
dutiful, and to strive for achievement and competence; and finally, Openness to experience
which may also be the tendency to enjoy new intellectual experiences and new ideas (Kalat,
2002).
Neuroticism and extraversion are very powerful traits of the big five dimensions that influence
much of human behaviors, (Block, 1995) as reported by Kalat, (2002). Neuroticism is defined as
a predisposition to experience negative affect (McCrae, 1990) and therefore those who are high
in neuroticism experience more anxiety, depression, hostility and self-consciousness. Individual
high in this trait tend to experience emotional instability, irritability, sadness and self-pity.
Neurotic individuals are worriers, defeatist and complainers, even when they have no problems.
People low in this have the tendency to be calm, secure and self-satisfied (McCrae & Costa,
1986). The tendency to be active, assertive, energetic, outgoing, talkative, expressive and
gregarious describes people high in Extraversion. It describes a sense of exuberance and
willingness to be involved with the world around. People who are low on extraversion are
retiring, somber and reserved (McCrae & Costa, 1997).
Openness to experience means an appreciation for variety of experience. People with this are
artistic, curious, insightful, imaginative, independent and interested in variety. Another
dimension is Conscientiousness and this is the tendency to be efficient, organized, reliable, and
dependable (McCrae & Costa, 1986). This describes how likely someone is to act with self-
control, self-discipline, responsibility and have an interest in achievement. Someone low on
conscientiousness would be disorganized, impulsive or careless. For instance, chaotic and
spontaneous people are mostly on the low side of conscientiousness whereas anal-retentive,
obsessive-compulsive workaholics are on the high side of it (Wade & Tavris, 2000).
Agreeableness involves attributes such trust, altruism, kindness, affection and other prosocial
The Big Five Model, Criminality and Psychoticism
- 8 -
behaviors. People who score high on agreeableness are pleasant, cooperative and willing to
compromise. Moreover people who score low are suspicious of other‟s motive and place their
own interest first (McCrae & John, 1992).
Another aspects of the study involves Psychoticism and this is associated not only with the
liability to have a psychotic episode (or break with reality), but also with aggression. Psychotic
behavior is rooted in the characteristics of tough-mindedness, non-conformity, inconsideration,
recklessness, hostility, anger and impulsiveness. People high on Psychoticism would behavior in
a psychotic manner and such psychotic tendencies include recklessness, disregard for common
sense, and inappropriate emotional expression to name a few (Boeree, 1998 as cited by Porzio,
2004). Higher psychoticism scores were also reported amongst psychopaths and criminals
(Howarth, 1986 as reported by Porzio, 2004).
The main issue about criminality here is that, it is affected by a person‟s behavior whereas a
person‟s stable trait or personality influences his behavior (Wade & Tavris, 2000). So then could
a person‟s personality determine whether he or she would be high or low on Psychoticism hence
commit crime or not? Moreover would some aspects of the Big Five dimensions like
extraversion, agreeableness and neuroticism affect levels of Psychoticism? This study looks at
that debate, and asked whether we can predict criminality by looking at factors of an individual‟s
personality. Thus specific research question was that, would a person high on extraversion and
neuroticism of the Big five model be higher on psychoticism than the person low on extraversion
and neuroticism? In addition, would an individual high on extraversion but low on neuroticism
be high on psychoticism or vice versa? Another question that arose from this is that, would
people high on all the factors of the big five model be significantly high on psychoticism or be
low on it?
The Big Five Model, Criminality and Psychoticism
- 9 -
If McCrae and Costa (1990) think people who are high in neuroticism experience more anxiety,
depression, hostility and self-consciousness, then could it be that such individuals would commit
crime and hence high on psychoticism? Furthermore, to Wade and Tavris (2000), people low on
extraversion are shy, silent, cautious and less enthusiastic, hence it is plausible to ask whether
such people would be relatively low on Psychoticism. And these are issues this particular
research sought to find.
Aims and Objectives
1. To examine whether levels of extraversion would be associated with levels of
Psychoticism among inmates in James Camp Prison.
2. To examine whether levels of neuroticism would be associated with levels of
Psychoticism among inmates in James Camp Prison.
3. To examine whether levels of agreeableness would be associated with levels of
Psychoticism among inmates in James Camp prison.
The Big Five Model, Criminality and Psychoticism
- 10 -
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
THEORITICAL FRAMEWORK
In this section, personality theories surrounding the variables of this study, which include the five
factor model (Neuroticism, Extraversion and Agreeableness, in this case) and Psychoticism will
be examined.
Allport’s Theory
Gordon Allport (1897-1967) investigated personality traits and theorized that, individuals differ
in the trait that predominate their personality. “Traits are not creations in the mind of the
observer, nor are they verbal fictions; they are here accepted as biophysical facts, actual
psychophysical dispositions related to persistent neural systems of stress and determination” (p.
339), (Allport, 1937b) as reported by Cloninger (1996).
For Allport, traits are highly individualized, or unique. He explicitly disagreed with theories who
asserted that one motive or instinct is determinative for all people (as, for example, Freud
attributed personality to sexual motivation). Rather, people are motivated by diverse traits (for
this study the Big Five dimensions) reflecting the differences in their learning (Cloninger, 1996).
Cattell’s Theory
Another prominent trait theorist who believed in the dimensional trait approach is Raymond
Cattell. Cattell‟s (1950, p. 2) definition of personality neatly summarizes his entire theoretical
and empirical approach. To him, “Personality is that which permits prediction of what a person
will do in a given situation” (Cloninger, 1996), therefore in this study, the focus is whether the
The Big Five Model, Criminality and Psychoticism
- 11 -
Big Five dimensions, to be precise extraversion, agreeableness and neuroticism, could predict
levels of Psychoticism in criminals. Cattell pioneered multivariate research methods. And this
research strategy works with several variables at one time to predict behavior. He theorized that
in normal personalities, sixteen (16) traits account for most individual differences (Cloninger,
1996).
Robert McCrae and Paul Costa: The Five- Factor Model
The Big five personality traits include five dimensions that account for a great deal of human
personality differences (Kalat, 2002). Current research regarding the Big five (often referred to
as the Five-Factor) model of personality maintains that personality can be observed within five
broad dimensions (Goldberg, 1993), namely extraversion, neuroticism, agreeableness,
conscientiousness and openness to experience.
Contemporary personality researchers like McCrae and Costa have expressed dissatisfaction with
Eysenck and Cattell theories, suggesting that Eysenck‟s theory (which involves, Extraversion,
Neuroticism and Psychoticism) is too simple and has too few factors. And also, Cattell‟s theory
is too complicated and difficult to replicate (Schultz & Schultz, 1994). Thus in the 1980s, Robert
McCrae and Paul Costa embarked on a program that identified the five factor model (McCrae &
Costa, 1985, 1987 as cited in Schultz & Schultz, 1994).
As reported by Schultz and Schultz (1994), McCrae and Costa believe that, Neuroticism and
Extraversion are more strongly influenced by hereditary than environment. Moreover, the five
factors have been detected both in children and in adults. Longitudinal research in which the
same subjects were tested over six years, demonstrated a high level of stability in all five
dimensions (Costa & McCrae, 1988 as cited in Schultz & Schultz, 1994). Extraversion was
The Big Five Model, Criminality and Psychoticism
- 12 -
found to be positively related to emotional wellbeing and neuroticism negatively related to
emotional wellbeing. Thus the research concluded that, persons high on extraversion and low on
neuroticism were genetically predisposed to emotional stability (Schultz & Schultz, 1994). And
this gives credence to this study.
Meanwhile not all contemporary personality researchers accept McCrae and Costa‟s five factors.
Some agree that there may be five factors but they disagree on what those traits are. Others argue
that no group of five dimensions could adequately account for the complexity of human
personality. Nevertheless, McCrae and Costa have provided an intriguing and well supported
approach to describing the composition of personality and the relative importance of heredity
and environment in determining traits (Schultz & Schultz, 1994).
Psychoticism
Hans J. Eysenck developed his model of personality based mostly on a psychophysiological
basis. Eysenck developed his model of personality and temperament with three dimensions:
Psychoticism, Extraversion, and Neuroticism. This became known as the "PEN" model of
personality. Originally Eysenck only theorized about neuroticism and extraversion, but later he
realized that Psychoticism was also a contributing factor of personality. He then added
Psychoticism into his theory as the third factor of his model giving birth to his BIG-Three model
of personality (Porzio, 2004). It was also found that the Psychoticism scale correlates
significantly with other hostility and tough-mindedness scales and traits such as non-acceptance
of cultural norms, immaturity, and anti-authoritative attitudes. Higher Psychoticism scores were
also reported amongst psychopaths and criminals (Howarth, 1986 as cited by Porzio, 2004). This
reinforces the idea Eysenck described as his Psychoticism scale.
The Big Five Model, Criminality and Psychoticism
- 13 -
REVIEW OF RELATED STUDIES
Decades ago, classic researches have been done to examine the authenticity of different models
to predict behavior but at present, one of the most empirical models of personality that best
predicts behavior and hence Psychoticism is the Big five dimensions of personality (Kachik,
2003).
The Five Factor Model and Psychotic Behavior
One of the first studies that associated structural models of personality and antisocial behavior
was conducted by Miller and Lynam in 2006. The authors of this research argued that the
concept of personality has much to offer the field of criminology. To this end, they used meta-
analytic techniques to examine the relations between antisocial behavior relatively broadly and
four structural model of personality: Eysenck‟ PEN model, Tellengen‟s three factor model, Costa
and McCrae‟s five-factor model (FFM) and Cloninger‟s seven factor temperament and character
model. A comprehensive review of the literature yielded 59 studies that provided relevant
information. Eight of the dimensions bore moderate relation to antisocial behavior, the
dimensions could all be understood as measures of either Agreeableness or Conscientiousness
from the five-factor model. The implications of these finding is that there is a relation between
the dimensions and antisocial behavior (Miller & Lynam, 2006). This means that, levels of
agreeableness, conscientiousness, neuroticism, extraversion and openness to experience affect
antisocial behavior or Psychoticism. One flaw about this study is that, it did not find out the
particular antisocial behavior the levels of the dimension affect. Meanwhile, this study examines
how levels of the five-factor dimensions affect Psychoticism.
The Big Five Model, Criminality and Psychoticism
- 14 -
Van Dam, Janssens and De Bruyn (2005), researched on PEN (Psychoticism, Extraversion and
Neuroticism), juvenile delinquency and criminality recidivism. The aim of this study was to
examine which of the two personality models, PEN or Big Five, differentiates best between
Dutch juvenile offenders and college students, between Dutch self-reported recidivists and non-
recidivists, and between officially recorded recidivists and non-recidivists. Students and
offenders filled out the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire Revised and the Short Big Five
Questionnaire. Occurrence and severity of recidivism were measured by a self-report
questionnaire and official police records. Students were higher than offenders on PEN‟s
Extraversion and the Big Five dimensions Agreeableness and Openness. PEN‟s Extraversion
appeared to be higher in officially recorded recidivists compared to non-recidivists. PEN‟s
Psychoticism, Big Five‟s Neuroticism and Agreeableness differentiated self-reported recidivists
from non-recidivists. Only PEN‟s Psychoticism predicted severity of self-reported recidivism
(Van Dam et al., 2005). One relevance of their study is that, it tests the ability of the big five
dimensions to influence juvenile delinquency and in this case Psychoticism and this is what
forms the basis of this study. Meanwhile in the above study, the researchers did not specify the
kind of crime or juvenile delinquency that was understudied. In addition, if different levels of the
dimensions of the Big Five model were examined against various levels of Psychoticism, it
would have clarified which model best explains or predicts juvenile delinquency and criminal
recidivism.
Neuroticism and Psychoticism
The relationship between Neuroticism and Psychoticism is evidently indicated in a study done by
Goodwin, Fergusson and Horwood (2003). The aims of this research were to examine the
The Big Five Model, Criminality and Psychoticism
- 15 -
associations between the personality trait of neuroticism in adolescence and later psychotic
symptoms, taking into account potential confounding factors. Data were gathered over the course
of a longitudinal study of a birth cohort of New Zealand born young people. Over the course of
the study, data were gathered first on neuroticism at age fourteen; secondly on psychotic
symptoms predominantly subclinical, assessed on the Symptom Checklist (SCL-90), at ages
eighteen and twenty one; and thirdly on a range of potential confounding factors including
measures of childhood adversity and co-morbid mental disorders. The results of this study
showed that young people in the highest quartile of neuroticism at age fourteen had rates of
psychotic symptoms that were two to three times higher than those in the lowest quartile. After
statistical adjustment for confounding factors, including childhood adversity and co-morbid
mental disorders, the association between neuroticism and later psychotic symptoms reduced but
remained statistically significant. After adjustment for confounding factors, young people with
high levels of neuroticism had rates of psychotic symptoms that were between 1·5 to 1·8 times
higher than those with low levels of neuroticism. With the above analyses, it was concluded that
early neuroticism may be a precursor to the onset of psychotic symptoms. The mechanism
underlying this association are unclear, but may relate to overlapping features between
prodromal phases of psychosis and items that measure neuroticism (Goodwin et al., 2003). The
relevance of this finding to this study is that, it evidently shows the effect levels of neuroticism
will have on Psychoticism. Moreover, whiles the above research was done among cohort of New
Zealand born young people, this current study would be done among some criminals in Ghana to
examine the effect of the five-factor dimension on Psychoticism.
The Big Five Model, Criminality and Psychoticism
- 16 -
Extraversion and Psychoticism
Reviewing a classic study by Rushton and Chrisjohn (1981), which was first published online on
May, 2002 would evidently show the relationship between extraversion, Psychoticism and
delinquency. Eight separate samples of high school and university students in Britain and Canada
were used to test predictions from Eysenck's theory that delinquents should be high scorers on
scales of extraversion, neuroticism, and Psychoticism. Self-report paper- and pencil-
questionnaire measures of both personality and delinquency were administered under conditions
that ensured anonymity. The evidence showed clear support for a relationship between high
delinquency scores and high scores on both extraversion and Psychoticism. These relationships
held up across diverse samples and different ways of analyzing the data. No support was found
for a relationship between delinquency scores and the dimension of neuroticism (Rushton &
Chrisjon, 1981). The scores on both extraversion and Psychoticism in relation to that of
delinquency are relevant to this study in a sense that, the higher criminals score on extraversion,
the higher they would score on Psychoticism, hence extraversion and Psychoticism are positively
related. Despite this relevance, it is obvious that the above research is based on Eysenck‟s theory
and this current study focuses on the five factor model.
Agreeableness and Psychoticism
A study done by Gleeson, Rawlings, Jackson and McGorry, (2005) showed how Agreeableness
and Neuroticism can serve as Predictors of Relapse after First-Episode Psychosis. Cross-
sectional investigations, using the five-factor model of personality have evinced relationships
among neuroticism, agreeableness, and psychotic symptoms. The current study examined these
relationships via a prospective follow-up study with remitted first-episode psychosis patients.
The Big Five Model, Criminality and Psychoticism
- 17 -
Baseline five-factor model personality profiles, diagnoses, symptom ratings, and premorbid
adjustment ratings were followed by nine monthly ratings on Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale
psychosis items in sixty first-episode patients. Valid baseline personality profiles were completed
by forty patients. Patients who had a return of symptoms scored higher on baseline neuroticism
and agreeableness than those who remained in remission. Premorbid adjustment also predicted
return of symptoms. After premorbid adjustment was controlled for, the agreeableness
differences remained significant, but the neuroticism scores were no longer significantly
different. It was concluded that lower agreeableness acts as a mediating variable in relapse. This
current study is also designed to find whether agreeableness can predict psychoticism.
Rationale for the study
The rationale for this study could be derived from the researches above, for instance in Miller
and Lynam‟s study in 2006; they associated structural models of personality and antisocial
behavior and predicted that the dimensions are related to antisocial behavior, hence have much to
offer the field of criminology. And this is what this study sought to find. Moreover, in the study
by Van Dam et al., (2005) as indicated above, it was found that only the PEN‟s Psychoticism
predicted severity of self-reported recidivism and also the study tested the ability of the big five
dimensions to influence juvenile delinquency. Thus, it was plausible to embark on a study of this
nature. In a related but longitudinal study, Goodwin et al., (2003) predicted the relationship
between neuroticism and Psychoticism among young people in New Zealand. And this current
study sought to do similar but in this case among some prisoners in Ghana. Furthermore, this
current study sought to replicate a classic study by Rushton and Chrisjohn (1981) as published
The Big Five Model, Criminality and Psychoticism
- 18 -
by ScienceDirect, in 2002 to evidently show the relationship between extraversion, Psychoticism
and delinquency, but the focus would be on the Big five dimensions.
After careful review of the above studies, it would be relevant to stipulate that, the research
variables for this particular study are Extraversion, Neuroticism and Agreeableness (The Big
Five dimension), which are the predictors and are examined to see their effect on and
Psychoticism (dependent variable) among Criminals.
STATEMENT OF HYPOTHESES
With reference to the above theoretical frameworks and literature review, it is plausible to
hypothesize in this study that;
1. Inmates who score high on extraversion would score significantly low on Psychoticism.
2. Inmates who score significantly high on Neuroticism would score high on Psychoticism.
3. Inmates who score significantly high on Agreeableness would score high on
Psychoticism.
The Big Five Model, Criminality and Psychoticism
- 19 -
CHAPTER THREE
METHODOLOGY
This chapter focuses on the research design, population, sample, sampling procedures and
materials to be used in collecting data, scoring of the data and statistical analysis of the data.
Population and Respondents
The target population for this study was convicted male prisoners of Ghana whiles the accessible
population was convicted prisoners of James Camp prisons of either violent or non-violent
crimes. Only males were used for this study since James Camp Prisons is an all-male prison.
Forty (40) inmates between the ages of eighteen (18) and seventy (70) were purposively sampled
based on judgement or prior information and willingness of the inmates to participate in the
research in order to select a sample appropriate, readily accessible and that would provide
information needed for this study. This sample size was used because it would ensure internal
validity.
Material / Questionnaire
Adapted questionnaires would be used to solicit for information on the various dimensions of
personality and psychoticism.
IPIP Big-Five Personality Inventory
The first questionnaire is the 50-item set International Personality Item Pool (IPIP) Big-Five
Personality Inventory, developed to measure the Big-Five factor markers reported in an article by
Goldberg, (1992) as published by IPIP web site. This includes ten (10) item-set on each of the
five dimensions (Extraversion, Neuroticism, Agreeableness, Openness and Conscientiousness)
The Big Five Model, Criminality and Psychoticism
- 20 -
scales, keyed positive (+) and negative (-). Each item is rated on a five-point linkert scale from
“very inaccurate” (1) through to “very accurate” (5). The short version of the IPIP instrument
(Goldberg, 1992), has the internal consistency reliability estimates (coefficient alpha) for each of
the five domains as .87 (for: Extraversion), .82 (for: Agreeableness), .79 (for:
Conscientiousness), .86 (for: Emotional stability or Neuroticism), and .84 (for:
Intellect/Openness) (Goldberg, 1992 as cited by IPIP). The IPIP scales have good internal
consistency and relate strongly to major dimensions of personality assessed by the NEO-FFI
(Five –factor Inventory) and EPQ-R (Gow, Whiteman, Pattie, & Deary, 2005)
Short version of the EPQ-R scale or P-scale
The second scale is the revised version of the Psychoticism scale (P-scale) and this was revised
by Eysenck, Eysenck and Barrett (1985). The revised version of Eysenck Personality
Questionnaire (EPQ-R) or P-scale contains 48 items, 12 each for the personality factors
Extraversion (E), Psychoticism (P) and Neuroticism (N), plus a Lie Scale (L). Participants would
be required to read each item, and circle either „yes‟ or „no‟ to show which best described them.
These questionnaires would be self-administered but help would be given when and where it is
necessary. The alpha reliability of the P-scale (short version) for males is .68 and for females is
.51 (Eysenck, et al., 1985).
Procedure
Questionnaires were personally administered to participants to fill but interviewing would be
employed in the administration of questionnaire when a participant cannot read or write.
Interviews were conducted in different of the Ghanaian languages where necessary. One week
The Big Five Model, Criminality and Psychoticism
- 21 -
was used for the administration of questionnaires. For the lost or damage of test material,
replacement were made to ensure accurate collection of data. Respondents were informed about
the purpose of the research and asked to tick the appropriate column applicable to them. None of
the items on the questionnaires were open ended questions. Moreover anonymity was ensured to
assure confidentiality. In addition, subjects‟ preparedness to be part of the test was considered to
enforce accuracy.
Scoring of Data
The IPIP Big five scales were scored as follows;
For positively (+) keyed items, the response "Very Inaccurate" is assigned a value of 1,
"Moderately Inaccurate" a value of 2, "Neither Inaccurate nor Accurate" a 3, "Moderately
Accurate" a 4, and "Very Accurate" a value of 5. For negatively (-) keyed items, the response
"Very Inaccurate" is assigned a value of 5, "Moderately Inaccurate" a value of 4, "Neither
Inaccurate nor Accurate" a 3, "Moderately Accurate" a 2, and "Very Accurate" a value of 1.
Once numbers were assigned for all of the items in the scale, they were summed to obtain a total
scale score.
The scoring key for the EPQ-R or the P-scale is as follows;
Respondents scored high on each dimension (Psychoticism, Extraversion, Neuroticism and Lie)
if they answered „yes‟ for items keyed „YES‟, and „no‟ for items keyed „NO‟ as shown below.
However, respondents scored low on each dimension if they answered „no‟ for items keyed
„YES‟ and „yes‟ for items keyed „NO‟.
Psychoticism (12) = YES; 10, 14, 22, 31, 39
NO; 2, 6, 18, 26, 28, 35, 43.
The Big Five Model, Criminality and Psychoticism
- 22 -
Extraversion (12) = YES; 3, 7, 11, 15, 19, 23, 32, 36, 44, 48
NO; 27, 41
Neuroticism (12) = YES; 1, 5, 9, 13, 17, 21, 25, 30, 34, 38, 42, 46
Lie (12) = YES; 4, 16, 45.
NO; 8, 12, 20, 24, 29, 33, 37, 40, 47
Statistical Analysis
Various statistics were done including frequencies, means, and standard deviation to explore
patterns in the data and these were done through the use of the Statistical Package for the Social
Sciences (SPSS) program. The Parametric statistical test used to analyze the data of the study
was the Pearson Product-Moment Correlation Coefficient and this measured the magnitude and
interval of the variables in all the hypotheses. The Pearson Product-Moment correlation
coefficient was used because this study sought to correlate two variables for each of the
hypotheses, which are measured on at least an interval scale. The 0.05 level of significance was
adopted for this study.
The Big Five Model, Criminality and Psychoticism
- 23 -
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND FINDINGS
INTRODUCTION
This chapter includes the demographic analysis and the results of the statistical analysis
correlation between the factors of the Big five dimensions and Psychoticism which the study
seeks to find. Data was collected through quantitative analysis and this data is reported in the
form of tables and the findings analyzed statistically and descriptively.
Demographic Analysis
The ages ranged between nineteen (19) years and sixty seven (67) years. The mean age, 32.33,
was with a Standard Deviation of 12.035. Moreover about 15% of the respondents were aged 24
which made it the age with the highest frequency.
Table 1: Correlations
N= 40; * p>0.05; **p<0.05
Variables Psychoticism Extraversion Neuroticism Agreeableness
Psychoticism Pearson r
p-value
1
-0.287**
0.036
-0.111*
0.248
-0.103*
0.263
Extraversion Pearson r
1
Neuroticism Pearson r
1
Agreeableness Pearson r 1
The Big Five Model, Criminality and Psychoticism
- 24 -
Table 2: Descriptive Statistics
Correlation between Extraversion and Psychoticism
It was observed from Table 2 that, the mean of the 40 participants sampled on extraversion is
3.269 with a standard deviation of 0.610 and the mean of the subjects sampled for the study on
Psychoticism was 1.219 with a standard deviation of 0.106.
With a degree of freedom (df) of 38, it was observed in Table 2 above that, the Pearson product
moment correlation coefficient recorded for the relationship between extraversion and
psychoticism was r = -0.287, with p = 0.036 < 0.05. The results showed that there exists a
significant relationship between extraversion and psychoticism but this relationship is negative.
This means the hypothesis that inmates who score high on extraversion would score significantly
low on psychoticism was retained at the 0.05 significance level.
Correlation between Neuroticism and Psychoticism
With reference to Table 2, the mean of the 40 participants sampled on Neuroticism is 3.138 with
a standard deviation of 0.642. The mean of the subjects sampled for the study on Psychoticism
was 1.219 with a standard deviation of 0.106. It was observed in Table 2 that the Pearson product
Mean Std. Deviation N
Psychoticism 1.219 0.106 40
Extraversion 3.269 0.610 40
Neuroticism 3.138 0.642 40
Agreeableness 3.788 0.484 40
The Big Five Model, Criminality and Psychoticism
- 25 -
moment correlation coefficient recorded for the relationship between Neuroticism and
Psychoticism was r = -0.111, with p = 0.248 > 0.05 and the df of 38. This means the hypothesis
that inmates who score high on Neuroticism would score high on Psychoticism was rejected at
the 0.05 significance level.
Correlation between Agreeableness and Psychoticism
From the table 2, it was observed that the mean score of subjects sampled on agreeableness is
3.788 with a standard deviation of 0.484. The mean of the 40 subjects sampled for the study on
Psychoticism was 1.219 with a standard deviation of 0.106.
Also from the Table 1 above, it was observed that the Pearson product moment correlation
coefficient r for the relationship between agreeableness and psychoticism was r = -0.103, with p
= 0.263 > 0.05. This means the hypothesis that inmates who score significantly high on
Agreeableness would score high on Psychoticism was not supported at the 0.05 significance
level.
Summary of the Results
With a minimum age of 19 and a maximum age of 67, a mean age of 32.33 was derived. The
result for the correlation between Extraversion and Psychoticism indicated that, the hypothesis
that, inmates who score high on extraversion would score significantly low on psychoticism was
retained at the 0.05 level of significance since p = 0.036 < 0.050. This is as a result of the
negative relationship between the variables.
The Big Five Model, Criminality and Psychoticism
- 26 -
It was observed also that, the second hypothesis which is, inmates who score high on
Neuroticism would score high on Psychoticism was rejected at the 0.05 significance level and
this is because the relationship (r= -0.111) and the p-value (0.248) is greater than 0.05.
The third hypothesis which states that inmates who score significantly high on Agreeableness
would score high on Psychoticism was rejected at the 0.05 level of significance because the
variables were negatively related (r= -0.103). The p-value calculated was greater than 0.05. (p=
0.263 > 0.05).
The Big Five Model, Criminality and Psychoticism
- 27 -
CHAPTER FIVE
DISCUSSION
Introduction
This chapter discusses the findings of the study, their interpretations and implications in relation
to the empirical studies and theoretical framework used in the literature review. The chapter is
organized in sections along the objectives or hypotheses stated for the study. This gives a
detailed discussion of the study drawing from its highpoints or otherwise which will be used to
proffer recommendations for future researches.
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
This study was aimed at examining whether levels of dimensions of the Big Five Model,
specifically Extraversion, Neuroticism and Agreeableness would be associated with levels of
Psychoticism among inmates in James Camp prison. After the analysis of data, it was observed
that, all variables for each of the hypotheses were negatively related. The hypothesis which
stated that, inmates who score high on extraversion would score significantly low on
psychoticism was supported.
In the second analysis, the hypothesis which states that, inmates who score high on Neuroticism
would score high on Psychoticism was rejected. The final hypothesis which states that, inmates
who score significantly high on Agreeableness would score high on Psychoticism was rejected
due to the negative correlation observed.
The Big Five Model, Criminality and Psychoticism
- 28 -
IMPLICATIONS OF FINDINGS AND PREVIOUS RESEARCHES
The general implication for this research is for the society to be careful in judging who is likely
to engage in more crime when looking at the person‟s personality type or variables.
Extraversion and Psychoticism
This research retained the hypothesis that correlated extraversion and psychoticism and this
implies that, inmates who score high on extraversion would score significantly low on
psychoticism. Generally, people high on extraversion tend to be active, assertive, energetic,
outgoing, expressive and gregarious, meanwhile people low on psychoticism are not tough-
minded, they conform, are considerate, not reckless, and not impulsive (McCrae & Costa, 1997).
Socio-culturally, since the Ghanaian culture is a collective one, people high on extraversion are
more integrated into the society (due to the outgoing nature) therefore tend to have social support
in terms material, emotional and informational. This factor makes them less likely to engage in
criminal activities. Due to their talkative nature, they are more likely to say things which would
reveal their inner thoughts and could be advised by significant others to refrain from engaging in
such acts. This implies that, an inmate who is high on extraversion or who is active and assertive
could be considerate and not impulsive, hence might not engage in criminal or antisocial
activities due to the cultural factor. In the study reviewed above by Van Dam et al., (2005),
results showed that students were higher than offenders on extraversion. Although the same
study showed that PEN‟s Extraversion appeared to be higher in officially recorded recidivists
compared to non-recidivists, implications could be, despite the fact that an individual is
gregarious outgoing and a talkative does not necessarily mean he or she would engage in
criminal or psychotic behaviors. Another study by Rushton and Chrisjon, (1981) showed clear
The Big Five Model, Criminality and Psychoticism
- 29 -
support for a relationship between high delinquency scores and high scores on extraversion. That
implied that the higher inmates score on extraversion, the higher they would score on
Psychoticism, hence Extraversion and Psychoticism are positively related. Meanwhile this
relationship is obviously different from what was found in this study and there are various
reasons that accounted for such findings of the study. One reason for the negative relationship is
that only males were used for this study whiles most past researches used both sexes in their
researches. Also, it was realized that for some respondents, the likelihood of giving socially
desirable answers is high due to the female research assistants that were used.
Neuroticism and Psychoticism
The findings of this study indicated a negative relationship between Neuroticism and
Psychoticism (although not significant) therefore, the hypothesis that stated that, inmates who
score high on Neuroticism would score significantly high on Psychoticism was rejected.
Although studies showed that people low in neuroticism have the tendency to be calm, secure
and self-satisfied (McCrae & Costa, 1986), this study indicated that people low on neuroticism
are high on psychoticism which involves recklessness, impulsivity and non-conformist behavior.
In the Ghanaian culture, calm people (low in neuroticism) are mostly perceived as secretive and
tend to keep things to themselves therefore less likely to exhibit their criminal tendencies until
manifested. Moreover, people high in neuroticism are worriers, defeatist and complainers;
therefore the collective culture of Ghana makes them receive more comfort and social support.
By so doing, they are sometimes less likely to engage in antisocial or psychotic behaviors. This
implies that, people might have personalities that may show that they are not calm, or show
predisposition to experience negative affect (McCrae, 1990) but does not necessarily mean they
would engage in antisocial or psychotic behavior. The results of the study done by Goodwin,
The Big Five Model, Criminality and Psychoticism
- 30 -
Fergusson and Horwood (2003) reviewed earlier in the study showed that young people in the
highest quartile of neuroticism had rates of psychotic symptoms that were two to three times
higher than those in the lowest quartile. This means that, psychoticism and neuroticism are
positively related and this is different from the findings of this research which showed negative
relationship although not significant due to the cultural factors. In another study done by Rushton
and Chrisjon, (1981), no support was found for a relationship between delinquency scores and
the dimension of neuroticism, indicating that there was no significant relationship between the
two variables. This current research also found an insignificant relationship between neuroticism
and Psychoticism especially due to the cultural factors.
Agreeableness and Psychoticism
It was observed in this research that, the hypothesis which states that inmates who score
significantly high on Agreeableness would score high on Psychoticism was not supported. It was
found that, there is a negative correlation between Agreeableness and Psychoticism although
insignificant. This implies that when individuals tend to be compassionate towards others,
willing to comply and not be antagonistic (Kalat, 2002), they are either less likely to engage in
psychotic behaviors or show no relation between psychotic behaviors and agreeableness. On the
other side, when someone is antagonistic and not willing to comply, that fellow is more likely to
engage in antisocial or psychotic behavior. The socio-cultural values of Ghanaians advice against
engaging in antisocial behaviors and individuals who are high on agreeableness conform to such
social values. Another reason for this result is that, in the Ghanaian culture people who engage in
criminal activities are perceived as not having affection for the other party and moreover people
high on agreeableness are affectionate (McCrae & John, 1992). There is also a public assumption
that, people from some particular ethnic groups are more likely to engage in psychotic behaviors
The Big Five Model, Criminality and Psychoticism
- 31 -
and this notion is due to the perception that such people are difficult to convince, hence less
agreeable. A study done by Gleeson, Rawlings, Jackson and McGorry, (2005) showed how
Agreeableness and Neuroticism can serve as Predictors of Relapse after First-Episode Psychosis.
Their research concluded that, patients who had a return of symptoms scored higher on baseline
neuroticism and agreeableness than those who remained in remission. After premorbid
adjustment was controlled for, the agreeableness differences remained significant and that
showed that, lower agreeableness acts as a mediating variable in relapse. This past research is
contradiction to the findings of the current study due to the above mentioned cultural factors.
Another reason for the negative relationship is that, only males were used for this study whiles
most past researches used both sexes in their researches. Moreover in this study, there was oral
translation of the items on the questionnaire from English to other local languages to some
respondents by female research assistants, therefore socially desirable answers might be given to
some of the questions.
LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
With respect to the various findings of this study, it is obvious that there were limitations that
needed to be looked at for future studies. One of such limitations is the use of only males for the
predictions and this is because there are more of males than females in the Prisons. Moreover
males are culturally perceived as more likely to commit crime. In the analysis of hypotheses, it
was observed that, results of past researches contradicted some findings of the research because
such researches used both male and female inmates.
The Big Five Model, Criminality and Psychoticism
- 32 -
Another limitation is the sample size of the study that is not large for generalization to the
population of prisoners in Ghana. And also, the used of more female research assistants to collect
data from a male prison could have affected the responds of the participants.
Finally, language barrier could also be a limitation. Some inmates available for the study found it
a little difficult to understand some simple English vocabularies hence translation was quite
difficult since not all assistants understood the local dialects.
CONCLUSION
This research recommends for further studies to be done in the topic area of Personality and
Criminality, to see how criminality is affected by personality variables. Different models of
personality could be used to assess their influences. To be more specific, future researchers are
advised to use both males and females inmates in their studies. Moreover, researchers can use a
larger sample size to ensure accurate representation of the population of inmates.
The legislative and judicial services; judges, lawyers, eye witnesses, the police and other security
officers should be extra vigilant in concluding who a criminal might be after looking at the
person‟s personality. Policy makers should consider psychological variables when drafting
policies on criminal issues and for court proceedings.
The Big Five Model, Criminality and Psychoticism
- 33 -
REFERENCES
Cloninger S. C. (1996). Theories of Personality, Understanding Persons, 2nd
edition, USA,
Prentice - Hall Inc.
Eysenck S. B. G., Eysenck H. J. & Barrett P. (1985). A revised version of the psychoticism scale.
Personality and Individual Difference Vol. 6. No. 1. pp. 21-29, 1985
Goldberg L. R. (1993). The structure of phenotypic personality traits. American psychologist, 48,
26-34.
Goldberg, L. R. (1992). The development of markers for the Big-Five factor structure.
Psychological Assessment, 4, 26-42.
Goodwin R. D., Fergusson D. M. &. Horwood L. J (2003). Neuroticism in adolescence and
psychotic symptoms in adulthood. Psychological Medicine, 33, pp 1089-1097
doi:10.1017/S0033291703007888
Gow A. J, Whiteman M. C., Pattie A. & Deary I. J. (2005). Goldberg‟s „IPIP‟ Big-Five factor
markers: Internal consistency and concurrent validation in Scotland. Personality and
Individual Difference Vol. 39, Issue 2, 317-329.
Kachik J. C. (2003) The Five Factor Model and Holland‟s theory: Community College and
Corporate Leaders. A Dissertation presented to the Graduate School of the University
of Florida.
Kalat J. W. (2002). Introduction to Psychology, 6th
edition, USA: Wadsworth Thomson.
McCrae R.R. (1990). Controlling neuroticism in the measurement of stress. Stress Medicine, 6,
237 – 241.
The Big Five Model, Criminality and Psychoticism
- 34 -
McCrae, R. R & John, O. (1992). An introduction to the five-factor model and its applications.
Journal of Personality, 60(2), 174-214.
McCrae, R. R., & COSTA, P. T. (1986). Personality, coping and coping effectiveness in an adult
sample. Journal of Personality, 54, 385-405.
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1997). Personality trait structure as a human universal. American
Psychologist, 52, 509-516.
McCrae. R. R., & Costa, P. T. Jr. (1990). Personality in adulthood. New York: Guilford.
Miller, J.D., & Lynam, D.R. (2006). Reactive and proactive aggression: Similarities and
differences. Personality and Individual Differences, 41, 1469-1480
Porzio S. K. (2004, Dec. 04). A critical Review of Eysenck‟s theory of Psychoticism and How it
relates to Creativity. Rochester Institute of Technology, retrieved, Dec. 01, 2010 from
the World Wide Web: http://www.personalityresearch.org/papers/porzio.html
Ruston J. P. & Chrisjohn R. D. (1981). Extraversion, neuroticism, psychoticism and self-reported
delinquency: evidence from eight separate samples. Personality and Individual
Differences. Vol. 2, Issue 1, p. 11-20
Schultz D. And Schultz, S. E. (1994) Theories of Personality, fifth edition, USA. Wadsworth Inc.
Van Dam C., Janssens J. M.A.M. And De Bruyn E. E. J. (2005), PEN, Big Five, juvenile
delinquency and criminal recidivism. Personality and Individual Differences, Volume
39, Issue 1, Pages 7-19.
The Big Five Model, Criminality and Psychoticism
- 35 -
APPENDICES
Appendix I
Questionnaire for 50-Item Set of IPIP Big-Five Factor Markers
Describe yourself as you generally are now, not as you wish to be in the future. Describe
yourself as you honestly see yourself, in relation to other people you know of the same sex as
you are, and roughly your same age. So that you can describe yourself in an honest manner, your
responses will be kept in absolute confidence. Indicate for each statement whether it is 1. Very
Inaccurate, 2. Moderately Inaccurate, 3. Neither Accurate Nor Inaccurate, 4. Moderately
Accurate, or 5. Very Accurate as a description of you.
1
Very
Inaccurate
2
Moderately
Inaccurate
3
Neither
Accurate
Nor
Inaccurate
4 . Moderately
Accurate
5
Very
Accurate
1. Am the life of the party.
2. Feel little concern for others.
3. Am always prepared.
4. Get stressed out easily.
5. Have a rich vocabulary.
6. Don't talk a lot.
7. Am interested in people.
8. Leave my belongings around.
9. Am relaxed most of the time.
10. Have difficulty understanding abstract ideas.
11. Feel comfortable around people.
12. Insult people.
13. Pay attention to details.
14. Worry about things.
The Big Five Model, Criminality and Psychoticism
- 36 -
15. Have a vivid imagination.
16. Keep in the background.
17. Sympathize with others' feelings.
18. Make a mess of things.
19. Seldom feel blue.
20. Am not interested in abstract ideas.
21. Start conversations.
22. Am not interested in other people's problems.
23. Get chores done right away.
24. Am easily disturbed.
25. Have excellent ideas.
26. Have little to say.
27. Have a soft heart.
28. Often forget to put things back in their proper place.
29. Get upset easily.
30. Do not have a good imagination.
31. Talk to a lot of different people at parties.
32. Am not really interested in others.
33. Like order.
34. Change my mood a lot.
35. Am quick to understand things.
36. Don't like to draw attention to myself.
37. Take time out for others.
38. Shirk my duties.
39. Have frequent mood swings.
40. Use difficult words.
The Big Five Model, Criminality and Psychoticism
- 37 -
41. Don't mind being the center of attention.
42. Feel others' emotions.
43. Follow a schedule.
44. Get irritated easily.
45. Spend time reflecting on things.
46. Am quiet around strangers.
47. Make people feel at ease.
48. Am exacting in my work.
49. Often feel blue.
50. Am full of ideas.
The Big Five Model, Criminality and Psychoticism
- 38 -
Appendix II
A REVISED VERSION OF THE P SCALE
SHORT-SCALE EPQ-R
Instructions: Please answer each question by putting a circle around the ‘YES or the „NO‟
following the question. There are no right or wrong answers, and no trick questions. Work
quickly and do not think too long about the exact meaning of the questions.
1. Does your mood of ten go up and down? ................................................
2. Do you take much notice of what people think? .........................................
3. Are you a talkative person? .........................................................
4. If you say you will do something, do you always keep your promise no matter how
inconvenient it might be? .......................................................................
5. Do you ever feel „just miserable‟ for no reason? ...........................................
6. Would being in debt worry you? .....................................................
7. Are you rather lively? ..............................................................
8. Were you ever greedy by helping yourself to more than your share of anything? .................
9. Are you an irritable person? ........................................................
10. Would you take drugs which may have strange or dangerous effects? .........................
11. Do you enjoy meeting new people? ...................................................
12. Have you ever blamed someone for doing something you knew was really your fault?
............
13. Are your feelings easily hurt? ........................................................
14. Do you prefer to go your own way rather than act by the rules? .............................
15. Can you usually let yourself go and enjoy yourself at a lively party? ..........................
16. Are all your habits good and desirable ones? ............................................
17. Do you often feel „fed-up.? ..........................................................
18. Do good manners and cleanliness matter much to you? ...................................
19. Do you usually take the initiative in making new friends? ..................................
20. Have you ever taken anything (even a pin or button) that belonged to someone else? ............
21. Would you call yourself a nervous person? .............................................
22. Do you think marriage is old-fashioned and should be done away with? ......................
The Big Five Model, Criminality and Psychoticism
- 39 -
23. Can you easily get some life into a rather dull party? ......................................
24. Have you ever broken or lost something belonging to someone else? .........................
25. Are you a worrier? ................................................................
26. Do you enjoy co-operating with others? ...............................................
27. Do you tend to keep in the background on social occasions? ...............................
28. Does it worry you if you know there are mistakes in your work? ............................
29. Have you ever said anything bad or nasty about anyone? ..................................
30. Would you call yourself tense or „highly-strung‟? .........................................
31. Do you think people spend too much time safeguarding their future with savings and
insurances? .........
32. Do you like mixing with people? .....................................................
33. As a child were you ever cheeky to your parents? ........................................
34. Do you worry too long after an embarrassing experience? ..................................
35. Do you try not to be rude to people? ..................................................
36. Do you like plenty of bustle and excitement around you? ..................................
37. Have you ever cheated at a game? ....................................................
38. Do you suffer from „nerves‟? .........................................................
39. Would you like other people to be afraid of you? ........................................
40. Have you ever taken advantage of someone? ............................................
41. Are you mostly quiet when you are with other people? ....................................
42. Do you often feel lonely? ............................................................
43. Is it better to follow society‟s rules than go your own way? .................................
44. Do other people think of you as being very lively? .......................................
45. Do you always practice what you preach? ..............................................
46. Are you often troubled about feelings of guilt? ..........................................
47. Do you sometimes put off until tomorrow what you ought to do today? .......................
48. Can you get a party going? ..........................................................