Exercise 1 - Rapport Building

Assignment 1
Aim:
The objective of the "Expressing a Feeling" activity is to create a nurturing atmosphere where
individuals can enhance their capacity to articulate positive emotions adeptly, thereby
nurturing emotional intelligence and fostering stronger interpersonal bonds.

Introduction:
During the last session's activity on building rapport, we focused on dealing with challenges
related to expressing positive and negative emotions. In this session, I had the opportunity to
reflect on my personal experiences and the obstacles that prevent me from openly
communicating my feelings, whether positive or negative. Through these discussions, I gained
a deeper understanding of the importance of emotional expression.

Main Discussion:
1. My friend and I had meaningful conversations that made me think about the importance of
open communication during both difficult and happy times. Through our exchange, we found
that some people find it difficult to express their emotions, and we realized that keeping
happiness to ourselves could prevent us from having deep connections. We also
acknowledged the importance of creating a safe environment where people can share their
thoughts without the fear of being judged.

2. After our conversation, I realized I value empathy and respect. I showed respect by listening
attentively to my friend's concerns without asking too many questions. Similarly, I
demonstrated empathy by sharing my own experiences and offering support. I also asked
some questions to understand the events and reasons behind the anecdotes and my friend's
feelings.

3. These values are essential in my professional life but also present challenges. Building
connections with colleagues through active listening and mutual respect can improve our
team's dynamics. Providing feedback that honors everyone's perspectives is an example of
respect. However, finding a balance between expressing my thoughts and following workplace
protocols can be challenging. It's also important to know when to maintain confidentiality.

My experience with my friend was more than just practice; it was a journey of self-discovery.
It taught me the value of open dialogue and emphasized the importance of empathy in building
genuine connections. However, the most valuable lesson was the art of attentive listening. It's
not just about hearing what someone else is saying; it's about being present and genuinely
caring about their perspective. Active listening can lead to a deeper understanding and the
discovery of shared experiences. This lesson has influenced my personal and professional
interactions, reminding me that sometimes, silence can speak volumes and that genuine
listening is the key to comprehension.
Conclusion:
My friend and I had an excellent opportunity to reflect and encourage each other as we
explored the complexities of expressing positive emotions. By sharing personal stories and
thoughts, we became more aware of how important it is to express emotions to form solid
connections and achieve personal fulfillment. Moving forward, we commit to being more
transparent and genuine in our emotional interactions, which will help improve our emotional
intelligence and strengthen our relationships with others.
 Exercise 2 - Intelligence

Aim:
This report aims to assess and analyze an individual's levels of self-determination using The
ARC's Self-Determination Scale. Through this evaluation, we aim to comprehensively
understand the individual's autonomy, self-regulation, psychological empowerment, and self-
realization. Furthermore, we strive to provide recommendations for fostering and enhancing
self-determination.

Introduction:
Self-determination, characterized by the ability to make choices and take control of one's life,
is fundamental to human autonomy and well-being. It encompasses various dimensions,
including autonomy, self-regulation, psychological empowerment, and self-realization, all of
which contribute to an individual's sense of agency and fulfillment. Recognizing an individual's
level of self-determination is crucial for developing effective interventions and support
mechanisms to facilitate personal growth and resilience. The ARC's Self-Determination Scale
serves as a structured tool for assessing these dimensions, offering valuable insights into an
individual's strengths and areas for improvement concerning self-determination. Through this
assessment, we endeavor to explore the multifaceted nature of self-determination and its
implications for both personal and professional achievements.

Methodology:
The ARC's Self-Determination Scale was used to assess the individual's level of self-
determination. This instrument is specifically designed to evaluate self-determination across
four domains: autonomy, self-regulation, psychological empowerment, and self-realization.
The assessment was conducted in a controlled setting to ensure consistency and reliability
of data collection. Participants were given clear instructions and encouraged to candidly
respond to a series of targeted questions aligned with each domain. Responses were then
scored according to predetermined criteria, with percentile ranks calculated based on
normative data derived from a representative sample population. Ethical protocols, including
obtaining informed consent and maintaining confidentiality, were strictly observed throughout
the assessment process to uphold the rights and privacy of participants.

Assignment 2

Definitions –
Behavioral Autonomy is the process of moving from dependence on others for care and
guidance to self-care and self-direction. This includes developing personal control over one's
life, establishing a personal value system, and being able to perform tasks necessary in the
adult world. A person's behavior is considered autonomous when it aligns with their interests,
abilities, and preferences without undue external influence. Self- and family-care activities,
self-management activities, recreational activities, and social and vocational activities are the
four categories of behavioral autonomy identified by Sigafoos et al. (1989). Individuals with
mental retardation or learning disabilities tend to have limited autonomy across these
categories.

Self-Regulated Behavior is a multifaceted response system that enables individuals to

navigate their environment effectively. It involves examining the environment, assessing
available responses, making decisions, taking action, evaluating outcomes, and adapting
plans as needed. Self-management techniques such as self-monitoring, self-instruction, self-
evaluation, and self-reinforcement, goal setting and achievement, problem-solving, and
observational learning are strategies that fall under self-regulated behavior. These strategies,
both behavioral and cognitive, empower individuals to take control of their lives and become
active agents in achieving their desired outcomes.

Habitual Action refers to actions that have been learned and practiced to the extent that they
become automatic or require minimal conscious effort. For instance, typing on a keyboard or
riding a bicycle. Experienced professionals who repeatedly encounter familiar problems
develop routine responses. This behavior signifies their ability to navigate familiar scenarios
with ingrained expertise and minimal deliberation.

Understanding is a cognitive process, often associated with academic learning in universities.

It was impractical to create a questionnaire that encompassed the breadth of Mezirow's
thoughtful action due to poor psychometric properties. Therefore, the scale was refined to
focus specifically on understanding or comprehension, drawing from Bloom's taxonomy. This
narrower focus allowed for greater reliability and discrimination in assessing cognitive
processes, particularly the ability to comprehend concepts independently of their broader
implications in personal or practical contexts.

Reflective thinking was initially championed by Dewey and involves actively and carefully
considering beliefs or knowledge in light of supporting evidence and potential implications.
Mezirow interprets this as validity testing, emphasizing the critique of assumptions in problem-
solving processes. Reflective thinking involves questioning premises to make taken-for-
granted situations problematic, thus engaging in problem-posing rather than just problem-
solving. Additional definitions by Boud et al. and Boyd and Fales align with Dewey's concept,
emphasizing the exploration of experiences to lead to new understandings and perspectives.
Boyd and Fales' definition highlights the importance of experience as a trigger for reflection,
aligning with Schön's notion of the reflective practitioner in professional contexts.

Critical Reflection is a higher level of reflective thinking, also known as premise reflection, as
described by Mezirow. Premise reflection involves becoming aware of the underlying reasons
behind our perceptions, thoughts, feelings, or actions. It draws heavily from Mezirow's work
on critical theory and the writings of Habermas. To undergo a perspective transformation,
individuals must recognize that many of their actions stem from deeply ingrained beliefs and
values absorbed from their environment. Premise reflection entails critically examining these
presuppositions, whether conscious or unconscious, and their consequences. However, it is
often challenging to change conventional wisdom and ingrained assumptions due to their
deeply embedded nature. Mezirow acknowledges the difficulty of perspective transformation,
suggesting that it requires a hiatus during which a problem is redefined to redirect action.
Considering this, premise reflection is less frequently observed compared to understanding or
reflective thinking, as it necessitates a significant change in perspective. This is particularly
true for topics central to individuals' main activities, as these tend to harbor the most deeply
entrenched beliefs. Dewey also recognized a deeper level of reflection, distinguishing it from
reflective thinking, but the text does not elaborate on it.

Results:

Autonomy: My autonomy level was assessed to be HIGH, scoring 39 out of 54. This suggests
I can have sense of control over decision-making and actions, potentially my ability to assert
independence.
Self-Regulation: I demonstrated HIGH self-regulation skills, scoring 14 out of 15. This indicates
an intermediate degree of self-control and discipline in managing thoughts, emotions, and
behaviors, which contributes to effective goal pursuit and self-management.
Psychological Empowerment: A high score was achieved in psychological empowerment, with
a score of 15 out of 16. This reflects a significant level of confidence and motivation.
Self-Realization: Regarding self-realization, I displayed a high level of self-awareness and
personal growth, scoring 13 out of 15. This suggests a strong sense of identity and purpose,
facilitating the pursuit of meaningful goals and fulfillment of personal aspirations.

Overall Self-Determination Score: My overall self-determination score totaled 81. While

strengths were evident in psychological empowerment and self-realization, areas for
improvement were very low. These results offer valuable insights for implementing tailored
interventions aimed at enhancing my self-determination and overall well-being.
 Exercise 3 - Situational Judgement Test
Introduction:
Situational judgment tests (SJTs) represent a widely adopted assessment method aimed at
evaluating an individual's proficiency in effectively navigating and addressing diverse
workplace scenarios. In today's dynamic and rapidly evolving work environments, the ability
to make informed decisions amidst challenging circumstances is paramount for achieving
success. This study seeks to explore situational awareness across four distinct sections, each
focusing on various facets of decision-making and problem-solving capabilities.

Methodology:

We conducted a situational judgment test comprising four sections, each meticulously crafted
to assess specific dimensions of situational awareness. Participants were presented with
realistic workplace scenarios and tasked with selecting the most suitable responses from a
provided range of options. Subsequently, the responses were compared against
predetermined correct answers to ascertain individual scores for each section.

Results:

Section 1 - Most Likely and Least Likely to Do: This segment aimed to assess my ability to
discern appropriate actions in given scenarios. Presented with situations requiring
identification of the most and least likely actions, I answered four questions and scored 20 out
of 24. The outcome indicated a high proficiency level in dealing with the presented scenarios,
with responses reflecting a blend of effective and less optimal choices. Identification of
strengths and areas for improvement offered valuable insights into decision-making
tendencies.

Section 2 - Effectiveness of Responses: In this section, I evaluated the effectiveness of various

response options in addressing presented scenarios. Answering four questions, I scored 21
out of 24, revealing a high competency level and understanding of the effectiveness of different
actions. Strong decision-making skills were showcased, indicating adeptness in navigating
complex challenges effectively.

Section 3 - Most Likely and Least Likely to Do (Part 2): Building upon prior themes, this part
focused on identifying appropriate actions in a different set of scenarios. Answering four
questions, I scored 8 out of 24, reflecting a lower understanding of suitable actions. Emerging
patterns in decision-making tendencies provided further insights into thought processes and
problem-solving approaches.

Section 4 - Effectiveness of Responses (Part 2): The final section aimed to assess my ability
to evaluate the effectiveness of response options across various scenarios. Answering three
questions, I scored 23 out of 24, demonstrating a high proficiency level and adeptness in
selecting appropriate courses of action. Strong decision-making abilities were evident,
emphasizing competency in navigating diverse and complex workplace situations.

Conclusion:
In summary, my performance on the situational judgment test demonstrates a commendable
level of situational awareness. Although there are areas for potential development, my
capacity to assess and respond to workplace scenarios effectively underscores my value as
an asset in professional contexts. Through ongoing practice and refinement of my decision-
making skills, I can further augment my situational awareness, thereby bolstering my success
across diverse roles and environments.
 Exercise 4 - Creativity Test
Introduction:
The purpose of the creativity test is to evaluate my inclination toward innovative thinking and
problem-solving abilities. In today's rapidly evolving world, creativity has emerged as a
fundamental skill across various sectors, driving advancement and adaptability. This study
delves into the intricacies of creativity by analyzing my responses to diverse questions,
shedding light on my creative potential and capacity to generate original ideas.

Methodology:
To conduct the creativity test, I encountered a series of questions, each presenting three
response options: agree, disagree, or undecided. Covering a broad spectrum of topics and
scenarios, these questions enabled me to articulate my unique perspectives and cognitive
processes. Each response option was assigned a specific rating, reflecting its alignment with
established criteria for creativity.
Subsequently, my responses underwent meticulous analysis and comparison with correct
answers, with scores allocated based on their conformity with the principles of creative
thinking. The scoring system categorized my proficiency into various tiers, ranging from less
creative to exceptionally creative. Rigorous adherence to standardized protocols ensured the
reliability and validity of the assessment.

Results:
After the completion of the creativity test, my responses underwent aggregation and analysis,
yielding a final score of 45 out of 40 questions. This situates me within the average realm of
creativity, suggesting a moderate proficiency level in devising innovative ideas and strategies
across diverse scenarios.
Although I exhibited some capacity for creative thinking, there exists scope for further
enhancement and honing of my creative skills. These findings provide valuable insights into
my creative aptitude and developmental areas, paving the path for tailored interventions and
training initiatives designed to nurture creativity and foster innovation.

Conclusion:
To conclude, the creativity test offers significant insights into my creative abilities and
inclination toward innovative thinking. Through the analysis of my responses to diverse
questions, I attain a clearer comprehension of my capability to generate original ideas and
problem-solving approaches. While my creativity falls within the average range, these results
provide a starting point for future advancement and refinement in this crucial skill domain. With
the implementation of focused interventions and support, I can continue to develop my creative
potential, fostering innovation and achieving success in both personal and professional
spheres.
 Exercise 5 - IPIP-NEO Personality Inventory

Introduction:
The Big Five personality traits are a comprehensive framework used to describe and
understand human personality. These traits are considered to capture the broadest
dimensions of personality, providing a useful framework for organizing individual differences
in behavior, thoughts, and emotions. The Big Five traits are:
1. Openness to Experience: This trait reflects a person's receptiveness to new ideas,
experiences, and sensations. Individuals high in openness tend to be curious, imaginative,
and open-minded, while those low in openness may be more conventional and prefer
familiarity.
2. Conscientiousness: Conscientiousness refers to the degree of organization, responsibility,
and self-discipline in an individual. Highly conscientious individuals are dependable,
organized, and achievement-oriented, while those low in conscientiousness may be more
spontaneous and less focused on long-term goals.
3. Extraversion: Extraversion encompasses traits related to sociability, assertiveness, and
positive emotionality. Extroverted individuals are outgoing, energetic, and seek social
stimulation, while introverted individuals are more reserved and prefer solitude or small group
interactions.
4. Agreeableness: Agreeableness reflects the extent to which a person is cooperative,
compassionate, and considerate towards others. Highly agreeable individuals are empathetic,
trusting, and accommodating, while those low in agreeableness may be more competitive or
skeptical.
5. Neuroticism: Neuroticism refers to the tendency to experience negative emotions such as
anxiety, depression, and vulnerability. Individuals high in neuroticism are prone to emotional
instability, worry, and mood swings, while those low in neuroticism tend to be more emotionally
stable and resilient.
These traits interact with one another and influence various aspects of life, including
interpersonal relationships, career choices, and overall well-being. Understanding one's Big
Five profile can provide valuable insights into personality strengths, weaknesses, and potential
areas for personal growth.
The IPIP-NEO-300 is a comprehensive personality inventory designed around the OCEAN
Model, encompassing 30 distinct traits grouped into five factors: Openness to Experience,
Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Neuroticism. Commercial and public
domain personality inventories, such as the Hogan Personality Inventory and the NEO PI-R,
have been developed based on these five broad personality dispositions, or domains.
The facets within each domain provide a nuanced understanding of individual differences, with
variations across different inventories. This breadth allows for tailored assessments to suit
various organizational and clinical needs.
Applications of these assessments span diverse fields, including business, personnel
selection, training, skill acquisition, and clinical psychology. In business, personality
assessments inform hiring decisions and team dynamics. In clinical settings, they aid in
diagnosis and treatment planning.
Furthermore, these tools are instrumental in understanding cultural differences and facilitating
cross-cultural communication and cooperation. The widespread adoption of these
assessments underscores their significance in both academic research and practical
applications.

Methodology:
During the personality assessment, I carefully considered each statement, reflecting on how
accurately it described my behaviors and tendencies. I rated each statement based on my
honest self-perception, considering how I generally behave compared to others of my gender
and similar age.
There were statements like “Worry about things.” and adjacent to it were 5 options Very
Inaccurate, Moderately Inaccurate, Neither Accurate Nor Inaccurate, Moderately Accurate,
Very Accurate. I chose the option which I felt best describes me.
I evaluated myself as I am currently, rather than how I aspire to be in the future, aiming for a
true representation of my personality. It was important to provide responses that reflected my
genuine traits and characteristics, maintaining the integrity of the assessment.
As I progressed through the questions, I made sure to respond to each item, recognizing that
skipping questions would compromise the validity of the results. I acknowledged any mistakes
or changes in my responses by adjusting my ratings accordingly before submitting them for
scoring.
Overall, I approached the assessment with honesty and introspection, recognizing its
significance in providing insights into my personality traits and tendencies.

Results:
Extraversion:

Based on the scores provided for the facets of the Extraversion domain in the OCEAN
personality test, it's evident that I exhibit a strong inclination toward extraverted behaviors
overall. Specifically, my scores indicate a high level of friendliness and gregariousness,
suggesting that I am sociable, outgoing, and enjoy interacting with others. Additionally, my
tendency towards excitement-seeking and cheerfulness further supports this notion, indicating
a preference for lively and stimulating environments. However, my score for assertiveness
falls slightly below the other facets, suggesting that while I may not always assert myself
confidently in social situations, I still maintain a generally positive and approachable
demeanor. Moreover, my activity level score suggests a moderate level of energy and vigor
in my daily pursuits.
Agreeableness:

Based on the scores provided for the facets of the Agreeableness domain in the OCEAN
personality test, it's apparent that I exhibit a high level of agreeableness overall. Specifically,
my scores indicate a strong sense of morality, altruism, and sympathy, suggesting that I am
compassionate, empathetic, and genuinely concerned about others' well-being. My high score
in trust indicates that I generally have faith in others and tend to see the best in people,
although it's slightly lower compared to other facets. Additionally, my moderate score in
cooperation suggests that while I am generally willing to work with others, I may not always
prioritize collaboration in every situation. However, my lower score in modesty indicates that I
may not always downplay my achievements or seek attention.
Conscientiousness:

Based on the scores provided for the facets of the Conscientiousness domain in the OCEAN
personality test, it's evident that I exhibit a high level of conscientiousness overall. Specifically,
my scores indicate strengths in orderliness, dutifulness, achievement-striving, and self-
discipline, suggesting that I am organized, responsible, and motivated to achieve my goals.
My high score in orderliness reflects a preference for structure and organization in my daily
life, while my scores in dutifulness and achievement-striving indicate a strong sense of duty
and a drive for success. Additionally, my score in self-discipline suggests that I can regulate
my behaviors and stay focused on tasks, even in the face of distractions or challenges.
However, my lower score in self-efficacy suggests that I may sometimes doubt my abilities or
struggle with confidence in certain situations.
Neuroticism:
Based on the scores provided for the facets of the Conscientiousness domain in the OCEAN
personality test, it's evident that I exhibit a high level of conscientiousness overall. Specifically,
my scores indicate strengths in orderliness, dutifulness, achievement-striving, and self-
discipline, suggesting that I am organized, responsible, and motivated to achieve my goals.
My high score in orderliness reflects a preference for structure and organization in my daily
life, while my scores in dutifulness and achievement-striving indicate a strong sense of duty
and a drive for success. Additionally, my score in self-discipline suggests that I can regulate
my behaviors and stay focused on tasks, even in the face of distractions or challenges.
However, my lower score in self-efficacy suggests that I may sometimes doubt my abilities or
struggle with confidence in certain situations.
Openness to Experience:

Based on the scores provided for the facets of the Openness domain in the OCEAN
personality test, it's apparent that I exhibit a high level of openness to experience overall.
Specifically, my scores indicate strengths in artistic interests, adventurousness, and a
moderate level of emotionality, suggesting that I am curious and imaginative, and enjoy
exploring new ideas and experiences. My high score in artistic interests reflects a strong
appreciation for creativity and aesthetics, while my adventurousness score indicates a
willingness to seek out new and exciting experiences. However, my lower score in intellect
suggests that I may not always prioritize abstract thinking or intellectual pursuits. Additionally,
my moderate score in liberalism suggests that while I may be open-minded and receptive to
new ideas, I may also hold some more traditional or conservative beliefs. Conclusion:

Based on the analysis of my OCEAN personality results, it's evident that my strong points lie
in several areas. I demonstrate high levels of agreeableness, conscientiousness, and
openness to experience. These strengths can be leveraged to increase productivity in various
aspects of my life:
1. Agreeableness: My high level of agreeableness means I am pleasant, sympathetic, and
cooperative. I can use these traits to foster positive relationships with colleagues and clients,
collaborate effectively in team settings, and provide support to others when needed. This can
lead to improved teamwork, reduced conflicts, and overall enhanced morale in my work
environment.
2. Conscientiousness: My conscientious nature, characterized by traits such as orderliness,
dutifulness, and achievement-striving, makes me reliable, hardworking, and goal-oriented. I
can capitalize on these traits by setting clear goals, establishing efficient work routines, and
prioritizing tasks effectively. This can lead to increased efficiency, higher quality work output,
and greater success in achieving my professional objectives.
3. Openness to Experience: My openness to experience indicates that I enjoy novelty, variety,
and change. I can harness this trait by seeking out new challenges, embracing innovative
ideas and approaches, and continuously learning and adapting to new situations. This can
lead to personal growth, increased creativity, and a broader perspective, ultimately enhancing
my ability to tackle complex tasks and problem-solving.
While I have several strengths, there are also areas where I may have weaker points:
1. Assertiveness (Extraversion): My score for assertiveness falls slightly below other facets of
extraversion. Working on assertiveness skills can help me communicate my needs and ideas
more confidently, advocate for myself in professional settings, and assert my influence when
necessary.
2. Self-Efficacy (Conscientiousness): My score for self-efficacy is relatively low within the
conscientiousness domain. Building self-confidence and belief in my abilities can help me
overcome self-doubt and approach tasks with greater assurance and resilience.
3. Intellect (Openness): My score for intellect is relatively low within the openness domain.
Engaging in activities that stimulate intellectual curiosity, such as reading, attending seminars,
or pursuing further education, can help broaden my intellectual horizons and enhance my
critical thinking skills.
To address these weaknesses and further enhance my overall productivity I will:
- Consider seeking out opportunities for personal and professional development, such as
workshops or training programs, to strengthen areas where I may be less confident.
- Practice assertiveness techniques, such as effective communication and assertive body
language, to assert my needs and opinions more confidently.
- Set specific, achievable goals for self-improvement in targeted areas and track your progress
over time.
- Seek feedback from colleagues or mentors to gain insights into areas where I can improve
and receive guidance on how to address them effectively.
Exercise 6 - Personality and Collective Action -
not to be done, only survey happened in class
Introduction:
Personality plays a significant role in shaping individuals' propensity to engage in collective
action. According to social psychologists, collective action involves actions undertaken by
individuals as members of a psychological group with the aim of improving their group's
conditions. This can range from small acts like signing a petition to larger-scale movements.
Importantly, personality traits influence how individuals perceive and respond to socio-
structural conditions that either hinder or facilitate collective action. For instance, individuals
with a strong sense of social identity and a belief in the efficacy of collective action are more
likely to engage in activism, regardless of whether they belong to the advantaged or
disadvantaged group. Moreover, subjective factors, such as individuals' motivations and
beliefs, are crucial determinants of their participation in collective action. Understanding
individuals' core motivations is therefore essential in predicting and promoting collective action
initiatives. Thus, personality traits, coupled with subjective motivations, shape individuals'
readiness to participate in collective action efforts aimed at social change and improvement.

Methodology:
In order to assess my values regarding social groups and movements in society, I participated
in an online questionnaire designed to measure my stance on supporting either inclusiveness
and social change (Option A) or protecting established traditions and social order (Option B).
The questionnaire presented a series of scenarios and statements related to social activism,
collective action, and societal values. For each scenario, I indicated my level of agreement or
disagreement with statements reflecting the goals and objectives of each type of social group
or movement. The questionnaire aimed to gauge my preferences and priorities in terms of
advancing the rights of disadvantaged groups and promoting social change versus
maintaining the status quo and preserving traditional social structures. After completing the
questionnaire, my responses were analyzed to determine the extent to which I lean towards
either supporting social change and inclusiveness or upholding established traditions and
social order in society. This methodology allowed for an exploration of my values and provided
insights into my attitudes towards collective action and societal dynamics.

Exercise 6 - Motivation, Work Values and

Person-Environment Fit

Introduction:
Work Values -
The Work Values Inventory (WVI), serves as a comprehensive tool to assess the array of
values that drive individuals' motivation to work. The inventory comprises 45 items, each
reflecting values that individuals typically consider important in their work and the satisfactions
they seek from their jobs. Respondents rate each item using a 5-point Likert scale, allowing
for nuanced assessments of their work-related values. Overall, the WVI offers a structured
approach to exploring individuals' attitudes and priorities in the workplace, providing valuable
insights for career counseling and organizational development.
Motivation -
The Work Extrinsic and Intrinsic Motivation Scale (WEIMS) is a tool used to measure how
motivated people are at work. It's based on a theory called self-determination theory, which
talks about how people are motivated when they feel they have control over their actions and
choices. Researchers found that the scale was good at predicting both positive and negative
outcomes at work. The scale also showed good reliability and validity, meaning it measures
what it's supposed to measure and does so consistently. Overall, WEIMS is useful for
understanding motivation at work and can be trusted to give accurate results in different job
settings.
Person - Environment Fit -
Person-environment fit (PE fit) is a key concept in industrial and organizational psychology,
focusing on aligning individuals with their work environment for optimal outcomes. Despite its
importance, challenges persist in understanding and measuring PE fit, including its
multidimensionality, integration of fit theories, and simultaneous effects of multiple
dimensions. To address these challenges, this research introduces the Perceived Person-
Environment Fit Scale (PPEFS), comprising four measures: Person-Job Fit Scale (PJFS),
Person-Organization Fit Scale (POFS), Person-Group Fit Scale (PGFS), and Person-
Supervisor Fit Scale (PSFS). Through two independent studies, this study validates the
PPEFS and examines its psychometric properties and predictive validity on workplace
outcomes. By offering a comprehensive assessment tool, the PPEFS aims to advance
research and practice in understanding PE fit.

Methodology:
Work Values -
I completed the work values assessment to help me identify what I prioritize in a work
environment. This assessment asked me to rate the importance of various workplace values
on a scale from 1 to 4. For each value, I considered how crucial it is for my job satisfaction. A
rating of 4 indicates that a particular feature is extremely important to me and necessary for
my satisfaction in a job. A rating of 3 signifies that the feature is important, but I could live
without it if needed. If I rated a value as 2, it means that having that feature would be nice, but
it's not essential. Lastly, a rating of 1 indicates that a feature is not necessary for my job
satisfaction at all. By analyzing this list of common workplace values, I gained insights into my
priorities and what I seek in a job environment.
Motivation -
To assess the alignment between my reasons for being involved in my current work and a set
of 18 predefined items, I utilized a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (Does not correspond at
all) to 7 (Corresponds exactly). This scale allowed me to indicate the extent to which each
item resonated with my motivations for engaging in my work. Each item was carefully
considered, and I selected the option that best reflected my personal experience and reasons
for involvement in my current job. This methodology provided a systematic approach to
capturing the nuances of my motivations and their correspondence to the predefined items.
By employing this structured assessment, I aimed to gain insights into the alignment between
my motivations and the factors influencing my engagement in my work.
Person - Environment Fit -
I utilized four distinct scales to assess different dimensions of person-environment fit: the
Person-Job Fit Scale (PJFS), the Person-Organization Fit Scale (POFS), the Person-Group
Fit Scale (PGFS), and the Person-Supervisor Fit Scale (PSFS). Each scale consisted of
multiple questions aimed at gauging the alignment between various aspects of my
professional skills, knowledge, and abilities with those required by the job, organization, group,
and supervisor, respectively. Using a 7-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (no match) to 7
(complete match), I carefully evaluated each question to determine the extent of the match
between my attributes and the job or organizational context. This test provided a
comprehensive assessment of person-environment fit across multiple dimensions, allowing
for a nuanced understanding of the alignment between my skills and the requirements of my
work environment.

Result:
Out of 21, I scored 17 in intrinsic motivation, 8 in integrated regulation, 15 in identified
regulation, 8 in introjected regulation, 19 in external regulation, and 7 in amotivation.

Conclusion:
Upon completing the Work Intrinsic Extrinsic Motivation Test (WIEMT), I found that I scored
17 out of 21 in intrinsic motivation, indicating a strong internal drive and satisfaction derived
from my work. Additionally, my score of 15 in identified regulation reflects my belief in the
significance and value of my work-related goals. However, I also scored 8 in both integrated
and introjected regulation, suggesting that while I have some internalized motivations, external
pressures may also influence my engagement in work. Furthermore, my high score of 19 in
external regulation suggests that external rewards or consequences play a significant role in
motivating me. Despite this, my low score of 7 in amotivation demonstrates that I generally do
not feel indifferent or disinterested in my work. Overall, my results highlight a combination of
intrinsic and extrinsic motivations, with a predominant emphasis on intrinsic factors but also
influenced by external incentives.

Exercise 7 - Positive Human Strengths

Introduction:
The VIA Character Strengths Survey -
The VIA Character Strengths Survey offers a unique opportunity to explore and understand
the strengths that define our personality. This scientifically-backed survey, which takes just 10
minutes to complete, provides insights into our character strengths and their impact on various
aspects of our lives. Research demonstrates that leveraging our character strengths can lead
to increased happiness, a sense of purpose, stronger relationships, better stress
management, and greater success in achieving goals. Developed in the early 2000s, the VIA
Survey identifies 24 character strengths that are universally present in individuals, each falling
under six broad virtue categories. By discovering and utilizing our unique character strengths
profile, we can enhance our overall well-being and fulfillment in life.
The Wong and Law Emotional Intelligence Scale (WLIES) -
The Wong and Law Emotional Intelligence Scale (WLIES) was created to measure emotional
intelligence specifically for use in workplace research. Emotional intelligence, as defined by
Mayer and Salovey, involves several skills related to understanding and managing emotions.
These skills include accurately perceiving and expressing emotions, recognizing emotions in
others, regulating one's own emotions, and using emotions to aid in thinking and performance.
The scale originally had 36 items, with 9 items for each of the 4 dimensions of emotional
intelligence. Through analysis, it was found that the scale could be improved by selecting the
4 items with the strongest connections to each dimension. This resulted in a clearer structure
with 16 items representing the 4 dimensions. The scale showed good reliability and validity,
and it performed well in predicting life satisfaction compared to other measures of emotional
intelligence. Overall, the WLIES is a useful tool for assessing emotional intelligence in the
workplace.
Compound PsyCap Scale -
In Compound PsyCap Scale we measure something called psychological capital (PsyCap),
which is all about positive qualities like hope, optimism, resilience, and self-efficacy that help
people succeed in life and work. Until now, researchers have mainly used a questionnaire
called the Psychological Capital Questionnaire (PCQ) to measure PsyCap, but it's mostly
focused on work-related stuff. So, the researchers wanted to create a new questionnaire, the
Compound Psychological Capital Scale–12 (CPC-12), that could be used in all areas of life,
not just work. They did two studies to make sure CPC-12 works well. In the first study, they
used existing questions about hope, optimism, resilience, and self-efficacy from different
surveys to create CPC-12. They also checked if CPC-12 matched up with the PCQ and
another questionnaire about job-related confidence. In the second study, they tested CPC-12
again and checked if it was related to other positive things like happiness, job satisfaction, and
social support. They found that people who scored high on CPC-12 were more likely to feel
positive and satisfied with their lives and jobs. They also tended to have better coping skills
and felt more supported by their friends and family. Overall, CPC-12 seems like a good way
to measure PsyCap in all areas of life, not just at work.

Methodology:
The VIA Character Strengths Survey -
The methodology for this survey involved participants answering 96 questions designed to
assess their strengths and weaknesses. Each question presented a statement related to
various aspects of personal attributes, such as problem-solving skills, interpersonal abilities,
and emotional resilience. Participants were asked to rate their agreement with each statement
on a scale ranging from "Very Much Unlike Me" to "Very Much Like Me." The questions were
carefully crafted to cover a wide range of traits and behaviors to provide a comprehensive
understanding of each participant's strengths and areas for improvement. This approach
allowed for a thorough assessment of individual psychological capital, encompassing factors
like creativity, adaptability, confidence, and perseverance. The survey was conducted online,
providing ease of access for participants and ensuring anonymity to encourage honest
responses. Overall, this methodology aimed to offer insight into participants' personal
attributes and facilitate self-awareness and growth.
The Wong and Law Emotional Intelligence Scale (WLIES) -
The methodology for this survey involved participants responding to 16 statements, each
assessing various aspects of personal attributes on a 5-point scale from "Strongly Disagree"
(=1) to "Strongly Agree" (=5). Each statement presented in the survey aimed to capture
different facets of participants' strengths and weaknesses. Participants were asked to consider
each statement carefully and select the response that best reflected their own perceptions and
experiences. The statements covered a broad spectrum of characteristics, including problem-
solving abilities, interpersonal skills, and emotional resilience. Overall, this methodology
sought to facilitate a comprehensive understanding of participants' personal attributes and
promote self-awareness and growth.
Compound PsyCap Scale -
The methodology employed in this survey involved participants responding to 12 statements,
each assessing various aspects of personal attributes on a 5-point scale ranging from
"Strongly Disagree" (=1) to "Strongly Agree" (=5). Each statement presented aimed to capture
different dimensions of participants' self-perceptions, strengths, and areas for improvement.
Participants were instructed to carefully consider each statement and select the response that
most accurately reflected their own thoughts and experiences. By providing a structured
framework for self-assessment, the survey sought to offer individuals insight into their
psychological capital and personal attributes. Overall, this methodology aimed to facilitate a
comprehensive understanding of participants' self-perceptions and contribute to their personal
growth and development.

Result:
In my VIA Character Strengths Profile, my top five strengths include fairness, forgiveness,
appreciation of beauty and excellence, prudence, and teamwork. These strengths reflect my
commitment to justice, empathy, and collaboration, as well as my ability to appreciate beauty
and make thoughtful decisions. On the other hand, my last five qualities include honesty,
leadership, zest, creativity, self-regulation, and bravery. These qualities highlight my
authenticity, leadership abilities, enthusiasm for life, creativity, discipline, and courage in
facing challenges. Overall, my character strengths profile showcases a diverse range of
virtues and abilities that contribute to my personal and professional life.
According to the Wong and Law Emotional Intelligence Scale, I scored 18 in each of the four
dimensions: Self Emotion Appraisal (SEA), Others' Emotion Appraisal (DEA), Use of Emotion
(MOE), and Regulation of Emotion (RDE). These results suggest a high level of emotional
intelligence across all aspects measured by the scale. My ability to accurately perceive and
understand both my own emotions and those of others, as well as my capacity to effectively
use and regulate emotions, reflects a well-rounded emotional skill set. This balanced
proficiency in emotional intelligence bodes well for my interpersonal relationships, decision-
making abilities, and overall emotional well-being.
Based on the Compound PsyCap test results, my scores indicate a positive level of
psychological capital across several dimensions. I scored 12 in hope, demonstrating a
moderate level of optimism and belief in my ability to achieve goals despite challenges.
Additionally, with a score of 15 in optimism, I exhibit a generally positive outlook on life and
confidence in future outcomes. My resilience score of 11 suggests a capacity to bounce back
from adversity and maintain a sense of perseverance in the face of setbacks. Furthermore, a
score of 14 in self-efficacy reflects a strong belief in my ability to succeed in various tasks and
situations.

Conclusion:
In reviewing my VIA Character Strengths Profile, it's clear that my top strengths center around
principles of justice, temperance, and transcendence. Fairness and forgiveness underscore
my commitment to treating others with equality and empathy, while my appreciation of beauty
and excellence reflects my ability to find inspiration in various aspects of life. Additionally,
prudence highlights my careful decision-making approach, and my emphasis on teamwork
illustrates my dedication to collaborative efforts. On the other hand, qualities like honesty,
leadership, zest, creativity, self-regulation, and bravery showcase my authenticity, leadership
skills, enthusiasm, creativity, discipline, and courage in facing challenges. Together, these
strengths provide a comprehensive understanding of my character, revealing a blend of virtues
and abilities that contribute to my personal growth and relationships. In summary, I possess a
diverse range of character strengths that empower me to navigate life's obstacles with
resilience, integrity, and purpose.
The results of the Wong and Law Emotional Intelligence Scale indicate consistently high
scores across all four dimensions: Self Emotion Appraisal (SEA), Others' Emotion Appraisal
(DEA), Use of Emotion (MOE), and Regulation of Emotion (RDE). These scores suggest a
strong level of emotional intelligence, characterized by an ability to accurately perceive and
understand both one's own emotions and those of others. Additionally, the high score in Use
of Emotion indicates proficiency in effectively harnessing emotions to facilitate thought and
behavior. Furthermore, the high score in Regulation of Emotion suggests adeptness in
managing and controlling emotions to promote emotional and intellectual growth.
The results of the Compound PsyCap test reveal varying levels of psychological capital across
different dimensions. While optimism stands out with a strong score of 15, indicating a positive
outlook on life and confidence in future outcomes, hope, self-efficacy, and resilience show
slightly lower scores of 12, 14, and 11 respectively. Despite differences in scores, these results
collectively suggest a reasonably balanced psychological capital profile. The combination of
optimism, hope, self-efficacy, and resilience reflects a capacity to maintain positive beliefs,
persevere through challenges, and adapt to adversity. However, areas such as resilience
could benefit from further development to enhance coping mechanisms and bounce-back
ability in the face of setbacks. Overall, these results provide valuable insights into
psychological strengths and areas for growth, which can inform personal development efforts
and strategies to enhance overall well-being and resilience.

Exercise 8 - Psychological Well Being, PERMA

and Flourishing

Introduction:
Psychological Well Being -
Before 1989, researchers were interested in understanding happiness and life satisfaction,
but they hadn't fully captured the idea of psychological wellbeing on its own. Then,
psychologist Carol Ryff developed a new idea of wellbeing, which includes six important
dimensions. These dimensions are: feeling good about yourself (self-acceptance), having
good relationships with others, feeling independent (autonomy), feeling capable of handling
life's challenges (environmental mastery), having a sense of purpose, and feeling like you're
growing and improving as a person. If someone scores high on these dimensions, it means
they have high psychological wellbeing. On the other hand, if someone scores low, they may
feel stuck, disconnected from others, or lacking a sense of direction in life. Ryff's work helped
create a way to measure psychological wellbeing, which is important for understanding how
people feel about their lives.
PERMA -
In the book "Flourish," psychologist Martin Seligman outlined a concept of wellbeing based on
five pillars: Positive emotion, Engagement, Relationships, Meaning, and Accomplishment,
known as PERMA. To measure PERMA, researchers created the PERMA-Profiler, a brief
questionnaire. They started with hundreds of questions related to PERMA and then narrowed
them down through three studies involving over 7,000 participants. The final version of the
PERMA-Profiler consists of 15 questions, three for each domain of PERMA, along with eight
additional questions about overall wellbeing and other related factors. Further studies,
involving nearly 32,000 participants, tested the reliability and validity of the measure. The
PERMA-Profiler provides a way to visually assess wellbeing across different aspects of life,
adding to the tools available for monitoring and understanding wellbeing.
The Flourishing Scale -
Researchers developed measures to assess people's well-being by looking at both positive
and negative feelings. They tested these measures on 689 college students from six different
places. One measure, called the Flourishing Scale, is a short questionnaire with 8 questions.
It asks about how successful people feel in important parts of their lives, like relationships,
self-esteem, and optimism. The scale gives a single score to show how well someone feels
overall. Another measure, called the Scale of Positive and Negative Experience, asks about
positive and negative feelings people have had in the past four weeks. It has 6 questions for
positive feelings and 6 for negative feelings. The score from this scale helps to understand
how balanced someone's emotions are. These measures are reliable and connect well with
other tests that look at how people feel.

Methodology:
Psychological Well Being -
The methodology for the psychology wellbeing test involved answering a comprehensive
questionnaire consisting of 42 statements, designed to assess six dimensions of psychological
wellbeing: self-acceptance, positive relations with others, autonomy, environmental mastery,
purpose in life, and personal growth. Each item was carefully crafted to capture both positive
and negative aspects of these dimensions, with responses measured on a six-point scale
ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree.
PERMA -
The methodology for the assessment involved a questionnaire consisting of 15 questions
designed to measure various aspects of individuals' experiences and behaviors related to goal
accomplishment, absorption in activities, emotional states, and achievement of important
goals. Participants were instructed to rate each question on a scale from 0 to 10, where 0
represented "never" and 10 represented "always." The questions covered a range of domains,
including progress towards goals, absorption in activities, feelings of joy, and levels of anxiety.
This quantitative approach allowed for the systematic collection of data on participants'
subjective experiences and behaviors, providing valuable insights into their overall well-being
and psychological functioning.
The Flourishing Scale -
The methodology for the flourishing scale test involved participants responding to eight
statements using a 1–7 scale to indicate their level of agreement with each item. The
statements aimed to assess various aspects of individuals' well-being, including their sense
of purpose and meaning in life, the quality of their social relationships, their level of
engagement in daily activities, and their contribution to the happiness and well-being of others.
Participants were asked to select a response ranging from "strongly disagree" to "strongly
agree" for each statement, allowing for a nuanced evaluation of their subjective experiences
and perceptions related to flourishing. This quantitative approach facilitated the systematic
measurement of different dimensions of well-being, providing valuable insights into individuals'
overall flourishing and psychological health.

Result: Based on a Flourishing Scale score of 53 suggests that I feel positive about
my life in several important areas. The Flourishing Scale typically ranges from 8 (lower
levels of well-being) to 56 (higher levels of well-being), so a score of 53 indicates that
you perceive yourself as doing well in aspects such as relationships, self-esteem,
purpose, and optimism. This score reflects a high level of well-being and suggests that
you feel successful and content in many areas of your life. Keep in mind that personal
growth and well-being are ongoing processes, so continuing to engage in practices
that support your mental health and happiness is beneficial.

Conclusion: The conclusion of Exercise 8, which focused on Psychological Well-

Being, PERMA, and Flourishing, underscores the importance of a multifaceted
approach to understanding and measuring individual well-being. Through the
exploration of Carol Ryff's six dimensions of psychological well-being, Martin
Seligman's PERMA model, and the Flourishing Scale, this exercise highlights the
complexity of human well-being beyond mere happiness or life satisfaction. It
demonstrates that well-being encompasses a range of experiences and feelings, from
self-acceptance and purpose in life to positive relationships and achievements. The
methodologies employed, including comprehensive questionnaires and scales, offer
valuable tools for assessing various aspects of well-being, allowing individuals to
identify areas of strength and potential improvement. Ultimately, this exercise
reinforces the idea that flourishing in life involves a combination of positive emotions,
engagement, relationships, meaning, and accomplishments, providing a roadmap for
enhancing psychological health and overall life satisfaction.
Rupesh Kumar Yadav
VIA Character Strengths Profile
03/27/2024

1. Kindness
HUMANITY

Doing favors and good deeds for others; helping them; taking care of them.

2. Humor
TRANSCENDENCE

Liking to laugh and tease; bringing smiles to other people; seeing the light side; making (not necessarily
telling) jokes.

3. Gratitude
TRANSCENDENCE

Being aware of and thankful for the good things that happen; taking time to express thanks.

4. Perseverance
COURAGE

Finishing what one starts; persevering in a course of action in spite of obstacles; “getting it out the door”;
taking pleasure in completing tasks.

5. Judgment
WISDOM

Thinking things through and examining them from all sides; not jumping to conclusions; being able to change
one's mind in light of evidence; weighing all evidence fairly.

6. Curiosity
WISDOM

Taking an interest in ongoing experience for its own sake; finding subjects and topics fascinating; exploring
and discovering.

7. Perspective
WISDOM

Being able to provide wise counsel to others; having ways of looking at the world that make sense to
oneself/others.

8. Leadership
JUSTICE

Encouraging a group of which one is a member to get things done and at the same time maintain good relations
within the group; organizing group activities and seeing that they happen.

9. Prudence
TEMPERANCE

Being careful about one's choices; not taking undue risks; not saying or doing things that might later be
regretted.

©2024 VIA Institute on Character. All Rights Reserved.

Rupesh Kumar Yadav
VIA Character Strengths Profile
03/27/2024

10. Honesty
COURAGE

Speaking the truth but more broadly presenting oneself in a genuine way and acting in a sincere way; being
without pretense; taking responsibility for one's feelings and actions.

11. Fairness
JUSTICE

Treating all people the same according to notions of fairness and justice; not letting feelings bias decisions
about others; giving everyone a fair chance.

12. Social Intelligence

HUMANITY

Being aware of the motives/feelings of others and oneself; knowing what to do to fit into different social
situations; knowing what makes other people tick.

13. Love
HUMANITY

Valuing close relations with others, in particular those in which sharing & caring are reciprocated; being close
to people.

14. Creativity
WISDOM

Thinking of novel and productive ways to conceptualize and do things; includes artistic achievement but is not
limited to it.

15. Humility
TEMPERANCE

Letting one's accomplishments speak for themselves; not regarding oneself as more special than one is.

16. Bravery
COURAGE

Not shrinking from threat, challenge, difficulty, or pain; speaking up for what’s right even if there’s
opposition; acting on convictions even if unpopular; includes physical bravery but is not limited to it.

17. Appreciation of Beauty & Excellence

TRANSCENDENCE

Noticing and appreciating beauty, excellence, and/or skilled performance in various domains of life, from
nature to art to mathematics to science to everyday experience.

18. Zest
COURAGE

Approaching life with excitement and energy; not doing things halfway or halfheartedly; living life as an
adventure; feeling alive and activated.

©2024 VIA Institute on Character. All Rights Reserved.

Rupesh Kumar Yadav
VIA Character Strengths Profile
03/27/2024

19. Spirituality
TRANSCENDENCE

Having coherent beliefs about the higher purpose and meaning of the universe; knowing where one fits within
the larger scheme; having beliefs about the meaning of life that shape conduct and provide comfort.

20. Love of Learning

WISDOM

Mastering new skills, topics, and bodies of knowledge, whether on one's own or formally; related to the
strength of curiosity but goes beyond it to describe the tendency to add systematically to what one knows.

21. Hope
TRANSCENDENCE

Expecting the best in the future and working to achieve it; believing that a good future is something that can be
brought about.

22. Teamwork
JUSTICE

Working well as a member of a group or team; being loyal to the group; doing one's share.

23. Self-Regulation
TEMPERANCE

Regulating what one feels and does; being disciplined; controlling one's appetites and emotions.

24. Forgiveness
TEMPERANCE

Forgiving those who have done wrong; accepting others’ shortcomings; giving people a second chance; not
being vengeful.

CONTINUE YOUR STRENGTHS JOURNEY

VIA Total 24 Character Strengths Report

The VIA Total 24 Character Strengths Report is the ultimate, multifaceted review of your entire
Character Strengths Profile. Explore all your character strengths to maximize engagement,
happiness and well-being.

Buy Now

VIA Top 5 Character Strengths Report

The VIA Top 5 Character Strengths Report is a shortened version of the Total 24 Report with an
emphasis on the 5 highest strengths in your profile. Learn how these strengths impact your life and
how to use them to find greater well-being.

Buy Now

©2024 VIA Institute on Character. All Rights Reserved.

 IPIP-NEO Report for Rupesh Kumar Yadav
NOTE: The report sent to your computer screen upon the completion of the IPIP-NEO is only
a temporary web page. When you exit your web browser you will not be able to return to this
URL to re-access your report. No copies of the report are sent to anyone. IF YOU WANT A
PERMANENT COPY OF THE REPORT, YOU MUST SAVE THE WEB PAGE TO YOUR
HARD DRIVE OR OTHER STORAGE MEDIUM, AND/OR PRINT THE REPORT WHILE
YOU ARE STILL VIEWING IT IN YOUR WEB BROWSER. Probably the best way to save
the report is to select and copy the entire page (Ctrl-A, Ctrl-C on most browsers), paste it into a
word processor, and save the document.

This report compares Rupesh Kumar Yadav from the country India to average scores from 720,288
persons of all genders, ages, and nationalities.. (The name used in this report is either a nickname
chosen by the person taking the test, or, if a valid nickname was not chosen, a random nickname
generated by the program.)

This report estimates the individual's level on each of the five broad personality domains of the Five-
Factor Model. The description of each one of the five broad domains is followed by a more detailed
description of personality according to the six subdomains that comprise each domain.

A note on terminology. Personality traits describe, relative to other people, the frequency or intensity
of a person's feelings, thoughts, or behaviors. Possession of a trait is therefore a matter of degree. We
might describe two individuals as extraverts, but still see one as more extraverted than the other. This
report uses expressions such as "extravert" or "high in extraversion" to describe someone who is
likely to be seen by others as relatively extraverted. The computer program that generates this report
classifies you as low, average, or high in a trait according to whether your score is approximately in
the lowest 30%, middle 40%, or highest 30% of scores obtained by people of your sex and roughly
your age. Your numerical scores are reported and graphed as percentile estimates. For example, a
score of "60" means that your level on that trait is estimated to be higher than 60% of persons of your
sex and age.

Please keep in mind that "low," "average," and "high" scores on a personality test are neither
absolutely good nor bad. A particular level on any trait will probably be neutral or irrelevant for a
great many activites, be helpful for accomplishing some things, and detrimental for accomplishing
other things. As with any personality inventory, scores and descriptions can only approximate an
individual's actual personality. High and low score descriptions are usually accurate, but average
scores close to the low or high boundaries might misclassify you as only average. On each set of six
subdomain scales it is somewhat uncommon but certainly possible to score high in some of the
subdomains and low in the others. In such cases more attention should be paid to the subdomain
scores than to the broad domain score. Questions about the accuracy of your results are best resolved
by showing your report to people who know you well.

John A. Johnson wrote descriptions of the five domains and thirty subdomains. These descriptions
are based on an extensive reading of the scientific literature on personality measurement. Although
Dr. Johnson would like to be acknowledged as the author of these materials if they are reproduced, he
:
 has placed them in the public domain.

Extraversion
Extraversion is marked by pronounced engagement with the external world. Extraverts enjoy being
with people, are full of energy, and often experience positive emotions. They tend to be enthusiastic,
action-oriented, individuals who are likely to say "Yes!" or "Let's go!" to opportunities for
excitement. In groups they like to talk, assert themselves, and draw attention to themselves.

Introverts lack the exuberance, energy, and activity levels of extraverts. They tend to be quiet, low-
key, deliberate, and disengaged from the social world. Their lack of social involvement should not be
interpreted as shyness or depression; the introvert simply needs less stimulation than an extravert and
prefers to be alone. The independence and reserve of the introvert is sometimes mistaken as
unfriendliness or arrogance. In reality, an introvert who scores high on the agreeableness dimension
will not seek others out but will be quite pleasant when approached.

DOMAIN/Facet Score
EXTRAVERSION 19
..Friendliness 23
..Gregariousness 31
..Assertiveness 16
..Activity Level 30
..Excitement-Seeking 48
..Cheerfulness 14
Your score on Extraversion is low, indicating you are introverted, reserved, and quiet. You enjoy
solitude and solitary activities. Your socializing tends to be restricted to a few close friends.

Extraversion Facets

Friendliness. Friendly people genuinely like other people and openly demonstrate positive
feelings toward others. They make friends quickly and it is easy for them to form close,
intimate relationships. Low scorers on Friendliness are not necessarily cold and hostile, but
they do not reach out to others and are perceived as distant and reserved. Your level of
friendliness is low.
Gregariousness. Gregarious people find the company of others pleasantly stimulating and
rewarding. They enjoy the excitement of crowds. Low scorers tend to feel overwhelmed by,
and therefore actively avoid, large crowds. They do not necessarily dislike being with people
sometimes, but their need for privacy and time to themselves is much greater than for
individuals who score high on this scale. Your level of gregariousness is low.
Assertiveness. High scorers Assertiveness like to speak out, take charge, and direct the
activities of others. They tend to be leaders in groups. Low scorers tend not to talk much and
let others control the activities of groups. Your level of assertiveness is low.
Activity Level. Active individuals lead fast-paced, busy lives. They move about quickly,
energetically, and vigorously, and they are involved in many activities. People who score low
:
 on this scale follow a slower and more leisurely, relaxed pace. Your activity level is low.
Excitement-Seeking. High scorers on this scale are easily bored without high levels of
stimulation. They love bright lights and hustle and bustle. They are likely to take risks and seek
thrills. Low scorers are overwhelmed by noise and commotion and are adverse to thrill-
seeking. Your level of excitement-seeking is average.
Cheerfulness. This scale measures positive mood and feelings, not negative emotions (which
are a part of the Neuroticism domain). Persons who score high on this scale typically
experience a range of positive feelings, including happiness, enthusiasm, optimism, and joy.
Low scorers are not as prone to such energetic, high spirits. Your level of positive emotions is
low.

Agreeableness
Agreeableness reflects individual differences in concern with cooperation and social harmony.
Agreeable individuals value getting along with others. They are therefore considerate, friendly,
generous, helpful, and willing to compromise their interests with others'. Agreeable people also have
an optimistic view of human nature. They believe people are basically honest, decent, and
trustworthy.

Disagreeable individuals place self-interest above getting along with others. They are generally
unconcerned with others' well-being, and therefore are unlikely to extend themselves for other
people. Sometimes their skepticism about others' motives causes them to be suspicious, unfriendly,
and uncooperative.

Agreeableness is obviously advantageous for attaining and maintaining popularity. Agreeable people
are better liked than disagreeable people. On the other hand, agreeableness is not useful in situations
that require tough or absolute objective decisions. Disagreeable people can make excellent scientists,
critics, or soldiers.

DOMAIN/Facet Score
AGREEABLENESS 5
..Trust 22
..Morality 9
..Altruism 1
..Cooperation 27
..Modesty 32
..Sympathy 11
Your score on Agreeableness is low, indicating less concern with others' needs Than with your own.
People see you as tough, critical, and uncompromising.

Agreeableness Facets

Trust. A person with high trust assumes that most people are fair, honest, and have good
intentions. Persons low in trust see others as selfish, devious, and potentially dangerous. Your
:
 level of trust is low.
Morality. High scorers on this scale see no need for pretense or manipulation when dealing
with others and are therefore candid, frank, and sincere. Low scorers believe that a certain
amount of deception in social relationships is necessary. People find it relatively easy to relate
to the straightforward high-scorers on this scale. They generally find it more difficult to relate
to the unstraightforward low-scorers on this scale. It should be made clear that low scorers are
not unprincipled or immoral; they are simply more guarded and less willing to openly reveal
the whole truth. Your level of morality is low.
Altruism. Altruistic people find helping other people genuinely rewarding. Consequently, they
are generally willing to assist those who are in need. Altruistic people find that doing things for
others is a form of self-fulfillment rather than self-sacrifice. Low scorers on this scale do not
particularly like helping those in need. Requests for help feel like an imposition rather than an
opportunity for self-fulfillment. Your level of altruism is low.
Cooperation. Individuals who score high on this scale dislike confrontations. They are
perfectly willing to compromise or to deny their own needs in order to get along with others.
Those who score low on this scale are more likely to intimidate others to get their way. Your
level of compliance is low.
Modesty. High scorers on this scale do not like to claim that they are better than other people.
In some cases this attitude may derive from low self-confidence or self-esteem. Nonetheless,
some people with high self-esteem find immodesty unseemly. Those who are willing to
describe themselves as superior tend to be seen as disagreeably arrogant by other people. Your
level of modesty is average.
Sympathy. People who score high on this scale are tenderhearted and compassionate. They feel
the pain of others vicariously and are easily moved to pity. Low scorers are not affected
strongly by human suffering. They pride themselves on making objective judgments based on
reason. They are more concerned with truth and impartial justice than with mercy. Your level
of tender-mindedness is low.

Conscientiousness
Conscientiousness concerns the way in which we control, regulate, and direct our impulses. Impulses
are not inherently bad; occasionally time constraints require a snap decision, and acting on our first
impulse can be an effective response. Also, in times of play rather than work, acting spontaneously
and impulsively can be fun. Impulsive individuals can be seen by others as colorful, fun-to-be-with,
and zany.

Nonetheless, acting on impulse can lead to trouble in a number of ways. Some impulses are
antisocial. Uncontrolled antisocial acts not only harm other members of society, but also can result in
retribution toward the perpetrator of such impulsive acts. Another problem with impulsive acts is that
they often produce immediate rewards but undesirable, long-term consequences. Examples include
excessive socializing that leads to being fired from one's job, hurling an insult that causes the breakup
of an important relationship, or using pleasure-inducing drugs that eventually destroy one's health.

Impulsive behavior, even when not seriously destructive, diminishes a person's effectiveness in
significant ways. Acting impulsively disallows contemplating alternative courses of action, some of
which would have been wiser than the impulsive choice. Impulsivity also sidetracks people during
:
 projects that require organized sequences of steps or stages. Accomplishments of an impulsive person
are therefore small, scattered, and inconsistent.

A hallmark of intelligence, what potentially separates human beings from earlier life forms, is the
ability to think about future consequences before acting on an impulse. Intelligent activity involves
contemplation of long-range goals, organizing and planning routes to these goals, and persisting
toward one's goals in the face of short-lived impulses to the contrary. The idea that intelligence
involves impulse control is nicely captured by the term prudence, an alternative label for the
Conscientiousness domain. Prudent means both wise and cautious. Persons who score high on the
Conscientiousness scale are, in fact, perceived by others as intelligent.

The benefits of high conscientiousness are obvious. Conscientious individuals avoid trouble and
achieve high levels of success through purposeful planning and persistence. They are also positively
regarded by others as intelligent and reliable. On the negative side, they can be compulsive
perfectionists and workaholics. Furthermore, extremely conscientious individuals might be regarded
as stuffy and boring. Unconscientious people may be criticized for their unreliability, lack of
ambition, and failure to stay within the lines, but they will experience many short-lived pleasures and
they will never be called stuffy.

DOMAIN/Facet Score
CONSCIENTIOUSNESS 6
..Self-Efficacy 2
..Orderliness 21
..Dutifulness 1
..Achievement-Striving 25
..Self-Discipline 37
..Cautiousness 16
Your score on Conscientiousness is low, indicating you like to live for the moment and do what feels
good now. Your work tends to be careless and disorganized.

Conscientiousness Facets

Self-Efficacy. Self-Efficacy describes confidence in one's ability to accomplish things. High

scorers believe they have the intelligence (common sense), drive, and self-control necessary for
achieving success. Low scorers do not feel effective, and may have a sense that they are not in
control of their lives. Your level of self-efficacy is low.
Orderliness. Persons with high scores on orderliness are well-organized. They like to live
according to routines and schedules. They keep lists and make plans. Low scorers tend to be
disorganized and scattered. Your level of orderliness is low.
Dutifulness. This scale reflects the strength of a person's sense of duty and obligation. Those
who score high on this scale have a strong sense of moral obligation. Low scorers find
contracts, rules, and regulations overly confining. They are likely to be seen as unreliable or
even irresponsible. Your level of dutifulness is low.
Achievement-Striving. Individuals who score high on this scale strive hard to achieve
excellence. Their drive to be recognized as successful keeps them on track toward their lofty
:
 goals. They often have a strong sense of direction in life, but extremely high scores may be too
single-minded and obsessed with their work. Low scorers are content to get by with a minimal
amount of work, and might be seen by others as lazy. Your level of achievement striving is low.
Self-Discipline. Self-discipline-what many people call will-power-refers to the ability to persist
at difficult or unpleasant tasks until they are completed. People who possess high self-
discipline are able to overcome reluctance to begin tasks and stay on track despite distractions.
Those with low self-discipline procrastinate and show poor follow-through, often failing to
complete tasks-even tasks they want very much to complete. Your level of self-discipline is
average.
Cautiousness. Cautiousness describes the disposition to think through possibilities before
acting. High scorers on the Cautiousness scale take their time when making decisions. Low
scorers often say or do first thing that comes to mind without deliberating alternatives and the
probable consequences of those alternatives. Your level of cautiousness is low.

Neuroticism
Freud originally used the term neurosis to describe a condition marked by mental distress, emotional
suffering, and an inability to cope effectively with the normal demands of life. He suggested that
everyone shows some signs of neurosis, but that we differ in our degree of suffering and our specific
symptoms of distress. Today neuroticism refers to the tendency to experience negative feelings.
Those who score high on Neuroticism may experience primarily one specific negative feeling such as
anxiety, anger, or depression, but are likely to experience several of these emotions. People high in
neuroticism are emotionally reactive. They respond emotionally to events that would not affect most
people, and their reactions tend to be more intense than normal. They are more likely to interpret
ordinary situations as threatening, and minor frustrations as hopelessly difficult. Their negative
emotional reactions tend to persist for unusually long periods of time, which means they are often in
a bad mood. These problems in emotional regulation can diminish a neurotic's ability to think clearly,
make decisions, and cope effectively with stress.

At the other end of the scale, individuals who score low in neuroticism are less easily upset and are
less emotionally reactive. They tend to be calm, emotionally stable, and free from persistent negative
feelings. Freedom from negative feelings does not mean that low scorers experience a lot of positive
feelings; frequency of positive emotions is a component of the Extraversion domain.

DOMAIN/Facet Score
NEUROTICISM 44
..Anxiety 25
..Anger 45
..Depression 64
..Self-Consciousness 40
..Immoderation 35
..Vulnerability 56
Your score on Neuroticism is average, indicating that your level of emotional reactivity is typical of
the general population. Stressful and frustrating situations are somewhat upsetting to you, but you are
:
 generally able to get over these feelings and cope with these situations.

Neuroticism Facets

Anxiety. The "fight-or-flight" system of the brain of anxious individuals is too easily and too
often engaged. Therefore, people who are high in anxiety often feel like something dangerous
is about to happen. They may be afraid of specific situations or be just generally fearful. They
feel tense, jittery, and nervous. Persons low in Anxiety are generally calm and fearless. Your
level of anxiety is low.
Anger. Persons who score high in Anger feel enraged when things do not go their way. They
are sensitive about being treated fairly and feel resentful and bitter when they feel they are
being cheated. This scale measures the tendency to feel angry; whether or not the person
expresses annoyance and hostility depends on the individual's level on Agreeableness. Low
scorers do not get angry often or easily. Your level of anger is average.
Depression. This scale measures the tendency to feel sad, dejected, and discouraged. High
scorers lack energy and have difficult initiating activities. Low scorers tend to be free from
these depressive feelings. Your level of depression is average.
Self-Consciousness. Self-conscious individuals are sensitive about what others think of them.
Their concern about rejection and ridicule cause them to feel shy and uncomfortable abound
others. They are easily embarrassed and often feel ashamed. Their fears that others will
criticize or make fun of them are exaggerated and unrealistic, but their awkwardness and
discomfort may make these fears a self-fulfilling prophecy. Low scorers, in contrast, do not
suffer from the mistaken impression that everyone is watching and judging them. They do not
feel nervous in social situations. Your level or self-consciousness is average.
Immoderation. Immoderate individuals feel strong cravings and urges that they have have
difficulty resisting. They tend to be oriented toward short-term pleasures and rewards rather
than long- term consequences. Low scorers do not experience strong, irresistible cravings and
consequently do not find themselves tempted to overindulge. Your level of immoderation is
average.
Vulnerability. High scorers on Vulnerability experience panic, confusion, and helplessness
when under pressure or stress. Low scorers feel more poised, confident, and clear-thinking
when stressed. Your level of vulnerability is average.

Openness to Experience
Openness to Experience describes a dimension of cognitive style that distinguishes imaginative,
creative people from down-to-earth, conventional people. Open people are intellectually curious,
appreciative of art, and sensitive to beauty. They tend to be, compared to closed people, more aware
of their feelings. They tend to think and act in individualistic and nonconforming ways. Intellectuals
typically score high on Openness to Experience; consequently, this factor has also been called
Culture or Intellect. Nonetheless, Intellect is probably best regarded as one aspect of openness to
experience. Scores on Openness to Experience are only modestly related to years of education and
scores on standard intelligent tests.

Another characteristic of the open cognitive style is a facility for thinking in symbols and abstractions
far removed from concrete experience. Depending on the individual's specific intellectual abilities,
:
 this symbolic cognition may take the form of mathematical, logical, or geometric thinking, artistic
and metaphorical use of language, music composition or performance, or one of the many visual or
performing arts. People with low scores on openness to experience tend to have narrow, common
interests. They prefer the plain, straightforward, and obvious over the complex, ambiguous, and
subtle. They may regard the arts and sciences with suspicion, regarding these endeavors as abstruse
or of no practical use. Closed people prefer familiarity over novelty; they are conservative and
resistant to change.

Openness is often presented as healthier or more mature by psychologists, who are often themselves
open to experience. However, open and closed styles of thinking are useful in different environments.
The intellectual style of the open person may serve a professor well, but research has shown that
closed thinking is related to superior job performance in police work, sales, and a number of service
occupations.

DOMAIN/Facet Score
OPENNESS 1
..Imagination 4
..Artistic Interests 1
..Emotionality 4
..Adventurousness 15
..Intellect 8
..Liberalism 26
Your score on Openness to Experience is low, indicating you like to think in plain and simple terms.
Others describe you as down-to-earth, practical, and conservative.

Openness Facets

Imagination. To imaginative individuals, the real world is often too plain and ordinary. High
scorers on this scale use fantasy as a way of creating a richer, more interesting world. Low
scorers are on this scale are more oriented to facts than fantasy. Your level of imagination is
low.
Artistic Interests. High scorers on this scale love beauty, both in art and in nature. They become
easily involved and absorbed in artistic and natural events. They are not necessarily artistically
trained nor talented, although many will be. The defining features of this scale are interest in,
and appreciation of natural and artificial beauty. Low scorers lack aesthetic sensitivity and
interest in the arts. Your level of artistic interests is low.
Emotionality. Persons high on Emotionality have good access to and awareness of their own
feelings. Low scorers are less aware of their feelings and tend not to express their emotions
openly. Your level of emotionality is low.
Adventurousness. High scorers on adventurousness are eager to try new activities, travel to
foreign lands, and experience different things. They find familiarity and routine boring, and
will take a new route home just because it is different. Low scorers tend to feel uncomfortable
with change and prefer familiar routines. Your level of adventurousness is low.
Intellect. Intellect and artistic interests are the two most important, central aspects of openness
to experience. High scorers on Intellect love to play with ideas. They are open-minded to new
:
 and unusual ideas, and like to debate intellectual issues. They enjoy riddles, puzzles, and brain
teasers. Low scorers on Intellect prefer dealing with either people or things rather than ideas.
They regard intellectual exercises as a waste of time. Intellect should not be equated with
intelligence. Intellect is an intellectual style, not an intellectual ability, although high scorers on
Intellect score slightly higher than low-Intellect individuals on standardized intelligence tests.
Your level of intellect is low.
Liberalism. Psychological liberalism refers to a readiness to challenge authority, convention,
and traditional values. In its most extreme form, psychological liberalism can even represent
outright hostility toward rules, sympathy for law-breakers, and love of ambiguity, chaos, and
disorder. Psychological conservatives prefer the security and stability brought by conformity to
tradition. Psychological liberalism and conservatism are not identical to political affiliation, but
certainly incline individuals toward certain political parties. Your level of liberalism is low.
: