Who is satisfied with life? Personality, cognitive flexibility, and life satisfaction

Abstract

In the current study, we examined the relationship between Big Five personality traits, cognitive flexibility, and life satisfaction. We expected that the Big Five traits would predict cognitive flexibility, cognitive flexibility would predict life satisfaction, and cognitive flexibility would mediate the relationship between four of the Big Five traits (conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism) and life satisfaction. We sampled 258 U. S. participants through MTurk, where they completed a series of self-report measures. Using path analysis, we found support for each of our predictions. Future research should examine the role of affect and cognition in the Big Five traits, and how those might predict cognitive flexibility and life satisfaction.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.

Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Data Availability

Available on Open Science Framework.

References

  1. Anglim, J., Horwood, S., Smillie, L. D., Marrero, R. J., & Wood, J. L. (2020). Predicting psychological and subjective well-being from personality: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 146(4), 279–323. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000226.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Aruguete, M. S., Ho, H., Brown, B. L., Jurs, B., Flint, E., & McCutcheon, L. E. (2019). How serious is the ‘carelessness’ problem on mechanical Turk. International Journal of Social Research Methodology: Theory and Practice, 22(5), 441–449. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2018.1563966.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Campbell, A. M., Davalos, D. B., McCabe, D. P., & Troup, L. J. (2011). Executive functions and extraversion. Personality and Individual Differences, 51, 720–725. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2011.06.018.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Cangur, S., & Ercan, I. (2015). Comparison of model fit indices used in structural equation modeling under multivariate normality. Journal of Modern Applied Statistical Methods, 14(1), 152–167. https://doi.org/10.22237/jmasm/1430453580.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Casler, K., Bickel, L., & Hackett, E. (2013). Separate but equal? A comparison of participants and data gathered via Amazon’s MTurk, social media, and face-to-face behavioral testing. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(6), 2165–2160. https://doi.org/10.1016/chb2103.05.009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Chan, C., & Holosko, M. K. (2016). An overview of the use of mechanical Turk in behavioral sciences: Implications for social work. Research on Social Work Practice, 26(4), 441–448. https://doi.org/10.1177/10497315155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Conway, A. M., Tugade, M. M., Catalino, L. I., & Fredrickson, B. L. (2013). The broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions: Form, function, and mechanism. In S. A. David, I. Boniwel, & A. Conley Ayers (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of happiness (pp. 17–34). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1980). Influence of extraversion and neuroticism on subjective well-being: Happy and unhappy people. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 668–678. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.38.4.668.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Crede, M., Harms, P., Niehorster, S., & Gaye-Valentine, A. (2012). An evaluation of the consequences of using short measures of the big five personality traits. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(4), 874–888. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027403.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Curran, T. (2018). An actor-partner interdependence dyad of cognitive flexibility and indicators of social adjustment among mother-child dyads. Personality and Individual Differences, 126(1), 99–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2018.01.025.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Dajani, D., & Uddin, L. Q. (2015). Demystifying cognitive flexibility: Implications for clinical and developmental neuroscience. Trends in Neurosciences, 38(9), 571–578. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tins.2015.07.003.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. DeNeve, K. M., & Cooper, H. (1998). The happy personality: A meta-analysis of 137 personality traits and subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 197–229. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.124.2.197.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Dennis, J. P., & Vander Wal, J. S. (2010). The cognitive flexibility inventory: Instrument development and estimates of reliability and validity. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 34, 241–253. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-009-9276-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Diener, E. (2000). Subjective well-being: The science of happiness and a proposal for a national index. American Psychologist, 55(1), 34–43. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71–75. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Diener, E., Oishi, S., & Lucas, R. E. (2009). Subjective well-being: The science of happiness and life satisfaction. In S. J. Lopez & C. R. Snyder (Eds.), Oxford Handbook of Positive \Psychology (2nd ed., pp. 187–194). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E., & Smith, H. L. (1999). Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 276–302. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.125.2.276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Fathi-Ashtiani, M., & Sheikholeslami, R. (2019). Relationship between attachment style and psychological well-beieng: The mediating role of cognitive flexibility. Journal of Psychology, 23(2), 134–147.

  19. Fredrickson, B. L. (2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: The broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. American Psychologist, 56(3), 218–226. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.56.3.218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Hamby, T., Taylor, W., Snowden, A. K., & Peterson, R. A. (2016). A meta-analysis of the reliability of free and for pay big five scales. The Journal of Personality, 150(4), 422–430. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.2015.1060186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Hauser, D. J., & Schwarz, N. (2016). Attentive Turkers: MTurk participants perform better on online attention checks than subject pool participants. Behavior Research Methods, 48(1), 400–407. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428.015-0578z.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). The weirdest people in the world? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33(2–3), 61–83. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X0999152X.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Hodson, G., & Busseri, M. A. (2012). Bright minds and dark attitudes: Lower cognitive ability predicts greater prejudice through right-wing ideology and lower intergroup contact. Psychological Science, 23(2), 187–195. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611421206.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Jensen-Campbell, L. A., Rosselli, M., Workman, K. A., Santisi, M., Rios, J. D., & Bojan, D. (2002). Agreeableness, conscientiousness, and effortful control processes. Journal of Research in Personality, 36(5), 476–489. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-6566(02)00004-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Johnson, D. R., & Borden, L. A. (2012). Participants at your fingertips: Using Amazon’s mechanical Turk to increase student-faculty collaborative research. Teaching of Psychology, 39, 245–251. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628312456615.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Kees, J., Berry, C., Burton, S., & Sheehan, K. (2017). An analysis of data quality: Professional panels, student subject pools, and Amazon’s mechanical Turk. Journal of Advertising, 46(1), 141–155. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2016.1269304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Kim, H., Schimmack, U., Oisho, S., & Tsutsui, I. (2018). Extraversion and life satisfaction: A cross-cultural examination of student and nationally representative samples. Journal of Personality, 86(4), 604–618. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12339.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Kline, E. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Koesten, J., Schrodt, P., & Ford, D. J. (2009). Cognitive flexibility as a mediator of family communication environments and young adults’ well-being. Health Communication, 24, 82–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410230802607024.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Kunicki, Z. J., & Harlow, L. L. (2020). Towards a higher-order model of resilience. Social Indicators Research, 151, 329–344. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-020-02368-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Magnus, K., Diener, E., Fujita, F., & Pavot, W. (1993). Extraversion and neuroticism as predictors of objective life events: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 1046–1053. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.65.5.1046.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Marcionetti, J., & Rossier, J. (2016). Global life satisfaction in adolescence: The role of personality traits, self-esteem and self-efficacy. Journal of Individual Differences, 37(3), 135–144. https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-0001/a000198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Martin, M. M., & Anderson, C. M. (1998). The cognitive flexibility scale: Three validity studies. Communication Reports, 11, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1080/08934219809367680.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Martin, M. M., & Rubin, R. B. (1995). A new measure of cognitive flexibility. Psychological Reports, 73, 623–626. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1995.76.2.623.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1987). Validation of the five-factor model of personality across instruments and observers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(1), 81–90. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.52.1.81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. McCrae, P. T., & Costa, R. R. (2009). The five factor model and the NEO inventories. In J. N. Butcher (Ed.) Oxford handbook of personality assessment (pp. 299–332). New York: Oxford University Press.

  37. Mepham, K. D., & Martinovic, B. (2018). Multilingualism and out-group acceptance: The mediating roles of cognitive flexibility and deprovincialization. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 37(1), 51–73. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X17706944.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Mertler, C. A., & Reinhart, R. V. (2017). Advanced and multivariate statistical methods (6th ed.). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Murdock, K. W., Oddi, K. B., & Bridgett, D. J. (2013). Cognitive correlates of personality: Links between executive functioning and the big five personality traits. Journal of Individual Differences, 34(2), 97–104. https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-0001/a000104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Odaci, H., & Cikrikci, O. (2019). Cognitive flexibility mediates the relationship between big five personality traits and life satisfaction. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 14, 1229–1246. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-018-9651-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Pavot, W., & Diener, E. (1993). Review of the satisfaction with life scale. Psychological Assessment, 5(2), 164–172. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.5.2.164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Pytlik Zillig, L. M., Hemenover, S. H., & Dienstbeier, R. A. (2002). What do we assess when we assess a big 5 trait? A content analysis of the affective, behavioral, and cognitive processes represented in big 5 personality inventory. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28(6), 847–858. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167202289013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Revelle, W., Wilt, J., & Rosenthal, A. (2010). Individual differences in cognition: New methods for examining the personality-cognition link. In A. Gruszka, G. Matthews, & B. Szymura (Eds.), Handbook of individual differences in cognition: Attention, memory, and executive control (pp. 27–49). New York: Springer Science + Business Media.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Rouse, S. (2020). Reliability of MTurk data from masters and workers. Journal of Individual Differences, 41(1), 30–36. https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-0001/a000300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Saucier, G. (1994). Mini-Markers: A brief version of Goldberg’s unipolar Big Five markers. Journal of Personality Assessment, 63(3), 506–516. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa6303_8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Shi, J., Yao, Y., Zhan, C., Mao, Z., Yin, F., & Zhao, X. (2018). The relationship between big five personality traits and psychotic experience in a large non-clinical youth sample: The mediating role of emotion regulation. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 9, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2018.00648.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Suchy, Y. (2009). Executive functioning: Overview, assessment, and research issues for non-neuropsychologists. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 37, 106–116. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12160-009-9097-4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Wang, Y.-M., & Guo, D.-J. (2008). The effects of positive emotions on task switching. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 40(3), 301–306. https://doi.org/10.3724/SP.J.1041.2008.00301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Williams, P. G., Suchy, Y., & Kraybill, M. L. (2010). Five-factor model personality traits and executive functioning among older adults. Journal of Research in Personality, 44, 485–491. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2010.06.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christine A. Smith.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Smith, C.A., Konik, J. Who is satisfied with life? Personality, cognitive flexibility, and life satisfaction. Curr Psychol (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-01359-6

Download citation

Keywords

  • Personality
  • Big five
  • Cognitive flexibility
  • Life satisfaction