See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/43534942
Testing Predictions From Personality
Neuroscience: Brain Structure and the Big Five
Article in Psychological Science · June 2010
DOI: 10.1177/0956797610370159 · Source: PubMed
CITATIONS
READS
311
226
6 authors, including:
Colin G Deyoung
Jacob B Hirsh
103 PUBLICATIONS 3,976 CITATIONS
39 PUBLICATIONS 2,164 CITATIONS
University of Minnesota Twin Cities
SEE PROFILE
University of Toronto
SEE PROFILE
Matthew S Shane
Jeremy R Gray
22 PUBLICATIONS 780 CITATIONS
86 PUBLICATIONS 7,553 CITATIONS
University of Ontario Institute of Technology
SEE PROFILE
Michigan State University
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Matthew S Shane on 13 December 2016.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. All in-text references underlined in blue are added to the original document
and are linked to publications on ResearchGate, letting you access and read them immediately.
NIH Public Access
Author Manuscript
Psychol Sci. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2011 March 6.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Published in final edited form as:
Psychol Sci. 2010 June ; 21(6): 820–828. doi:10.1177/0956797610370159.
Testing Predictions From Personality Neuroscience: Brain
Structure and the Big Five
Colin G. DeYoung1, Jacob B. Hirsh2, Matthew S. Shane3, Xenophon Papademetris4,
Nallakkandi Rajeevan4, and Jeremy R. Gray4
1University of Minnesota
2University
3The
of Toronto
Mind Research Network, Albuquerque, New Mexico
4Yale
University
Abstract
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
We used a new theory of the biological basis of the Big Five personality traits to generate
hypotheses about the association of each trait with the volume of different brain regions.
Controlling for age, sex, and whole-brain volume, results from structural magnetic resonance
imaging of 116 healthy adults supported our hypotheses for four of the five traits: Extraversion,
Neuroticism, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness. Extraversion covaried with volume of medial
orbitofrontal cortex, a brain region involved in processing reward information. Neuroticism
covaried with volume of brain regions associated with threat, punishment, and negative affect.
Agreeableness covaried with volume in regions that process information about the intentions and
mental states of other individuals. Conscientiousness covaried with volume in lateral prefrontal
cortex, a region involved in planning and the voluntary control of behavior. These findings
support our biologically based, explanatory model of the Big Five and demonstrate the potential of
personality neuroscience (i.e., the systematic study of individual differences in personality using
neuroscience methods) as a discipline.
Keywords
personality; Big Five; neuroimaging; brain structure
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Personality psychology promotes a systematic approach to understanding individual
differences in behavior, emotion, motivation, and cognition, through the development of
comprehensive taxonomies of personality traits. However, these descriptive taxonomies
have not typically been linked to empirical data from neuroscience research. Individual
differences are relevant to education and health, as well as basic science, and are therefore
increasingly the focus of cognitive, affective, and social neuroscience research (Kosslyn et
al., 2002). However, such efforts have not typically been systematic or comprehensive.
© The Author(s) 2010
Corresponding Authors: Colin G. DeYoung, Psychology Department, University of Minnesota, 75 East River Rd., Minneapolis, MN
55455 cdeyoung@umn.edu Jeremy R. Gray, Department of Psychology, Yale University, Box 208205, New Haven, CT 06520
jeremy.gray@yale.edu.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The authors declared that they had no conflicts of interest with respect to their authorship or the publication of this article.
Supplemental Material
Additional supporting information may be found at http://pss.sagepub.com/content/by/supplemental-data
DeYoung et al.
Page 2
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Personality neuroscience is emerging as a subdiscipline focused on testing and refining
neurobiological theories of personality (Canli, 2008; DeYoung & Gray, 2009). In the study
reported by this article, we used magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to test a biological
theory of the Big Five personality traits (DeYoung & Gray, 2009): Extraversion,
Neuroticism, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, and Openness/Intellect.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
The fact that many traits vary together (e.g., people who are talkative tend to experience
more positive emotion than people who are quiet) implies that a limited number of
underlying factors may account for much of the variation in personality traits. A large body
of evidence has converged on a five-factor solution to the correlations among personality
traits, leading to a taxonomy known as the Five-Factor Model, or Big Five (Costa &
McCrae, 1992; John, Naumann, & Soto, 2008). However, the Big Five factors are
descriptive rather than explanatory constructs and do not inherently provide a theory of the
underlying forces that produce these five dimensions of individual differences in
personality. A causal theory of the Big Five would be a significant advance in this field (cf.
McCrae & Costa, 2008) and should include a biological component (i.e., it should specify
not only the psychological mechanisms underlying each trait, but also the biological systems
linked to these psychological mechanisms). Personality traits represent tendencies to
manifest particular patterns of cognition, emotion, motivation, and behavior, in response to a
variety of eliciting stimuli (Fleeson, 2001). These tendencies are posited to arise from
regularities in the functioning of relevant brain systems (DeYoung & Gray, 2009).
Our aim in this study was to test whether individual variation in the volume of different
brain regions relates to personality in a manner consistent with our theory of the
psychological mechanisms and biological systems underlying each of the Big Five factors
(DeYoung & Gray, 2009). We outline here the psychological processes associated with each
factor and the neural systems linked to these processes. Our intent was not to provide an
exhaustive review of the psychological mechanisms or neural systems involved in each of
the Big Five, but rather to identify those likely to be most central to these traits. We
therefore developed hypotheses regarding the structural covariation of specific brain regions
with each of the Big Five. It is important to note that variation in function is not inevitably
associated with variation in brain structure, so we did not expect to confirm every plausible
association between traits and the volume of specific regions.
A Biological Model of the Big Five
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Of the Big Five, Extraversion and Neuroticism are the best understood in terms of their
underlying processes. There is considerable theoretical and experimental evidence that these
two traits represent the primary manifestations in personality of sensitivity to reward and
sensitivity to threat and punishment, respectively (Clark & Watson, 2008; Depue & Collins,
1999). Much is known about the biological systems governing reward and punishment, and
findings from neuroimaging and psychopharmacological research on Extraversion and
Neuroticism are consistent with the involvement of these biological systems in these traits
(DeYoung & Gray, 2009).
Extraversion is linked to the tendency to experience positive emotions (Clark & Watson,
2008; Costa & McCrae, 1992), which typically stem from experiences of reward or the
promise of reward. Extraversion encompasses an array of traits, such as assertiveness,
sociability, and talkativeness, that appear to be linked to the approach tendencies that
accompany sensitivity to reward. Although Extraversion is often manifested in social
behavior, this is probably because many human rewards involve social affiliation or status;
reward sensitivity thus remains at the core of Extraversion. We therefore hypothesized that
Extraversion would be associated with structural variation in some or all of the brain
Psychol Sci. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2011 March 6.
DeYoung et al.
Page 3
systems responsible for sensitivity to reward, including the nucleus accumbens, amygdala,
and orbitofrontal cortex (Depue & Collins, 1999).
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Neuroticism is linked to the tendency to experience negative emotions (Clark & Watson,
2008; Costa & McCrae, 1992), and includes such traits as anxiety, self-consciousness, and
irritability. We therefore hypothesized that Neuroticism would be associated with structural
variation in some or all of the brain systems associated with sensitivity to threat and
punishment, including the amygdala, anterior and mid-cingulate cortex, medial prefrontal
cortex (PFC), and hippocampus (Eisenberger & Lieberman, 2004; J.A. Gray &
McNaughton, 2000; Heatherton, Macrae, & Kelley, 2004). Although our previous
presentation of our biological theory of the Big Five (DeYoung & Gray, 2009) did not
review evidence for the involvement of medial PFC in Neuroticism, recent studies have
shown an association between this trait and neural activity in this region (Haas, Constable,
& Canli, 2008; Williams et al., 2006). In addition, involvement of this region in selfevaluation and emotion regulation is well established (Heatherton et al., 2004; Ochsner &
Gross, 2005), and low self-esteem, rumination, and emotional dysregulation are all
hallmarks of Neuroticism (Costa & McCrae, 1992; John et al., 2008).
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Agreeableness appears to identify the collection of traits related to altruism: one's concern
for the needs, desires, and rights of others (as opposed to one's enjoyment of others, which
appears to be related primarily to Extraversion). The positive pole of Agreeableness
describes prosocial traits, such as cooperation, compassion, and politeness, whereas its
negative pole describes antisocial traits, such as callousness and aggression. Agreeableness
has been linked to psychological mechanisms that allow the understanding of others’
emotions, intentions, and mental states, including empathy, theory of mind, and other forms
of social information processing (e.g., Graziano, Habashi, Sheese, & Tobin, 2007; Nettle &
Liddle, 2008). We therefore hypothesized that Agreeableness would be associated with brain
structures involved in these mechanisms, including the superior temporal sulcus,
temporoparietal junction, and posterior cingulate cortex (Pelphrey & Morris, 2006; Saxe &
Powell, 2006).
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Conscientiousness appears to reflect the ability and tendency of individuals to inhibit or
constrain impulses in order to follow rules or pursue nonimmediate goals. This trait is linked
to both academic and occupational success, as well as to behavior that promotes health and
longevity (Ozer & Benet-Martinez, 2006). Conscientiousness is characterized by traits such
as industriousness, orderliness, and self-discipline, as opposed to impulsivity, distractibility,
and disorganization. Conscientiousness is likely to be associated with functions of PFC,
which is thought to be responsible for much of the human ability to plan and follow complex
rules (Bunge & Zelazo, 2006; Miller & Cohen, 2001). Functional neuroimaging studies have
linked trait impulsivity to both dorsal and ventral regions of lateral PFC (Asahi, Okamato,
Akado, Yamawaki, & Yokota, 2004; Brown, Manuck, Flory, & Hariri, 2006). We therefore
hypothesized that Conscientiousness would be associated with structural variation in lateral
PFC.
Openness/Intellect appears to reflect the tendency to process abstract and perceptual
information flexibly and effectively, and includes traits such as imagination, intellectual
engagement, and aesthetic interest (DeYoung, Peterson, & Higgins, 2005). A higher degree
of Openness/Intellect suggests a larger bandwidth of information processing: an increase in
the “breadth, depth, and permeability of consciousness” (McCrae & Costa, 1997, p. 826).
This trait is likely to involve the PFC and functionally related regions, particularly those
involved in working memory, abstract reasoning, and the control of attention (DeYoung et
al., 2005). Openness/Intellect is the only Big Five trait to be consistently and positively
associated with intelligence (DeYoung et al., 2005), a faculty that appears to be governed by
Psychol Sci. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2011 March 6.
DeYoung et al.
Page 4
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
brain systems that overlap substantially with the working memory network (J.R. Gray,
Chabris, & Braver, 2003). We hypothesized that Openness/Intellect would be associated
with structural variation in some or all of the brain systems involved in the regulation of
working memory, attention, and reasoning, including dorsolateral PFC, anterior PFC (frontal
pole), and anterior parietal cortex (DeYoung et al., 2005; DeYoung, Shamosh, Green,
Braver, & Gray, 2009).
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Note that we hypothesized both Conscientiousness and Openness/Intellect to be associated
with lateral PFC. Individual brain regions can serve multiple functions, and
Conscientiousness and Openness/Intellect may reflect complementary but potentially
conflicting functions of lateral PFC: ensuring stable execution of plans and rules (associated
with Conscientiousness) and manipulating abstract information in order to explore
alternative possibilities (associated with Openness/Intellect; DeYoung & Gray, 2009).
Nonetheless, the prediction of findings for two traits in the same general brain region raises
the issue of discriminant validity, and some inferences can be made about which regions are
not associated with particular traits. For example, Conscientiousness and Openness/Intellect
are not likely to be associated with primarily affective regions, such as the amygdala and
nucleus accumbens. Similarly, Extraversion and Neuroticism, which appear to reflect basic
affective systems, are not likely to be associated with the areas of lateral cortex that are
involved in top-down control and are hypothesized to be associated with Conscientiousness
and Openness/Intellect. Finally, we would not expect any of the five traits to be associated
with primary visual cortex.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
In testing hypotheses about which brain regions are likely to be associated structurally with
each of the Big Five factors, a preliminary question is how brain structure—specifically, the
relative volume of different brain regions—relates to brain function. A greater-than-average
volume of a specific brain structure may signify greater-than-average power to carry out
specific functions associated with that structure, on the assumption that larger populations of
neurons can produce larger outputs and can therefore be more influential than smaller
populations of neurons. However, a smaller-than-average volume of a given structure might
indicate increased efficiency, or that the structure is streamlined to perform a particular
function or set of functions. Good evidence favors the larger-is-more-powerful position:
Training on particular tasks has been shown to increase the volume of functionally relevant
brain structures (Boyke, Driemeyer, Gaser, Buchel, & May, 2008). However, developmental
studies on the association of cortical thickness with intelligence provide some evidence that
efficiency may also be an important force, as individuals with above-average intelligence
show greater reductions in cortical volume in late childhood in comparison with individuals
of average intelligence (Shaw et al., 2006). Nonetheless, more intelligent children also show
more cortical thickening prior to the period of thinning, and intelligence in both children and
adults correlates positively with brain volume (McDaniel, 2005). Thus, it seems reasonable
to generalize tentatively that volume tends to covary positively with function. It would be
imprudent, however, to make strong predictions regarding the direction of effect for
associations of personality traits with volume in relevant neural structures.
Although the direction of volume-function relations is not entirely certain, structural scans
were more advantageous than functional scans for this study, as they provide data relevant to
all brain systems simultaneously, rather than data relevant only to those systems engaged by
the particular task being performed during a functional scan. Thus, we were able to test
hypotheses for all of the Big Five traits using a single scan for each individual. Of course, a
trait related to the function of a particular brain system is not necessarily associated with
gross structural differences in that system. However, if the data indicate that the trait is
related to structural differences in a given system, they provide evidence that the system is
relevant to that trait. Thus, structural brain scans provide one important way to test theories
Psychol Sci. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2011 March 6.
DeYoung et al.
Page 5
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
in personality neuroscience. If a trait is hypothesized to be associated with the functions of a
set of brain regions, the finding that the trait in question is associated with structural
variation in any of those regions supports the hypothesis.
Method
Participants
Healthy, right-handed participants were recruited from Washington University in St. Louis
and the surrounding community (N = 116: 58 females and 58 males; plus 1 female serving
as a within-study reference subject; ages 18–40 years, mean age = 22.9, SD = 5.5).
Participants gave informed consent and were prescreened to exclude anyone with a history
of neurological or psychiatric disorders or use of psychoactive drugs. We utilized this
sample in previous, unrelated studies (e.g., DeYoung et al., 2009), none of which reported
on the relation of the Big Five to brain structure. The experimental protocol was approved
by the Washington University Medical Center Human Subjects Committee.
Measures
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
We administered the self-report version of the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEOPI-R; Costa & McCrae, 1992) to assess the Big Five personality factors. Cronbach's alphas
for the Big Five scales were high—Neuroticism: .92; Extraversion: .87; Openness/Intellect: .
89; Agreeableness: .91; Conscientiousness: .91. Participants returned individually on a
different day for the MRI session.
Image acquisition and analysis
A 3-T Allegra System (Siemens, Erlangen, Germany) was used to acquire a high-resolution
structural image—a whole-brain magnetization-prepared rapid gradient-echo (MPRAGE)
image—for each subject. (See the Supplemental Material available online for additional
methodological details.) Preprocessing steps for each subject involved extraction of brain
data, coregistration of the resulting brain-only image to a reference subject using BioImage
Suite (Papademetris et al., 2006), and image smoothing. The reference subject was selected
from the sample of 117 participants on the basis of being near the group average for
personality traits and having a good structural image scan and extraction. The reference
subject's brain-only image was standardized by an affine transformation to a brain-only
version of the Colin27 brain template (Holmes et al., 1998). All other subjects were then
nonlinearly registered to the standardized reference subject, leaving each subject in standard
space and coregistered to a within-study reference image. Registration quality was good for
all subjects.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
For any given subject's brain, the spatial transformation needed to achieve coregistration
with the reference subject's brain contains the information of interest: the degree of local
(voxel-level) expansion or contraction required for the subject image to match the reference
image. The determinant of the Jacobian of the transformation is effectively a local scaling
factor that, when applied, expands or contracts one brain locally so that it matches the other
brain in structure. The nonlinear component of the transformation is of most interest because
it does not include individual differences in whole-brain volume or other linear effects of no
interest (such as translations) that apply uniformly across the brain (for that subject). For all
subjects, a three-dimensional image of the nonlinear component of the determinant of the
Jacobian across the brain was smoothed using an 8-mm full-width at half-maximum
(FWHM) Gaussian kernel. The smoothed images were then used as the dependent measure
in a voxel-based (mass-univariate) general linear model (GLM), with sex as a fixed effect,
and age and the Big Five as continuous covariates.
Psychol Sci. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2011 March 6.
DeYoung et al.
Page 6
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
To identify regions of interest (ROIs) in which local brain volume was significantly
associated with each personality trait independently (controlling simultaneously for the other
traits, plus age, sex, and whole-brain volume), we used a corrected threshold of p < .05, with
a cluster-based correction for multiple comparisons based on effect size and spatial extent.
An initial, uncorrected threshold of p < .01 at each voxel was chosen because it
corresponded to an effect size (r) of .24 (with our sample size). Approximately half of all
published significant effect sizes in psychology are equal to or greater than .24 (Hemphill,
2003), and we aimed to detect any effect larger than half of all published effects. With an
uncorrected threshold of p < .01 at each voxel, we used Monte-Carlo simulation (AlphaSim,
Ward, 2000; see the Supplemental Material) to identify the minimum cluster size needed to
correct for multiple comparisons: 317 contiguous voxels. ROIs were then identified on the
basis of meeting both the effect-size and the cluster-size criteria.
Results
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
The results of our analysis are reported in Table 1, which lists all clusters related to each of
the Big Five traits, controlling for age, sex, and the other traits. The table also indicates
which of these clusters reached the cluster-size threshold for significance (p < .05,
corrected), in order to be considered ROIs. (Controlling for indices of registration quality
did not substantively change results; see the Supplemental Material.) We found evidence to
support our hypotheses about four of the Big Five. Specifically, for Extraversion,
Neuroticism, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness, ROIs were in the set of regions
hypothesized to be related to each trait (see Table 1 and Fig. 1).
For Extraversion, the only significant association with volume was a positive one in medial
orbitofrontal cortex. For Neuroticism, the two largest regions of association were in right
dorsomedial PFC and in portions of the left medial temporal lobe, including posterior
hippocampus, as well as portions of basal ganglia and midbrain, including globus pallidus
and bilateral subthalamic nuclei. Both of these associations were negative. Regions of
positive association with Neuroticism were seen bilaterally in mid-cingulate cortex,
extending into the white matter of the cingulate gyrus and, in the left hemisphere, into the
caudate. In addition, three regions not hypothesized to be involved were found to be
associated with Neuroticism: one region in the middle temporal gyrus and one in the
cerebellum (both positive associations), and one region in right precentral gyrus (a negative
association). Finding significant associations involving regions not included in our
hypotheses in no way invalidates our theory but does suggest candidate brain regions and
systems that might fruitfully be incorporated into a theory of the Big Five, given replication.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
For Agreeableness, there was a significant positive association in the retrosplenial region of
posterior cingulate cortex and a significant negative association in superior temporal sulcus
and adjacent superior temporal gyrus. An additional, unpredicted, positive association with
Agreeableness was found in fusiform gyrus.
Conscientiousness was associated positively with volume in a region of lateral PFC
extending across most of the left middle frontal gyrus. An unpredicted negative association
with Conscientiousness was found in posterior fusiform gyrus.
Openness/Intellect did not show any significant associations with relative local brain
volume. This trait was associated with one cluster in right parietal cortex (p < .01,
uncorrected), but this cluster was not large enough to reach the cluster-size threshold (p < .
05, corrected). Although this association is consistent with our hypotheses, it could also be
due to chance.
Psychol Sci. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2011 March 6.
DeYoung et al.
Page 7
Discussion
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
To test our hypotheses on the biological substrates of the Big Five personality traits, we
examined the association between the Big Five and relative local volume throughout the
brain. We based specific hypotheses about individual traits on the premise that each trait
would be associated with structure in one or more of the brain regions known to be involved
in functions central to the trait in question. We also formulated more general hypotheses
about regions we did not expect to be related to some or all traits. Our data clearly supported
our hypotheses for four of the Big Five factors—Extraversion, Neuroticism, Agreeableness,
and Conscientiousness—but were not significant for Openness/Intellect, despite appearing
to be consistent with our hypothesis. These findings provide support for a model that posits
biological systems and psychological mechanisms underlying the Big Five (DeYoung &
Gray, 2009).
Extraversion was associated with the volume of medial orbitofrontal cortex. This region is
involved in coding the reward values of stimuli, and has therefore been hypothesized to be a
substrate of Extraversion (Depue & Collins, 1999), which appears to reflect sensitivity to
reward. Increased volume of orbitofrontal cortex has been associated with Extraversion in
two other studies (Omura, Constable, & Canli, 2005; Rauch et al., 2005), and our study
provides further evidence for this association.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Neuroticism was associated with reduced volume in dorsomedial PFC and a segment of left
medial temporal lobe including posterior hippocampus, and with increased volume in the
mid-cingulate gyrus, including both gray and white matter. These associations are consistent
with the theory that Neuroticism represents the primary manifestation in personality of
sensitivity to threat and punishment, encompassing traits that involve negative emotion and
emotional dysregulation. J.A.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
These associations are consistent with the theory that Neuroticism represents the primary
manifestation in personality of sensitivity to threat and punishment, encompassing traits that
involve negative emotion and emotional dysregulation. J.A. Gray and McNaughton (2000)
have implicated the hippocampus in the detection of uncertainty and goal conflict and in the
control of rumination and anxiety, functions they linked to Neuroticism. In addition, reduced
hippocampal volume has been associated with stress and depression (Bremner et al., 2000).
The mid-cingulate cortex has been associated with detection of error and response to pain,
both physical and emotional (Carter et al., 1998; Eisenberger & Lieberman, 2004). A larger
volume in this region in individuals who score higher in Neuroticism may reflect higher
sensitivity both to the possibility of error and to pain following punishment. Finally,
dorsomedial PFC has been implicated in evaluation of the self and in emotion regulation
(Heatherton et al., 2004; Ochsner & Gross, 2005). A smaller volume in this region may be
related to the emotional dysregulation associated with Neuroticism and to the related
tendency to evaluate the self negatively. Taken together, these associations present clear
evidence that Neuroticism is broadly related to variation in brain systems governing
sensitivity to threat and punishment.
Agreeableness was associated with reduced volume in posterior left superior temporal sulcus
and with increased volume in posterior cingulate cortex. The superior temporal sulcus is
involved in the interpretation of other individuals’ actions and intentions on the basis of
biological motion (Pelphrey & Morris, 2006), a process that may be more efficient in
individuals who score higher in Agreeableness. The posterior cingulate has been implicated
in the process of understanding other individuals’ beliefs, a sophisticated, late-emerging
component of theory of mind (Saxe & Powell, 2006). These associations are consistent with
the hypothesis that Agreeableness is associated with the social information processing that
Psychol Sci. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2011 March 6.
DeYoung et al.
Page 8
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
enables and motivates altruistic behavior. We also found an association between
Agreeableness and volume in the fusiform gyrus, which we did not predict, but which is
nonetheless consistent with a social information processing function, given the area's
proximity to the fusiform region specialized for perceiving faces (Kanwisher, McDermott, &
Chun, 1997).
Conscientiousness was associated positively with volume of the middle frontal gyrus in left
lateral PFC. The region of association was large, stretching from close to the frontal pole to
the posterior region of lateral PFC. The middle frontal gyrus is crucially involved in
maintaining information in working memory and in the execution of planned action. In
terms of brain function, moving from posterior to anterior regions of lateral PFC appears to
entail an increasing hierarchy of abstraction and complexity, in terms of rules that are
maintained and selected to guide behavior (Bunge & Zelazo, 2006). Our results may
therefore reflect the association of Conscientiousness with effective self-regulation at
multiple levels of complexity, which would be in keeping with this trait's importance as a
predictor of academic and occupational performance, health, and longevity.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
We found no associations with Openness/Intellect in regions large enough to be significant
at p < .05, corrected. However, we did find that Openness/Intellect was associated—at p < .
01, uncorrected—with one region consistent with our hypotheses: an area of parietal cortex
involved in working memory and the control of attention. A previous study found that a
nearly identical region (Talairach coordinates: 46, −33, 45) showed the strongest correlation
between neural activity (during a difficult working memory task) and intelligence (J.R. Gray
et al., 2003). This finding is significant because Openness/Intellect is the only Big Five trait
that has been consistently and positively associated with intelligence (DeYoung et al., 2005).
Our current finding for Openness/Intellect is not conclusive, but it does indicate a specific
ROI for testing in future studies.
The associations of personality traits with volume in predicted brain regions were generally
consistent with the hypothesis that larger brain tissue volume is associated with increased
function (with the exception of the negative association of Agreeableness with volume in
superior temporal sulcus). For example, Neuroticism was positively associated with volume
in a region of the cingulate linked to the detection of error and response to pain, both of
which increase with Neuroticism. Also, Neuroticism was negatively associated with volume
in a region of PFC associated with emotional regulation, which decreases with Neuroticism.
However, our findings do not provide definitive evidence to allow generalizations about the
relation of volume to function, and further research should target this question directly.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Conclusion
Personality neuroscience is a rapidly expanding area of research, incorporating not just
structural and functional neuroimaging, but also molecular genetics, psychophysiology, and
psychopharmacological research. If results in this field are to accumulate systematically,
broad theoretical frameworks are needed to organize findings and generate predictions. The
Big Five model offers a promising taxonomy of traits around which to build such a
framework. The Big Five factors are important predictors of outcomes in mental and
physical health, well-being, education, work, and relationships (Ozer & Benet-Martinez,
2006), and a theory of their biological roots is an important step toward the integration of
individual differences research in psychology and neuroscience. The results of this study
support such a theory, demonstrating the feasibility of using personality neuroscience to
advance understanding of human psychology.
Psychol Sci. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2011 March 6.
DeYoung et al.
Page 9
Supplementary Material
Refer to Web version on PubMed Central for supplementary material.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Acknowledgments
This research was supported by grants from the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) to J.R.G. (MH R01
66088) and C.G.D. (F32 MH077382). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not
necessarily represent the official views of NIMH or the National Institutes of Health (NIH).
References
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Asahi S, Okamato Y, Akado G, Yamawaki S, Yokota N. Negative correlation between right prefrontal
activity during response inhibition and impulsiveness: A fMRI study. European Archives of
Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience. 2004; 254:245–251. [PubMed: 15309395]
Boyke J, Driemeyer J, Gaser C, Buchel C, May A. Training-induced brain structure changes in the
elderly. Journal of Neuroscience. 2008; 28:7031–7035. [PubMed: 18614670]
Bremner JD, Narayan M, Anderson ER, Staib LH, Miller HL, Charney DS. Hippocampal volume
reduction in major depression. American Journal of Psychiatry. 2000; 157:115–118. [PubMed:
10618023]
Brown SM, Manuck SB, Flory JD, Hariri AR. Neural basis of individual differences in impulsivity:
Contributions of corticolimbic circuits for behavioral arousal and control. Emotion. 2006; 6:239–
245. [PubMed: 16768556]
Bunge SA, Zelazo PD. A brain-based account of the development of rule use in childhood. Current
Directions in Psychological Science. 2006; 15:118–121.
Canli, T. Toward a “molecular psychology” of personality.. In: John, OP.; Robins, RW.; Pervin, LA.,
editors. Handbook of personality: Theory and research. Guilford Press; New York: 2008. p.
311-327.
Carter CS, Braver TS, Barch DM, Botvinick MM, Noll D, Cohen JD. Anterior cingulate cortex, error
detection, and the online monitoring of performance. Science. 1998; 280:747–749. [PubMed:
9563953]
Clark, LA.; Watson, D. Temperament: An organizing paradigm for trait psychology.. In: John, OP.;
Robins, RW.; Pervin, LA., editors. Handbook of personality: Theory and research. Guilford Press;
New York: 2008. p. 265-286.
Costa, PT., Jr.; McCrae, RR. NEO PI-R professional manual. Psychological Assessment Resources;
Odessa, FL: 1992.
Depue RA, Collins PF. Neurobiology of the structure of personality: Dopamine, facilitation of
incentive motivation, and extraversion. Behavioral and Brain Sciences. 1999; 22:491–569.
[PubMed: 11301519]
DeYoung, CG.; Gray, JR. Personality neuroscience: Explaining individual differences in affect,
behavior, and cognition.. In: Corr, PJ.; Matthews, G., editors. The Cambridge handbook of
personality psychology. Cambridge University Press; New York: 2009. p. 323-346.
DeYoung CG, Peterson JB, Higgins DM. Sources of Openness/Intellect: Cognitive and
neuropsychological correlates of the fifth factor of personality. Journal of Personality. 2005;
73:825–858. [PubMed: 15958136]
DeYoung CG, Shamosh NA, Green EA, Braver TS, Gray JR. Intellect as distinct from openness:
Differences revealed through fMRI of working memory. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology. 2009; 97:883–892. [PubMed: 19857008]
Eisenberger NI, Lieberman MD. Why rejection hurts: A common neural alarm system for physical and
social pain. Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 2004; 8:294–300. [PubMed: 15242688]
Fleeson W. Towards a structure- and process-integrated view of personality: Traits as density
distributions of states. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2001; 80:1011–1027.
[PubMed: 11414368]
Gray, JA.; McNaughton, N. The neuropsychology of anxiety: An enquiry into the functions of the
septo-hippocampal system. Oxford University Press; New York: 2000.
Psychol Sci. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2011 March 6.
DeYoung et al.
Page 10
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Gray JR, Chabris CF, Braver TS. Neural mechanisms of general fluid intelligence. Nature
Neuroscience. 2003; 6:316–322.
Graziano WG, Habashi MM, Sheese BE, Tobin RM. Agreeableness, empathy, and helping: A person ×
situation perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2007; 93:583–599. [PubMed:
17892333]
Haas BW, Constable RT, Canli T. Stop the sadness: Neuroticism is associated with sustained medial
prefrontal cortex response to emotional facial expressions. NeuroImage. 2008; 42:385–392.
[PubMed: 18511299]
Heatherton TF, Macrae CN, Kelley WM. What the social brain sciences can tell us about the self.
Current Directions in Psychological Science. 2004; 13:190–193.
Hemphill JF. Interpreting the magnitudes of correlation coefficients. American Psychologist. 2003;
58:78–80. [PubMed: 12674822]
Holmes CJ, Hoge R, Collins DL, Woods R, Toga A, Evans AC. Enhancement of MR images using
registration for signal averaging. Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography. 1998; 22:324–333.
[PubMed: 9530404]
John, OP.; Naumann, LP.; Soto, CJ. Paradigm shift to the integrative Big Five trait taxonomy: History,
measurement, and conceptual issues.. In: John, OP.; Robins, RW.; Pervin, LA., editors. Handbook
of personality: Theory and research. Guilford Press; New York: 2008. p. 114-158.
Kanwisher N, McDermott J, Chun MM. The fusiform face area: A module in human extrastriate cortex
specialized for face perception. The Journal of Neuroscience. 1997; 17:4302–4311. [PubMed:
9151747]
Kosslyn SM, Cacioppo JT, Davidson RJ, Hugdahl K, Lovallo WR, Spiegel D, Rose R. Bridging
psychology and biology: The analysis of individuals in groups. American Psychologist. 2002;
57:341–351. [PubMed: 12025764]
McCrae, RR.; Costa, PT, Jr.. Conceptions and correlates of openness to experience.. In: Hogan, R.;
Johnson, J.; Briggs, S., editors. Handbook of personality psychology. Academic Press; Boston:
1997. p. 825-847.
McCrae, RR.; Costa, PT, Jr.. The five factor theory of personality.. In: John, OP.; Robins, RW.;
Pervin, LA., editors. Handbook of personality: Theory and research. Guilford Press; New York:
2008. p. 159-181.
McDaniel MA. Big-brained people are smarter: A meta-analysis of the relationship between in vivo
brain volume and intelligence. Intelligence. 2005; 33:337–346.
Miller EK, Cohen JD. An integrative theory of prefrontal cortex function. Annual Review of
Neuroscience. 2001; 24:167–202.
Nettle D, Liddle B. Agreeableness is related to social-cognitive, but not social-perceptual, theory of
mind. European Journal of Personality. 2008; 22:323–335.
Ochsner KN, Gross JJ. The cognitive control of emotion. Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 2005; 9:242–
249. [PubMed: 15866151]
Omura K, Constable RT, Canli T. Amygdala gray matter concentration is associated with extraversion
and neuroticism. NeuroReport. 2005; 16:1905–1908. [PubMed: 16272876]
Ozer DJ, Benet-Martinez V. Personality and the prediction of consequential outcomes. Annual Review
of Psychology. 2006; 57:201–221.
Papademetris, X.; Jackowski, M.; Rajeevan, N.; Okuda, H.; Constable, RT.; Staib, LH. BioImage
Suite: An integrated medical image analysis suite: An update. [Computer software]. 2006.
Available from http://www.bioimagesuite.org
Pelphrey KA, Morris JP. Brain mechanisms for interpreting the actions of others from biologicalmotion cues. Current Directions in Psychological Science. 2006; 15:136–140. [PubMed:
18079992]
Rauch SL, Milad MR, Orr SP, Quinn BT, Fischl B, Pitman RK. Orbitofrontal thickness, retention of
fear extinction, and extraversion. NeuroReport. 2005; 16:1909–1912. [PubMed: 16272877]
Saxe R, Powell LJ. It's the thought that counts: Specific brain regions for one component of theory of
mind. Psychological Science. 2006; 17:692–699. [PubMed: 16913952]
Shaw P, Greenstein D, Lerch J, Clasen L, Lenroot R, Gogtay N, et al. Intellectual ability and cortical
development in children and adolescents. Nature. 2006; 440:676–679. [PubMed: 16572172]
Psychol Sci. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2011 March 6.
DeYoung et al.
Page 11
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Ward, BD. Simultaneous inference for fMRI data. 2000 [March 16, 2010]. from
http://homepage.usask.ca/~ges125/fMRI/AFNIdoc/AlphaSim.pdf
Williams LM, Brown KJ, Palmer D, Liddell BJ, Kemp AH, Olivieri G, et al. The mellow years?:
Neural basis of improving emotional stability over age. Journal of Neuroscience. 2006; 26:6422–
6430. [PubMed: 16775129]
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Psychol Sci. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2011 March 6.
DeYoung et al.
Page 12
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Fig. 1.
Brain regions in which local volume was significantly associated with (a) Extraversion, (b)
Conscientiousness, (c) Neuroticism, and (d) Agreeableness, as hypothesized (see also Table
1). Coordinates indicate the locations of the brain slices. Color is related to effect size, with
lighter color signifying a larger effect, and darker color signifying a smaller effect. PFC =
prefrontal cortex.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Psychol Sci. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2011 March 6.
DeYoung et al.
Page 13
Table 1
Brain Regions in Which Relative Local Volume Was Associated With a Big Five Trait
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Trait and brain region
β
Brodmann's area
Centroid (Talairach coordinates): x, y, z
Number of voxels
Medial orbitofrontal cortex
11
5, 33, –20
646*
0.35
Superior temporal sulcus
22
–60, –32, 4
57
–0.27
Cerebellum
—
10, –74, –6
256
–0.29
28/34
–12, –12, –7
1,822*
–0.41
Medial frontal gyrus
8/9
3, 38, 39
1,582*
–0.37
Mid-cingulate gyrus
24
15, –4, 31
693*
0.31
Mid-cingulate gyrus, caudate
24
–20, –1, 25
995*
0.34
Middle temporal gyrus
37
–52, –56, 2
654*
0.36
Precentral gyrus
4
56, –10, 26
320*
–0.32
Cerebellum
—
22, –37, –42
697*
0.39
Cerebellum
—
–52, –46, –30
25
0.29
Cerebellum
—
3, –74, –8
124
0.28
22/42
52, –20, 3
533*
–0.34
Posterior cingulate
29
–5, –45, 6
813*
0.34
Fusiform gyrus
18
36, –81, –7
1,059*
0.37
21/37
–60, –54, 8
17
0.26
Extraversion
Neuroticism
Medial temporal lobe, basal ganglia
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Agreeableness
Superior temporal sulcus
Middle temporal gyrus
Precentral gyrus
6
55, –9, 31
105
–0.28
Precuneus
7
–2, –54, 43
144
–0.28
Middle frontal gyrus
8/9
–45, 25, 39
229
–0.30
Cerebellum
—
–6, –79, –13
64
0.26
Middle frontal gyrus
8/9/10
–35, 36, 32
629*
0.43
Inferior frontal gyrus
44
–54, 16, 12
35
–0.27
Conscientiousness
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
Paracentral lobule
5
–3, –34, 48
22
–0.27
Fusiform gyrus
19
35, –80, –11
476*
–0.32
Superior parietal lobule
7
34, –60, 48
222
0.31
40
47, –31, 43
188
0.31
Openness/Intellect
Inferior parietal lobule
Lingual gyrus
18
27, –78, –3
40
–0.28
Middle temporal gyrus
37
–60, –46, –10
19
–0.28
Note: N = 116.
*
p < .05, corrected for cluster size.
Psychol Sci. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2011 March 6.