journals.plos.org Open in urlscan Pro
35.190.43.188  Public Scan

Form analysis
1 forms found in the DOM

Name: searchForm — GET /plosone/search

<form name="searchForm" action="/plosone/search" method="get">
  <fieldset>
    <legend>Search</legend>
    <label for="search">Search</label>
    <div class="search-contain">
      <input id="search" type="text" name="q" placeholder="SEARCH" required="">
      <button id="headerSearchButton" type="submit" aria-label="Submit search">
        <i title="Submit search" class="search-icon"></i>
      </button>
    </div>
  </fieldset>
  <input type="hidden" name="filterJournals" value="PLoSONE">
</form>

Text Content

Skip to main content
Advertisement

 * plos.org
 * create account
 * sign in


PLOS ONE

 * Publish
    * Submissions
      * Getting Started
      * Submission Guidelines
      * Figures
      * Tables
      * Supporting Information
      * LaTeX
      * What We Publish
      * Preprints
      * Revising Your Manuscript
      * Submit Now
      * Calls for Papers
    * Policies
      * Best Practices in Research Reporting
      * Human Subjects Research
      * Animal Research
      * Competing Interests
      * Disclosure of Funding Sources
      * Licenses and Copyright
      * Data Availability
      * Complementary Research
      * Materials, Software and Code Sharing
      * Ethical Publishing Practice
      * Authorship
      * Corrections, Expressions of Concern, and Retractions
    * Manuscript Review and Publication
      * Criteria for Publication
      * Editorial and Peer Review Process
      * Editor Center
      * Resources for Editors
      * Guidelines for Reviewers
      * Accepted Manuscripts
      * Comments
   
   
   SUBMIT YOUR MANUSCRIPT
   
   Discover a faster, simpler path to publishing in a high-quality journal. PLOS
   ONE promises fair, rigorous peer review, broad scope, and wide readership – a
   perfect fit for your research every time.
   
   Learn More Submit Now

 * About
   * Why Publish with PLOS ONE
   * Journal Information
   * Staff Editors
   * Editorial Board
   * Section Editors
   * Advisory Groups
   * Find and Read Articles
   * Publishing Information
   * Publication Fees
   * Press and Media
   * Contact
 * Browse
   
   
   
 * Search Search
   
   advanced search

Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.



 * 0
   Save
   
   Total Mendeley and Citeulike bookmarks.

 * 0
   Citation
   
   Paper's citation count computed by Dimensions.

 * 12,151
   View
   
   PLOS views and downloads.

 * 60
   Share
   
   Sum of Facebook, Twitter, Reddit and Wikipedia activity.

Open Access

Peer-reviewed

Research Article


DIFFERENTIAL PERSONALITY CHANGE EARLIER AND LATER IN THE CORONAVIRUS PANDEMIC IN
A LONGITUDINAL SAMPLE OF ADULTS IN THE UNITED STATES

 * Angelina R. Sutin ,
   
   Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition,
   Writing – original draft
   
   * E-mail: angelina.sutin@med.fsu.edu
   
   Affiliation Florida State University College of Medicine, Tallahassee, FL,
   United States of America
   
   https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1824-8974
   
   ⨯
 * Yannick Stephan,
   
   Roles Conceptualization, Writing – review & editing
   
   Affiliation University of Montpellier, Montpellier, France
   
   ⨯
 * Martina Luchetti,
   
   Roles Methodology, Writing – review & editing
   
   Affiliation Florida State University College of Medicine, Tallahassee, FL,
   United States of America
   
   ⨯
 * Damaris Aschwanden,
   
   Roles Methodology, Writing – review & editing
   
   Affiliation Florida State University College of Medicine, Tallahassee, FL,
   United States of America
   
   ⨯
 * Ji Hyun Lee,
   
   Roles Methodology, Writing – review & editing
   
   Affiliation University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States of America
   
   https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3810-9186
   
   ⨯
 * Amanda A. Sesker,
   
   Roles Methodology, Writing – review & editing
   
   Affiliation Florida State University College of Medicine, Tallahassee, FL,
   United States of America
   
   https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1247-6463
   
   ⨯
 * Antonio Terracciano
   
   Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Methodology, Writing
   – review & editing
   
   Affiliation Florida State University College of Medicine, Tallahassee, FL,
   United States of America
   
   ⨯


DIFFERENTIAL PERSONALITY CHANGE EARLIER AND LATER IN THE CORONAVIRUS PANDEMIC IN
A LONGITUDINAL SAMPLE OF ADULTS IN THE UNITED STATES

 * Angelina R. Sutin, 
 * Yannick Stephan, 
 * Martina Luchetti, 
 * Damaris Aschwanden, 
 * Ji Hyun Lee, 
 * Amanda A. Sesker, 
 * Antonio Terracciano

x
 * Published: September 28, 2022
 * https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0274542
 * 


 * Article
 * Authors
 * Metrics
 * Comments
 * Media Coverage
 * Peer Review

 * Abstract
 * Introduction
 * Materials and methods
 * Results
 * Discussion
 * Supporting information
 * Acknowledgments
 * References

 * Reader Comments
 * Figures





ABSTRACT

Five-factor model personality traits (neuroticism, extraversion, openness,
agreeableness, conscientiousness) are thought to be relatively impervious to
environmental demands in adulthood. The coronavirus pandemic is an unprecedented
opportunity to examine whether personality changed during a stressful global
event. Surprisingly, two previous studies found that neuroticism decreased early
in the pandemic, whereas there was less evidence for change in the other four
traits during this period. The present research used longitudinal assessments of
personality from the Understanding America Study (N = 7,109; 18,623 assessments)
to examine personality changes relatively earlier (2020) and later (2021–2022)
in the pandemic compared to pre-pandemic levels. Replicating the two previous
studies, neuroticism declined very slightly in 2020 compared to pre-pandemic
levels; there were no changes in the other four traits. When personality was
measured in 2021–2022, however, there was no significant change in neuroticism
compared to pre-pandemic levels, but there were significant small declines in
extraversion, openness, agreeableness, and conscientiousness. The changes were
about one-tenth of a standard deviation, which is equivalent to about one decade
of normative personality change. These changes were moderated by age and
Hispanic/Latino ethnicity, but not race or education. Strikingly, younger adults
showed disrupted maturity in that they increased in neuroticism and declined in
agreeableness and conscientiousness. Current evidence suggests the slight
decrease in neuroticism early in the pandemic was short-lived and detrimental
changes in the other traits emerged over time. If these changes are enduring,
this evidence suggests population-wide stressful events can slightly bend the
trajectory of personality, especially in younger adults.


FIGURES

  

Citation: Sutin AR, Stephan Y, Luchetti M, Aschwanden D, Lee JH, Sesker AA, et
al. (2022) Differential personality change earlier and later in the coronavirus
pandemic in a longitudinal sample of adults in the United States. PLoS ONE
17(9): e0274542. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0274542

Editor: Baogui Xin, Shandong University of Science and Technology, CHINA

Received: April 18, 2022; Accepted: August 28, 2022; Published: September 28,
2022

Copyright: © 2022 Sutin et al. This is an open access article distributed under
the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits
unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the
original author and source are credited.

Data Availability: The data used in the current analyses can be downloaded from:
https://uasdata.usc.edu/index.php?r=eNpLtDKyqi62MrFSKkhMT1WyLrYyNAeyS5NyMpP1UhJLEvUSU1Ly80ASQDWJKZkpIKaxlZKlhYmSdS1cMG0-Euo.
Note that data are available but users must first register for a free account
with UAS before the link will direct them to the dataset for download. The
analytic scripts are in supplementary material.

Funding: Research reported in this publication was supported by the National
Institute on Aging of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number
R01AG053297 to ARS. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and
does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of
Health. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis,
decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests
exist.


INTRODUCTION

Since the beginning of the coronavirus pandemic, there has been interest in
tracking its effect on psychological outcomes [1]. This published work has
focused understandably on factors related to mental health. Many studies, for
example, examined how symptoms of depression and anxiety [2], loneliness [3, 4],
and social support [5] changed compared to before the pandemic. In addition to
aspects of mental and social well-being, the pandemic may have had an impact on
more general ways of thinking, feeling, and behaving (i.e., personality). The
five-factor model (FFM) [6] of personality operationalizes trait psychological
function along five broad dimensions: neuroticism (the tendency to experience
negative emotions and vulnerability to stress), extraversion (the tendency to be
talkative and outgoing), openness (the tendency to be creative and
unconventional), agreeableness (the tendency to be trusting and
straightforward), and conscientiousness (the tendency to be organized,
disciplined, and responsible). These traits are relatively stable over time [7]
but are theoretically thought to be responsive to environmental pressures [8],
including stressful events. The coronavirus pandemic has offered the unique
opportunity to examine how a global stressful event experienced by the whole
population may change personality.

Previous research suggests that personal, but not collective, stressful events
may be associated with personality change. Neuroticism, for example, has been
found to increase after personal stressful [9, 10] or traumatic [11] events. In
contrast, collective stressful events, such as natural disasters, seem to be
unrelated to personality change [12, 13]. A study that examined personality
change from before to after the 2011 earthquake in Christchurch, New Zealand,
for example, found no change in any of the five traits from before to after the
disaster (there was a slight increase in neuroticism among participants directly
affected by the quake; [12]). In addition, in a sample measured twice after
exposure to Hurricane Harvey, there was no evidence of mean-level change in any
of the five traits, even among participants with the most exposure [13]. This
literature thus suggests that personality traits are not responsive to natural
disasters.

In contrast to natural disasters, which tend to be limited in geographic area,
the coronavirus pandemic has affected the entire globe and nearly every aspect
of life. There is a developing literature on how the pandemic might be shaping
personality change. Early in the pandemic, during the acute phase, we examined
personality change in a sample of adults from across the United States (ages
18–90). We hypothesized that neuroticism would increase because of
pandemic-related stressors and the accompanying fear and uncertainty would lead
to more feelings of emotional instability [14]. Surprisingly, however,
neuroticism declined slightly between January/February 2020 and March 2020.
Although surprising, it is consistent with anecdotal evidence that anxiety (one
core aspect of neuroticism) declined early in the pandemic among individuals who
typically suffer from anxiety [15]. Further, a small sample from Germany found
that neuroticism was slightly lower among university students during the first
coronavirus lockdown compared to their neuroticism measured before the pandemic
[16]. Although modest, this current evidence suggests that, at least early in
the pandemic, during the acute phase, there was a decline in neuroticism.

There is less evidence for change in the other traits from pre- to during the
pandemic. Although extraversion was hypothesized to decline because pandemic
restrictions (e.g., lockdowns, social distancing, event cancellations) reduced
the ability to be sociable, the evidence is mixed: Extraversion decreased
slightly in a sample of university students in Germany [16], whereas it did not
change in a nationwide sample of adults in the United States accounting for
sociodemographic characteristics [14]. No change was found for Openness,
Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness in the American sample [14], and these
traits were not measured in the German sample [16].

These two studies provided important insights into the early effect of the
pandemic on personality. The present research builds on these initial findings
in four critical ways. First, we seek to replicate the finding that neuroticism
declined early in the pandemic in a larger national sample of adults in the
United States. Second, we address whether the other traits changed in this
larger and more diverse sample than the previous samples. Third, with
assessments of personality in both 2020 and in 2021–2022, we evaluate
differential patterns of personality change across the acute (2020) and
adaptation (2021–2022) phases of the pandemic. Finally, with a relatively
diverse sample, we test whether personality change was moderated by age, gender,
race, Hispanic/Latino ethnicity, or education.

To put any potential change in personality in context, previous research has
found that personality changes, on average, about one-tenth of a standard
deviation per decade of adulthood [17]. Regarding direction, neuroticism,
extraversion, and openness tend to decline from younger to older adulthood, and
agreeableness and conscientiousness tend to increase, although neuroticism and
conscientiousness may change direction and increase and decrease, respectively,
in older adulthood [17]. Although personality traits may change more in younger
and older adulthood, compared to middle adulthood, we do not make specific
predictions about age differences in personality change during the pandemic
because the virus and the response to it has been unprecedented and its effects
significant but different across age groups. Older adults, for example, faced a
greater threat of severe disease and death, whereas younger adults faced more
restriction on age-normative activities. If any differences are found, it would
suggest a fruitful future direction to pursue to identify theoretical and
empirical reasons for differential personality change by age. If changes are
similar across age, it would suggest that personality is reactive to a global
stressful event regardless of specific age-related stressors.

The purpose of this research is to examine personality change during the
coronavirus pandemic compared to pre-pandemic levels using longitudinal
assessments of personality from the Understanding America Study (UAS) [18]. We
construe these analyses as exploratory because this study will be the first
study of change in personality measured relatively earlier (acute phase) and
relatively later (adaptation phase) in the pandemic (pandemic assessments in
2020 and 2021–2022), and because previous findings were not consistent with
theoretical expectations. We do expect, however, that neuroticism declined early
in the pandemic because of the two previous studies. If this decline is apparent
in the UAS sample, it will provide robust evidence that neuroticism was reactive
to the pandemic. We do not expect change in the other four traits early in the
pandemic based on our previous findings [14]. We do not make predictions about
change in personality later in the pandemic or how change may differ by
sociodemographic characteristics.


MATERIALS AND METHODS


PARTICIPANTS AND PROCEDURE

UAS is an internet panel study of participants across the United States
administered by the University of Southern California [18]. Participants
completed surveys through the device of their choice (desktop, laptop, mobile,
etc.) and, when necessary, were provided with a device and internet access to
participate. To date, the UAS has administered the same personality measure
three times (UAS1, UAS121, UAS237). Personality in UAS1 was collected between
May 2014-March 2018, personality in UAS121 was collected between January
2018-April 2020, and personality in UAS237 was collected between April
2020-February 2022 (see COVID section below for how assessments were categorized
for analysis). All participants had personality measured at least once prior to
the pandemic. Because of the sampling structure of UAS, participants reported on
their personality again in either 2020 or 2021–2022, but did not report on their
personality in both years. As such, for all participants there is one assessment
of personality during the pandemic; all available personality data was used in
the analyses. Documentation for each wave can be found at the UAS website:
https://uasdata.usc.edu/index.php under “Surveys” and UAS1, UAS121, and UAS237.
Participants were included in the analytic sample if they had personality data
reported during the pandemic and at least one personality assessment prior to
the pandemic. Participants also needed to have sociodemographic information
available. A total of 7,109 participants met these criteria, for a total of
18,623 assessments (Mean = 2.62 assessments/participant, SD = .48; range = 2–3;
n = 4,495 at UAS1, n = 7,019 at UAS121, n = 7,109 at UAS 237). The current
analyses were based on publicly-available, de-identified data and thus did not
require approval from the local IRB. The primary data collection was overseen by
the IRB at the University of Southern California and written informed consent
was obtained from participants. Detailed information about the original data
collection, ethical oversight, and consent process can be found in Laith and
colleagues [18].

The analyses in this paper were not preregistered and are exploratory. The data
used in the current analyses can be downloaded from:
https://uasdata.usc.edu/index.php?r=eNpLtDKyqi62MrFSKkhMT1WyLrYyNAeyS5NyMpP1UhJLEvUSU1Ly80ASQDWJKZkpIKaxlZKlhYmSdS1cMG0-Euo.
Note that data are available but users must first register for a free account
with UAS before the link will direct them to the dataset for download. The
analytic scripts are in supplementary material.


MEASURES

PERSONALITY TRAITS.

Personality was measured with the 44-item Big Five Inventory (BFI) [19] at each
personality assessment. Participants rated items that measured neuroticism
(e.g., can be moody; eight items), extraversion (e.g., is talkative; eight
items), openness (e.g., has an active imagination; ten items), agreeableness
(e.g., is generally trusting; nine items), and conscientiousness (e.g., is a
reliable worker; nine items). Items were rated from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5
(strongly agree), reverse scored when necessary, and the sum taken in the
direction of the domain label (e.g., higher scores on neuroticism indicated
greater neuroticism). Although sum scores can sometimes be problematic for
missing data, at each personality assessment, more than 99% of participants who
completed the assessment had personality scores, which indicated that missing
data were not a problem in this study. Scores on neuroticism and extraversion
could range from 8 to 40, scores on openness could range from 10 to 50, and
scores on agreeableness and conscientiousness could range from 9 to 45. The
test-retest correlation between the first and last personality assessment was
.72 for neuroticism, .78 for extraversion, .73 for openness, .65 for
agreeableness, and .69 for conscientiousness, indicating relatively high
rank-order stability, which is similar to test-retest correlations reported
during non-pandemic times: .71 for neuroticism, .79 for extraversion, .79 for
openness, .70 for agreeableness, and .70 for conscientiousness (Hampson &
Goldberg, 2006) [20]. There were some differences between participants who
reported on their personality in 2021–22 versus 2020. Specifically, participants
who reported on their personality in 2021–2022 were younger at baseline (d =
.28, p < .01), had more years of education (d = .12, p < .01), were less likely
to be men (χ2 = 10.51, p < .01) or Hispanic ethnicity (χ2 = 307.99, p < .01),
and more likely to be Asian (χ2 = 111.25, p < .01) than participants who
reported on their personality in 2020. After accounting for sociodemographic
differences, participants who reported on their personality in 2021–2022 were
lower on baseline neuroticism (d = .08, p < .01) and baseline conscientiousness
(d = .10, p < .01) compared to participants who reported on their personality in
2020.

SOCIODEMOGRAPHIC COVARIATES.

Sociodemographic factors were age in years at the first personality assessment,
gender (0 = women, 1 = men), race (three dummy-coded variables that compared
Black = 1, Asian = 1, and Otherwise-identified = 1 to white = 0),
Hispanic/Latino ethnicity (1 = Hispanic or Latino ethnicity, 0 = not Hispanic or
Latino ethnicity) and education, reported on a scale from 1 (less than first
grade) to 16 (doctorate degree). These covariates were selected because of
potential age, gender, and education differences in personality and the
differential effect of the pandemic across sociodemographic groups.

COVID.

A variable was created that indicated whether each personality assessment
occurred before or during the coronavirus pandemic. We set March 1, 2020 as the
start of the pandemic for this sample because widescale closures and
cancellations started to occur in the United States in early March 2020. Because
patterns of personality change might be different depending on phase of the
pandemic, we categorized the COVID personality assessments into two time
periods: personality assessments during 2020 (March 1, 2020-December 31, 2020;
the acute phase) and personality assessments after 2020 (January 1,
2021-February 16, 2022; the adaptation phase).


STATISTICAL APPROACH

The trajectory of each personality trait was modeled on time. Time in years was
calculated from the first personality assessment to each subsequent assessment.
Multilevel modeling (MLM) was used to estimate the trajectory of personality
over time (which represents normative developmental/age-related change over
time), with random effects for intercept and slope. Level 1 was repeated
assessments of personality nested within-person. Socio-demographic variables
were entered at level 2 to control for age, gender, race, Hispanic/Latino
ethnicity, and education. Following previous studies on pandemic-induced change
in subjective age [21] and well-being [22] compared to pre-pandemic levels, we
specified a change component that was a time-varying dummy variable that
compared all personality assessments prior to the pandemic (May 2014-February
2020; pre-pandemic personality) to the personality assessments during the
pandemic (March 2020-February 2022; which reflect normative history-related
change during the pandemic). Two dummy-coded variables were created. The first
coded personality measured between March 1, 2020 and December 31, 2020 during
the acute phase of the pandemic as 1 and others as 0. The second coded
personality measured between January 1, 2021 and February 16, 2022 as 1 and
others as 0. All participants in the analytic sample had one or two personality
assessments prior to the pandemic and one personality assessment in either 2020
or 2021–2022 (because of the structure of UAS, personality assessments were not
from the same participants in both 2020 and 2021–2022). The dummy-coded variable
indicated whether personality measured during the pandemic increased or
decreased during the pandemic compared to pre-pandemic levels.

We also tested whether personality change was moderated by sociodemographic
factors (age, gender, race, Hispanic/Latino ethnicity, education) by including
an interaction term between each dummy-coded COVID variable and the
sociodemographic factor in separate regressions for each interaction. For age,
we also ran the same MLM analysis separately for three age groups: younger
adults (<30 years old), middle-aged adults (30–64 years old), and older adults
(≥65 years old) because each age group had different challenges at different
points in the pandemic. Due to the large number of tests and difficulty
replicating interaction effects, the p-value was set to < .01 for the moderation
analysis.


RESULTS

Descriptive statistics for study variables are in Table 1. Table 2 reports
results of the multilevel models that show personality change during the
pandemic, accounting for the effect of time over the three assessments.
Consistent with the previous studies on change in neuroticism early in the
pandemic [14, 16], neuroticism was lower (approximately one-tenth of a standard
deviation) in 2020 compared to pre-pandemic levels. This decline, however, was
not apparent in the next phase of the pandemic; neuroticism measured in
2021–2022 was not statistically different than neuroticism measured prior to the
pandemic. Note that the time trend for neuroticism was positive, which indicated
that neuroticism increased over time. The negative coefficient for COVID
indicated a decrease in neuroticism during the pandemic, despite the time trend
of increases over time. A different pattern emerged for the other four traits.
For these traits, there was no difference in 2020 compared to their pre-pandemic
levels. Extraversion, openness, agreeableness, and conscientiousness, however,
declined in 2021–2022 compared to their level pre-pandemic.

Download:
 * PPT
   PowerPoint slide
 * PNG
   larger image
 * TIFF
   original image

Table 1. Descriptive statistics (mean [standard deviation] or % [sample size])
for study variables analyzed in the current study.



https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0274542.t001

Download:
 * PPT
   PowerPoint slide
 * PNG
   larger image
 * TIFF
   original image

Table 2. Multilevel modeling of personality change from before to during the
pandemic.



https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0274542.t002

A different pattern of personality change was apparent when the sample was split
into three age groups (Table 3). The divergence by age was largest for
neuroticism (Fig 1). When was measured in 2020, older adults had the greatest
decline in neuroticism. Middle-aged adults also declined in neuroticism, with an
effect size about half that of older adults. Younger adults showed this initial
decline, but it was not statistically significant. The bigger discrepancy across
age groups occurred for personality measured in 2021–2022. In this case,
middle-aged adults continued to decline in neuroticism at this later stage of
the pandemic, as did older adults, albeit the decline was not statistically
significant. In contrast, younger adults had a significant increase in
neuroticism in 2021–2022 compared to prior to the pandemic. The pattern that
emerged for the remaining traits was similar across the four traits, with
declines for both younger and middle-aged adults in 2021–2022. There were two
patterns particularly worth noting. First, the coefficients for agreeableness
and conscientiousness were at least twice as large among younger than
middle-aged adults, which indicated larger declines in this age group. Second,
there was no significant change in these traits among older adults in either
2020 or 2021–2022: Extraversion, openness, agreeableness, and conscientiousness
during the pandemic for participants over 65 were similar to pre-pandemic
levels. The continuous interactions with age supported the overall pattern of
age differences in personality change during the pandemic (S1 Table).
Specifically, there was a negative interaction between COVID year and age on
neuroticism for both 2020 and 2021–2022, which indicated the decline in
neuroticism was larger at older ages in 2020 and the increase was larger at
younger ages in 2021–2022, respectively. Likewise, the age interactions for
agreeableness and conscientiousness indicated the decline in these two traits in
2021–2022 was stronger among relatively younger than relatively older
participants. The interaction with age for 2020 for agreeableness was also
significant.

Download:
 * PPT
   PowerPoint slide
 * PNG
   larger image
 * TIFF
   original image

Fig 1.



Age differences in the effect of the pandemic on personality change in 2020 and
in 2021–2022 for neuroticism (Panel A), extraversion (Panel B), openness (Panel
C), agreeableness (Panel D), and conscientiousness (Panel E). Asterisks indicate
significant personality changes from pre-pandemic levels.



https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0274542.g001

Download:
 * PPT
   PowerPoint slide
 * PNG
   larger image
 * TIFF
   original image

Table 3. Effect of the pandemic on personality change by age group.



https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0274542.t003

Personality change during COVID was also moderated by Hispanic/Latino ethnicity
(S1 Table). Hispanic/Latino participants did not experience the decline in
neuroticism apparent among non-Hispanic/Latino participants. Hispanic/Latino
participants also decreased more in agreeableness earlier in the pandemic than
non-Hispanic/Latino participants. Both Hispanic/Latino and non-Hispanic/Latino
participants declined in extraversion, openness, and conscientiousness in
2021–2022, but this decline was larger for Hispanic/Latino participants. There
was less evidence for differences by the other sociodemographic groups (S1
Table).


DISCUSSION

Replicating previous work on personality change in the acute phase [14, 16], the
present research found a significant decrease in neuroticism in 2020 compared to
neuroticism prior to the pandemic. There was no significant change in the other
traits in 2020. There was, however, a different pattern of change when
personality was measured in 2021–2022: The beneficial effect of the pandemic on
neuroticism dissipated, whereas there was significant decline in the other four
traits compared to before the pandemic. Importantly, significant age differences
also emerged that indicated that the decline in neuroticism in 2020 was largest
for older adults, whereas the decline in the other four traits in 2021 was
apparent in middle-aged and particularly younger adults. The present research
thus suggests differential acute and longer-term time of measurement effects of
the pandemic on personality change.

At the sample level, change in personality from before to during the pandemic
was approximately one-tenth of a standard deviation. Although modest in absolute
terms, it can be put in the perspective of developmental changes that occur over
adulthood. Normative personality change has been estimated to be approximately
one-tenth a standard deviation per decade in adulthood [17]. Given our analyses
accounted for these normative age-related changes, the change observed during
the short time of the pandemic approximated the degree of change usually
observed over a decade. In addition, the changes were much larger for some
demographic groups, including the decline in neuroticism for older adults, the
decline in conscientiousness for younger adults, and the decline in extraversion
for Hispanic/Latino participants, which were about one-fifth of a standard
deviation.

The present research adds to the replicated evidence that neuroticism declined
early in the pandemic [14, 16]. This decline is particularly surprising against
the backdrop of other longitudinal research on mental health that found symptoms
of depression, anxiety, and psychological distress increased during the first
year of the pandemic [1, 2, 23]. These findings appear contradictory,
particularly because symptoms of depression and anxiety are expressions of
neuroticism [24]. Both changes, however, may occur simultaneously. It may be
that, prior to the pandemic, individuals higher in neuroticism ascribed feelings
of distress to this dispositional aspect of themselves. The fear and uncertainty
caused by the pandemic, however, may have provided a reason for such feelings,
leading to declines in perceptions of dispositional neuroticism. Further, prior
to the pandemic, there were no behavioral suggestions to express or cope with
neuroticism, but pandemic guidance (washing hands, social distancing, masking)
gave people a preventive behavior to engage in against the external stressor.
The messaging around taking care of one’s mental health may also have
contributed to decreases in neuroticism, especially for older adults since so
much of the messaging was around taking care of this age group. It is also
possible that the greater social cohesion early in the pandemic brought a sense
of belonging that lessened a general disposition toward distress and/or
observing the distress in the world had individuals re-evaluate their own
tendency towards fear and anxiety. Further, there may be social comparison
processes that shape how individuals perceive themselves. That is, ratings of
personality are based, in part, on comparisons to other people. Early in the
pandemic, when there was a lot of reporting on fear and anxiety about the virus
in the media and on social media, individuals may have viewed themselves as less
fearful and anxious than those around them: Individuals may have viewed
themselves as less neurotic because the social norms around neuroticism shifted.
Three studies now document this decline in neuroticism early in the pandemic.

A completely different pattern of change emerged during the adaptation phase of
the pandemic. Neuroticism did not continue to decline, but rather was not
statistically different from prior to the pandemic, which suggests the
beneficial decline in neuroticism due to the pandemic was temporary. In
addition, the other four traits, which did not change in the acute phase, all
declined significantly in 2021–2022 compared to before the pandemic. This
pattern suggests that for extraversion, openness, agreeableness, and
conscientiousness, there was either a delayed effect that took longer to become
apparent and/or different stressors and strains later in the pandemic
contributed to these changes rather than the stressors and strains earlier in
the pandemic. One possibility is that the social cohesion apparent early in the
pandemic helped support stability of these traits. That is, in the acute phase,
despite fear and uncertainty, the increase in social support [3] and sense of
community [25] may have helped maintain personality. The decline in social
support [26] and increase in social conflict on pandemic-related protective
measures [27], may explain at least part of change observed in 2021–2022.

In our first paper on personality change very early in pandemic, we hypothesized
a decrease in extraversion and conscientiousness because of restrictions on
social gatherings and the loss of daily routines that often give structure to
one’s life, respectively. We did not, however, find any support for these
declines [14]. The present analyses suggest a delayed or longer-term effect on
these traits. Early in the pandemic, there were anecdotal stories of long-lost
connections being reestablished as old friends and acquaintances reached out to
one another [28, 29]. Such connections may have helped support extraversion in
the acute phase of the pandemic. Over a year of restrictions on social
gatherings–either mandated or self-imposed over safety concerns–may have
culminated in feeling less temperamentally outgoing than prior to the pandemic.
Likewise, it might have taken more time for the lack of structure and fewer
immediate responsibilities to consolidate into declines in conscientiousness. It
may also be the case that, prior to the pandemic, external structures that
supported schedules and routines were perceived as the individual’s own level of
conscientiousness. Without this stability and structure, it may be harder to be
organized and follow through on responsibilities. The changes observed in
2021–2022 may be the accumulation of changes in daily life that took more time
to culminate in trait decline.

There were also significant declines in openness and agreeableness. These
declines may have been, in part, a response to the social upheaval in response
to the pandemic that was sharper in 2021–2022. The continued uncertainty around
the pandemic, particularly as it dragged into a second year [30], as well as the
decline in mobility [31], may have led individuals to narrow their activities
and worldviews. Likewise, there may have been a decrease in interest in art and
artistic experiences because of less ability to engage in art due to closures of
concert venues, museums, theaters, etc. The move to online communication and
entertainment and reliance on social media may have decreased exposure to new
ideas. Such changes may have contributed to declines in openness. There has been
a decline in trust apparent for decades [17, 32]. Although there was an increase
in confidence in science and the medical community early in the pandemic, this
increase was short-lived and the decline precipitous during the second year of
the pandemic [33]. The decline in agreeableness observed later in the pandemic
is consistent with this trend. It is notable that this decline is apparent
controlling for the general time trend of declines in agreeableness. This
decline might have been partly fueled by amplification of mis/disinformation
that undermines trust and may also highlight benefits to not being
straightforward.

Two sociodemographic factors were significant moderators of personality change
during the pandemic: age and Hispanic/Latino ethnicity. Compared to middle-aged
and older adults, the personality of younger adults seemed particularly
sensitive to change. Personality tends to develop most and consolidate during
young adulthood [34], with the pattern of development toward greater maturity in
the form of declines in neuroticism and increases in agreeableness and
conscientiousness [35]. Over a year into the pandemic, however, young adults
show the opposite of this developmental trend. The personality of older adults,
in contrast, is thought to be more impervious to change (at least until very old
age or cognitive impairment [36–38]); and, indeed, four of the five traits were
relatively impervious to change among older adults. There may also be other
reasons for the age differences in personality change. We cannot, for example,
distinguish between age and cohort because they are confounded in the current
sample; it is possible that the differences are due to cohort rather than age.
It is also possible that different age groups faced different challenges in the
second year of the pandemic, such as instability in the job market and
school-related stressors (e.g., continued school closures, quarantining of the
self or one’s children after exposure). Such stressors may be more impactful for
younger and middle-aged adults than older adults, who also may both be less
likely to experience and have more resources to handle pandemic-related
stressors that did occur.

Personality change during the pandemic was also moderated by Hispanic/Latino
ethnicity. In 2020, Hispanic/Latino participants did not decrease in neuroticism
but did decrease in agreeableness earlier than non-Hispanic/Latino participants.
This pattern could be due, in part, to the strain of the pandemic not equally
distributed across the population. The financial cost of the pandemic was larger
for Hispanic/Latino adults compared to their counterparts [39], and, at the same
time, this population had higher rates of hospitalization and death due to COVID
than non-Hispanic white adults [40]. Further, the decline in extraversion,
openness, and conscientiousness in 2021–2022 was stronger for Hispanic/Latino
participants than non-Hispanic/Latino participants. Perhaps these declines were
because of processes that may have been apparent across the population were
amplified by ongoing stressors of high-risk work situations and risk of COVID
for themselves and their families. Surprisingly, although Black adults faced
similar stressors, in this sample, Black participants did not show a similar
pattern of personality change (i.e., the moderation analysis indicated no
difference in change between Black and white participants).

The present research focused on personality change during the coronavirus
pandemic. It is important to note other significant collective events in the
United States during this time. The death of George Floyd, the subsequent social
justice protests, the backlash to the protests, and the January 6, 2021
insurrection at the U.S. Capitol are significant events that occurred during
this time that may also have shaped the observed changes. More research needs to
tease apart whether/how different events may have shaped personality change.


IMPLICATIONS FOR MODELS OF PERSONALITY

There are several theoretical accounts to explain personality development across
the lifespan. Biologically-oriented models indicate personality in adulthood is
relatively impervious to environmental pressures and changes that are not
biologically-based should rebound [34]. Environmental models, in contrast,
highlight life events in the trajectory of adult personality, although evidence
on specific life events tends to be mixed and sometimes conflicting [8]. The
neuroticism finding represents a significant time of measurement effect that
replicated across three studies. We are not aware of similar population-wide
effects that have replicated across independent studies. The findings suggest
that a large scale, global event had an impact on personality at the population
level. It appears that this decline was transitory; it is too early to determine
whether the changes observed in 2021–2022 will endure or dissipate with time. It
is also possible personal experiences and perceptions of collective events may
be more impactful on personality than the event itself [41].

Personality traits go through most development in adolescence and early
adulthood and tend to reach stability about age 30 [34]. At the other end of
adulthood, personality tends to remain stable until cognitive impairment reduces
stability [36]. It is notable, but perhaps not surprising, that most significant
personality change during the pandemic occurred in younger adulthood, with most
traits showing no change among older adults. It is further of note that
middle-aged adults were more similar to younger adults than older adults (except
for neuroticism). It is unclear whether this pattern is due to greater
malleability of traits earlier than later in adulthood or whether the stressors
and strains of the pandemic, which differed across age groups, led to more
personality change.

These findings may have implications for long-term outcomes associated with
personality. Individuals higher in conscientiousness, for example, tend to
achieve more education [42] and income [43], develop fewer chronic diseases
[44], are at lower risk of dementia [45], and ultimately live longer [46]. The
decline in conscientiousness, particularly for younger adults, may have
consequences for these outcomes, especially if the decline is not transitory.
Higher neuroticism is associated with engagement in health-risk behaviors [47,
48] and is a risk factor for poor mental health outcomes [24]. This increase may
make some individuals more vulnerable to poor outcomes. It is especially
worrying that the largest changes in these two traits were among younger adults,
as the implications of these changes may ripple throughout their adult lives.

Although there should be some confidence in the decline in neuroticism, given
that it has replicated, the other findings need to be interpreted with caution
until replicated. It is of note that the lack of personality change in 2020
replicated our previous study on personality change in the acute phase of the
pandemic (but Krautter and colleagues [16] found a decrease in extraversion
during this time in a sample from Germany). Most importantly, the changes that
occurred in 2021–2022 need to be replicated and put in the context of the
sample. The sample was large and used a well-established measure of personality.
The sample, however, was from the United States. No part of the world escaped
the pandemic, but the course and response to the virus varied considerably
across countries, and even within the same country. More research is needed to
evaluate personality change during the pandemic in other cultural contexts and
populations. In addition, although our sample was fairly diverse, the percentage
of people of color was relatively low. The sample may have been underpowered to
detect different patterns of personality change for people of color (the sample
of Hispanic/Latino participants was larger and thus more powered to detect
differences). This research documents personality traits over the first two
years of the pandemic but the changes cannot be attributed solely to the
pandemic. As discussed above, political and social upheaval co-experienced with
the pandemic may have also contributed to the observed changes. We identified a
time of measurement effect on change but were unable to distinguish the specific
reasons for the changes. Pandemic-related policies and restrictions may be an
additional contextual factor that is important for personality change. In the
present research, participants were from around the United States who
experienced very different state government responses to the pandemic (e.g.,
California versus Florida). Future research could address whether specific
policy differences across states or countries have different impacts on change.
Also, with few assessments of personality per participant, it was not possible
to test for nonlinear changes over time. Future research would benefit from more
assessments of personality to be able to test for such change. Further, there
may be personality change related to infection with SARS-CoV-2, particularly for
individuals with severe cases and/or long COVID. Recent evidence indicates
significant changes in brain structure and cognitive function associated with
SARS-CoV-2 infection (Douaud et al., 2022) [49]. Personality change could be one
outcome of such alterations in neurological structure. The present research
could not address this possibility. Finally, it would be worthwhile to take a
“nuance” approach [50] and analyze change in specific items of the BFI to
determine whether changes were driven by specific components of each trait.

Despite these limitations, the present research offers new evidence for
longitudinal change in personality across the pandemic. This research highlights
the need to continue to assess longitudinal changes, as the pandemic may have
cumulative effects that were not apparent in the first few months. This research
also highlights the differential impact on personality change across demographic
groups (e.g., young adults, Hispanic/Latino). Future research needs to continue
to track trends in personality change to evaluate potential longer-term outcomes
associated with this change, particularly for groups impacted the most.


SUPPORTING INFORMATION

Interaction terms between sociodemographic factors and the pandemic on
personality change.

Showing 1/2: pone.0274542.s001.docx

Skip to figshare navigation
Supplemental Table S1
Interaction terms between sociodemographic factors and the pandemic on
personality change
Model estimates
Neuroticism
Extraversion
Openness
Agreeableness
Conscientiousness
Gender
2020
-.28 (.12)
.26 (.10)**
-.04 (.11)
.13 (.11)
.16 (.11)
2021
-.27 (.20)
.27 (.18)
.06 (.20)
.39 (.19)
.24 (.19)
Age
2020
-.02 (.004)**
.01 (.00)
.00 (.00)
.01 (.003)**
.01 (.003)
2021
-.02 (.01)**
.01 (.005)
.01 (.006)
.02 (.005)**
.02 (.005)**
Race (Black)
2020
.24 (.21)
-.12 (.18)
-.11 (.20)
.12 (.20)
-.23 (.19)
2021
.46 (.36)
-.28 (.31)
-.06 (.35)
-.33 (.34)
-.44 (.33)
Race (Asian)
2020
.30 (.31)
-.04 (.27)
-.03 (.30)
.04 (.30)
.26 (.29)
2021
.46 (.36)
-.16 (.31)
.34 (.35)
-.07 (.34)
.71 (.33)
Race (Otherwise identified)
2020
.11 (.21)
-.08 (.18)
-.15 (.20)
-.24 (.20)
-.47 (.19)
2021
.34 (.32)
-.50 (.28)
-.54 (.31)
-.86 (.30)**
-.61 (.29)
Hispanic/Latino ethnicity
2020
.73 (.17)**
-.35 (.15)
-.30 (.17)
-.44 (.16)**
-.26 (.16)
2021
.46 (.22)
-.73 (.19)**
-.62 (.21)**
-.33 (.21)
-.59 (.20)**
Education
2020
-.02 (.02)
.00 (.02)
-.02 (.02)
.02 (.02)
.04 (.02)
2021
.02 (.04)
.10 (.04)
.06 (.04)
.10 (.04)
.07 (.04)
Note
. The one significant interaction for gender indicated a decline in extraversion
in 2020 compared to pre-pandemic levels for
women but not men. The one significant interaction for race indicated that
Otherwise identified participants had a greater decline in
Agreeableness in 2021-2022 compared to white participants. Note that this
interaction is difficult to interpret because of the
diversity of this group. The interactions with age and Hispanic/Latino ethnicity
are described in the Results.
**
p
<.01.

1 / 2
ShareDownload

figshare


S1 TABLE. INTERACTION TERMS BETWEEN SOCIODEMOGRAPHIC FACTORS AND THE PANDEMIC ON
PERSONALITY CHANGE.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0274542.s001

(DOCX)


S2 TABLE. SYNTAX FOR REPORTED ANALYSES.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0274542.s002

(DOCX)


ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The project described in this paper relies on data from survey(s) administered
by the Understanding America Study (UAS), which is maintained by the Center for
Economic and Social Research (CESR) at the University of Southern California
(USC). The content of this paper is solely the responsibility of the authors and
does not necessarily represent the official views of USC or UAS.


REFERENCES

 1.  1. Aknin LB, De Neve JE, Dunn EW, Fancourt DE, Goldberg E, Helliwell JF, et
     al. Mental health during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic: A review
     and recommendations for moving forward. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2022.
     pmid:35044275
     * View Article
     * PubMed/NCBI
     * Google Scholar
 2.  2. Robinson E, Sutin AR, Daly M, Jones A. A systematic review and
     meta-analysis of longitudinal cohort studies comparing mental health before
     versus during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. J Affect Disord.
     2022;296:567–76. pmid:34600966
     * View Article
     * PubMed/NCBI
     * Google Scholar
 3.  3. Luchetti M, Lee JH, Aschwanden D, Sesker A, Strickhouser JE, Terracciano
     A, et al. The trajectory of loneliness in response to COVID-19. Am Psychol.
     2020; 75:897–908. pmid:32567879
     * View Article
     * PubMed/NCBI
     * Google Scholar
 4.  4. van der Velden PG, Hyland P, Contino C, von Gaudecker HM, Muffels R, Das
     M. Anxiety and depression symptoms, the recovery from symptoms, and
     loneliness before and after the COVID-19 outbreak among the general
     population: Findings from a Dutch population-based longitudinal study. PLoS
     One. 2021;16(1):e0245057. pmid:33411843
     * View Article
     * PubMed/NCBI
     * Google Scholar
 5.  5. Philpot LM, Ramar P, Roellinger DL, Barry BA, Sharma P, Ebbert JO.
     Changes in social relationships during an initial "stay-at-home" phase of
     the COVID-19 pandemic: A longitudinal survey study in the U.S. Soc Sci Med.
     2021;274:113779. pmid:33639395
     * View Article
     * PubMed/NCBI
     * Google Scholar
 6.  6. McCrae RR, John OP. An introduction to the five-factor model and its
     applications. J Pers. 1992;60(2):175–215. pmid:1635039
     * View Article
     * PubMed/NCBI
     * Google Scholar
 7.  7. Terracciano A, McCrae RR, Costa PT Jr. Intra-individual change in
     personality stability and age. J Res in Pers. 2010;44:31–7. pmid:20305728
     * View Article
     * PubMed/NCBI
     * Google Scholar
 8.  8. Bleidorn W, Hopwood CJ, Lucas RE. Life events and personality trait
     change. J Pers. 2018;86(1):83–96. pmid:27716921
     * View Article
     * PubMed/NCBI
     * Google Scholar
 9.  9. Löckenhoff CE, Terracciano A, Patriciu NS, Eaton WW, Costa PT.
     Self-reported extremely adverse life events and longitudinal changes in
     five-factor model personality traits in an urban sample. J Trauma Stress.
     2009;22(1):53–9. pmid:19230009
     * View Article
     * PubMed/NCBI
     * Google Scholar
 10. 10. Sutin AR, Stephan Y, Terracciano A. Perceived discrimination and
     personality development in adulthood. Dev Psychol. 2016;52(1):155–163.
     pmid:26501729
     * View Article
     * PubMed/NCBI
     * Google Scholar
 11. 11. Ogle CM, Rubin DC, Siegler IC. Changes in neuroticism following trauma
     exposure. J Pers. 2014;82(2):93–102. pmid:23550961
     * View Article
     * PubMed/NCBI
     * Google Scholar
 12. 12. Milojev P, Osborne D, Sibley CG. Personality resilience following a
     natural disaster. Soc Psychol Pers Sci. 2014;5:760–8.
     * View Article
     * Google Scholar
 13. 13. Damian RI, Serrano S, Hill PL. Hurricane exposure and personality
     development. J Pers. 2021;89(1):35–49. pmid:32031677
     * View Article
     * PubMed/NCBI
     * Google Scholar
 14. 14. Sutin AR, Luchetti M, Aschwanden D, Lee JH, Sesker AA, Strickhouser JE,
     et al. Change in five-factor model personality traits during the acute
     phase of the coronavirus pandemic. PLoS One. 2020;15(8):e0237056.
     pmid:32760108
     * View Article
     * PubMed/NCBI
     * Google Scholar
 15. 15. Gold J. Feeling less anxiety since the coronavirus lockdown? You’re not
     alone. Forbes. 2020.
     https://www.forbes.com/sites/jessicagold/2020/06/08/feeling-less-anxiety-since-the-coronavirus-lockdown-youre-not-alone/#791f12638744
     * View Article
     * Google Scholar
 16. 16. Krautter K, Friese M, Hart A, Reis D. No party no joy?-Changes in
     university students’ extraversion, neuroticism, and subjective well-being
     during two COVID-19 lockdowns. Appl Psychol Health Well Being. 2022.
     pmid:34994098
     * View Article
     * PubMed/NCBI
     * Google Scholar
 17. 17. Terracciano A, McCrae RR, Brant LJ, Costa PT Jr. Hierarchical linear
     modeling analyses of the NEO-PI-R scales in the Baltimore Longitudinal
     Study of Aging. Psychol Aging. 2005;20:493–506. pmid:16248708
     * View Article
     * PubMed/NCBI
     * Google Scholar
 18. 18. Laith A, Messel M, Rogofsky D. An introduction to the Understanding
     America Study internet panel. Social Security Bulletin. 2018;78:13–28.
     * View Article
     * Google Scholar
 19. 19. John OP, Srivastava S. The Big Five trait taxonomy: History,
     measurement, and theoretical perspectives. In: Pervin LA, John OP, editors.
     Handbook of personality: Theory and research. 2nd ed. New York: Guilford;
     1999. p. 102–38.
 20. 20. Hampson S. E., & Goldberg L. R. (2006). A first large cohort study of
     personality trait stability over the 40 years between elementary school and
     midlife. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91(4), 763–779.
     pmid:17014298
     * View Article
     * PubMed/NCBI
     * Google Scholar
 21. 21. Wettstein M, Wahl HW. Trajectories of attitude toward own aging and
     subjective age from 2008 to 2020 among middle-aged and older adults:
     Partial evidence of a "COVID-19 effect". Psychol Aging. 2021;36(7):790–805.
     pmid:34570564
     * View Article
     * PubMed/NCBI
     * Google Scholar
 22. 22. Kivi M, Hansson I, Bjälkebring P. Up and About: Older adults’
     well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic in a Swedish longitudinal study. J
     Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 2021;76(2):e4–e9. pmid:32599622
     * View Article
     * PubMed/NCBI
     * Google Scholar
 23. 23. Prati G, Mancini AD. The psychological impact of COVID-19 pandemic
     lockdowns: a review and meta-analysis of longitudinal studies and natural
     experiments. Psychol Med. 2021;51(2):201–11. pmid:33436130
     * View Article
     * PubMed/NCBI
     * Google Scholar
 24. 24. Kotov R, Gamez W, Schmidt F, Watson D. Linking "Big" personality traits
     to anxiety, depressive, and substance use disorders: A meta-analysis.
     Psychol Bull. 2010;136:768–821. pmid:20804236
     * View Article
     * PubMed/NCBI
     * Google Scholar
 25. 25. Sibley CG, Greaves LM, Satherley N, Wilson MS, Overall NC, Lee CHJ, et
     al. Effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and nationwide lockdown on trust,
     attitudes toward government, and well-being. Am Psychol. 2020.
     pmid:32496074
     * View Article
     * PubMed/NCBI
     * Google Scholar
 26. 26. Ausín B, González-Sanguino C, Castellanos MA, Sáiz J, Zamorano S,
     Vaquero C, et al. The psychological impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in
     Spain: A longitudinal study. Psicothema. 2022;34(1):66–73. pmid:35048897
     * View Article
     * PubMed/NCBI
     * Google Scholar
 27. 27. Pew Research Center. Society is more divided than before pandemic:
     Publics disagree about whether restrictions on public activity have gone
     far enough to combat COVID-19. 2021.
     https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2021/06/23/people-in-advanced-economies-say-their-society-is-more-divided-than-before-pandemic/
     * View Article
     * Google Scholar
 28. 28. Holohan M. Reach out to an old friend—research says it is a mood
     booster. Today. 2020.
     https://www.today.com/health/reconnecting-old-friends-helps-during-coronavirus-crisis-t180416
     * View Article
     * Google Scholar
 29. 29. Schoenberg N. Only a Zoom call away: COVID-19 brings long-distance
     friends closer. Chicago Tribune. 2020.
     https://www.chicagotribune.com/lifestyles/ct-life-covid-renews-long-distance-friendships-10072020-20201009-sz3ddckx7zfjhigzoz6xziwezy-story.html
     * View Article
     * Google Scholar
 30. 30. Pew Research Center. Majority in U.S. says public h ealth benefits of
     COVID-19 restrictions worth the costs, even as large shares also see
     downsides. September 2021.
     https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2021/09/15/majority-in-u-s-says-public-health-benefits-of-covid-19-restrictions-worth-the-costs-even-as-large-shares-also-see-downsides/
     * View Article
     * Google Scholar
 31. 31. Lucchini L, Centellegher S, Pappalardo L, Gallotti R, Privitera F,
     Lepri B, et al. Living in a pandemic: changes in mobility routines, social
     activity and adherence to COVID-19 protective measures. Sci Rep.
     2021;11(1):24452. pmid:34961773
     * View Article
     * PubMed/NCBI
     * Google Scholar
 32. 32. Twenge JM, Campbell WK, Carter NT. Declines in trust in others and
     confidence in institutions among American adults and late adolescents,
     1972–2012. Psychol Sci. 2014;25(10):1914–23. pmid:25205784
     * View Article
     * PubMed/NCBI
     * Google Scholar
 33. 33. Brenan M. Americans’ Confidence in Major U.S. Institutions Dips.
     Washington, DC: 2021.
     https://news.gallup.com/poll/352316/americans-confidence-major-institutions-dips.aspx
     * View Article
     * Google Scholar
 34. 34. McCrae RR, Costa PT. Personality in adulthood: A Five-Factor Theory
     perspective. 2nd ed. New York: Guilford Press; 2003.
 35. 35. Caspi A, Roberts BW, Shiner RL. Personality development: stability and
     change. Annu Rev Psychol. 2005;56:453–84. pmid:15709943
     * View Article
     * PubMed/NCBI
     * Google Scholar
 36. 36. Terracciano A, Stephan Y, Luchetti M, Sutin AR. Cognitive impairment,
     dementia, and personality stability among older adults. Assessment.
     2018;25:336–347. pmid:29214858
     * View Article
     * PubMed/NCBI
     * Google Scholar
 37. 37. Islam M, Mazumder M, Schwabe-Warf D, Stephan Y, Sutin AR, Terracciano
     A. Personality changes with dementia from the informant perspective: New
     data and meta-analysis. J Am Med Dir Association. 2019;20:131–137.
     pmid:30630729
     * View Article
     * PubMed/NCBI
     * Google Scholar
 38. 38. Ferguson CJ. A meta-analysis of normal and disordered personality
     across the life span. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2010;98(4):659–67. pmid:20307136
     * View Article
     * PubMed/NCBI
     * Google Scholar
 39. 39. Pew Research Center. Coronavirus economic downturn has hit Latinos
     especially hard. 2020.
     https://www.pewresearch.org/hispanic/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2020/08/PH_08.04.20_latino.economy.covid_Full.Report.pdf
     * View Article
     * Google Scholar
 40. 40. Mackey K, Ayers CK, Kondo KK, Saha S, Advani SM, Young S, et al. Racial
     and ethnic disparities in COVID-19-related infections, hospitalizations,
     and deaths: A systematic rreview. Ann Intern Med. 2021;174(3):362–73.
     pmid:33253040
     * View Article
     * PubMed/NCBI
     * Google Scholar
 41. 41. Wundrack R, Asselmann E, Specht J. Personality development in
     disruptive times: The impact of personal versus collective life events. Soc
     Personal Psychol Compass. 2021;15:e12635.
     * View Article
     * Google Scholar
 42. 42. Prevoo T, ter Weel B. The importance of early conscientiousness for
     socio-economic outcomes: Evidence from the British Cohort Study. Oxford
     Economic Papers. 2015;67:918–48.
     * View Article
     * Google Scholar
 43. 43. Sutin AR, Costa PT Jr, Miech R, Eaton WW. Personality and career
     success: Concurrent and longitudinal relations. Eur J Pers. 2009;23:71–84.
     pmid:19774106
     * View Article
     * PubMed/NCBI
     * Google Scholar
 44. 44. Weston SJ, Hill PL, Jackson JJ. Personality traits predict the onset of
     disease. Soc Psychol Pers Sci. 2015;6:309–17.
     * View Article
     * Google Scholar
 45. 45. Aschwanden D, Strickhouser JE, Luchetti M, Stephan Y, Sutin AR,
     Terracciano A. Is personality associated with dementia risk? A
     meta-analytic investigation. Ageing Res Rev. 2021;67:101269. pmid:33561581
     * View Article
     * PubMed/NCBI
     * Google Scholar
 46. 46. Chapman BP, Elliot A, Sutin A, Terracciano A, Zelinski E, Schaie W, et
     al. Mortality risk associated with personality facets of the big five and
     interpersonal circumplex across three aging cohorts. Psychosom Med.
     2020;82(1):64–73. pmid:31688676
     * View Article
     * PubMed/NCBI
     * Google Scholar
 47. 47. Hakulinen C, Hintsanen M, Munafò MR, Virtanen M, Kivimäki M, Batty GD,
     et al. Personality and smoking: individual-participant meta-analysis of
     nine cohort studies. Addiction. 2015;110:1844–52. pmid:26227786
     * View Article
     * PubMed/NCBI
     * Google Scholar
 48. 48. Sutin AR, Stephan Y, Luchetti M, Artese A, Oshio A, Terracciano A. The
     five factor model of personality and physical inactivity: A meta-analysis
     of 16 samples. J Res Pers. 2016;63:22–8. pmid:29056783
     * View Article
     * PubMed/NCBI
     * Google Scholar
 49. 49. Douaud G., Lee S., Alfaro-Almagro F. et al. SARS-CoV-2 is associated
     with changes in brain structure in UK Biobank. Nature 604, 697–707 (2022).
     pmid:35255491
     * View Article
     * PubMed/NCBI
     * Google Scholar
 50. 50. Mõttus R, Kandler C, Bleidorn W, Riemann R, McCrae RR. Personality
     traits below facets: The consensual validity, longitudinal stability,
     heritability, and utility of personality nuances. J Pers Soc Psychol.
     2017;112(3):474–90. pmid:27124378
     * View Article
     * PubMed/NCBI
     * Google Scholar


Download PDF
 
 * Citation
 * XML

Print
 * Print article
 * Reprints

Share
 * Reddit
 * Facebook
 * LinkedIn
 * Mendeley
 * Twitter
 * Email
   

 

Advertisement



SUBJECT AREAS
?

FOR MORE INFORMATION ABOUT PLOS SUBJECT AREAS, CLICK HERE.

WE WANT YOUR FEEDBACK. DO THESE SUBJECT AREAS MAKE SENSE FOR THIS ARTICLE? CLICK
THE TARGET NEXT TO THE INCORRECT SUBJECT AREA AND LET US KNOW. THANKS FOR YOUR
HELP!

 * Personality  
   
   Is the Subject Area "Personality" applicable to this article? Yes No
   
   Thanks for your feedback.

 * Pandemics  
   
   Is the Subject Area "Pandemics" applicable to this article? Yes No
   
   Thanks for your feedback.

 * Personality tests  
   
   Is the Subject Area "Personality tests" applicable to this article? Yes No
   
   Thanks for your feedback.

 * Personality traits  
   
   Is the Subject Area "Personality traits" applicable to this article? Yes No
   
   Thanks for your feedback.

 * Elderly  
   
   Is the Subject Area "Elderly" applicable to this article? Yes No
   
   Thanks for your feedback.

 * Ethnicities  
   
   Is the Subject Area "Ethnicities" applicable to this article? Yes No
   
   Thanks for your feedback.

 * Age groups  
   
   Is the Subject Area "Age groups" applicable to this article? Yes No
   
   Thanks for your feedback.

 * Anxiety  
   
   Is the Subject Area "Anxiety" applicable to this article? Yes No
   
   Thanks for your feedback.



 * Publications
 * PLOS Biology
 * PLOS Medicine
 * PLOS Computational Biology
 * PLOS Genetics
 * PLOS Pathogens
 * PLOS ONE
 * PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases

 *  
 * PLOS Climate
 * PLOS Digital Health
 * PLOS Global Public Health
 * PLOS Sustainability and Transformation
 * PLOS Water

 * Home
 * Blogs
 * Collections
 * Give feedback
 * LOCKSS

 * Privacy Policy
 * Terms of Use
 * Advertise
 * Media Inquiries
 * Contact

PLOS is a nonprofit 501(c)(3) corporation, #C2354500, based in San Francisco,
California, US

 




COOKIE PREFERENCE CENTER

Our website uses different types of cookies. Optional cookies will only be set
with your consent and you may withdraw this consent at any time. Below you can
learn more about the types of cookies PLOS uses and register your cookie
preferences.

Accept All Cookies


CUSTOMIZE YOUR COOKIE PREFERENCE

+Strictly Necessary

Always On
+Functional

OnOff
+Performance and Analytics

OnOff
+Marketing

OnOff

Save Selected Preferences and Close
For more information about the cookies and other technologies used by us, please
read our Cookie Policy.