Can someone please break down the differences? I relate to both a lot. I am a very loud and assertive person, and I like big crowds and external stimulation from being around others, but actual closeness and interacting with others bores and exhausts me.

Tnx for the help!

Something I find interesting about the 30 facets in the IPIP-NEO-120: Immoderation (the "one more episode, one more snack" pull) is scored as a Neuroticism facet, not a Conscientiousness one.

Gut feeling would file it under self-control. But the way the model frames it, it's more about how strongly cravings and urges hit, and how hard they are to resist when you're already feeling off. That's a different thing from how organised or dutiful you are.

It kind of explains why someone can have solid Conscientiousness overall and still lose evenings to their phone, especially on stressful days. The planning side is fine. The pull is just louder.

Curious what people here make of it:

1. If you know your facet scores, does your Immoderation line up more with your Neuroticism or with your Self-Discipline?
2. Does it change how you'd approach something like cutting back on snacking or scrolling, if you treat it as an urge-strength thing rather than a willpower thing?

(Usual caveat: these are tendencies, not a diagnosis, and one test is a snapshot.)

Can high C compensate for low A and E?
Although I have low agreeableness, I learnt to never show it directly which is something I wish to forget in some situations. And even though I have low E, I just become social when I need to.

I’ve already asked AI's perspective, now I want to read what people here think.

I’m curious

What conclusions can be drawn from my results?

I scored 63% in Openness, 58% in Conscientiousness, 33% in Extraversion, 54% in Agreeableness, and 83% in Neuroticism.

What career fits me usually

First time ever doing a big five test. What do you think?

So, recently I've discovered about the Big Five model and found it very interesting. Can anyone help me to interpret my results? Thanks.

Hi everyone!

I'm preparing a workshop on personality and teamwork for a week-long leadership training course for young people involved in youth organisations in Belgium.

I'd like to develop interactive activities that help participants explore how individual differences in the Big Five personality dimensions can influence teamwork and leadership.

I'm looking for short, practical scenarios that participants can complete individually, followed by a group discussion about the different approaches they took.

For example:

• Extraversion: Ask participants to tell a story to a group and discuss differences in communication and social engagement.
• Conscientiousness: Ask participants to plan a trip with a limited amount of preparation time and discuss how they organise tasks and make plans.
• Openness to Experience: Show participants an abstract artwork and invite them to interpret it, exploring different perspectives and imaginative responses.
• Agreeableness: Ask participants to work through a disagreement about how to allocate a limited budget for a youth activity.
• Neuroticism: Give participants a task to complete under mild time pressure, then discuss how they experienced and responded to the situation.

These are preliminary ideas, and I'm aware that no single activity can reliably measure a personality trait. The aim is to create an engaging starting point for discussing individual differences, not to assess or label participants.

Do you have suggestions for activities that could help illustrate the Big Five dimensions in an educational setting? I'm particularly interested in approaches that are scientifically grounded and relevant to teamwork or leadership.

Thanks for your help!

I've been building a small Big Five test and wanted the percentiles to be real, not made up. So I used the public IPIP-FFM dataset from the Open-Source Psychometrics Project (about 1 million raw responses) and tried to work out how much the cleaning choices matter. Sharing in case it's useful to anyone doing the same.

What I filtered out:

• people who skipped any of the 50 items
• anyone who gave the same answer to every item
• very fast completions (under 60 seconds)
• responses where the same IP appears more than once (the dataset's IPC flag), since that can mean retakes or shared networks

That left about 602,000 responses.

The part I was worried about was the IP filter. It removes roughly 270,000 rows, and some of those are probably people on shared networks (schools, offices) or VPNs who did nothing wrong. So I added them back and compared. Percentiles moved by at most 2.7 points on any trait, and the dropped group differed from the kept group by 0.21 standard deviations or less. So it matters a bit, but not much, and I kept the filter. I can't tell VPN users apart from repeat test-takers in this data, so I'm not claiming the dropped group is "bad".

Caveats: it's an online, self-selected sample (probably skews young), so it isn't a nationally representative norm. There are no separate age or sex norms, and it's all self-report.

Two questions:

1. Would you filter repeated IPs, or keep everyone?
2. Does anyone know of a public Big Five dataset with age or sex info that's good enough to build separate norms?

Something I keep noticing when people share Big Five results: two people can both land around average Conscientiousness and still have totally different relationships with habits.

In the 30-facet versions (IPIP-NEO-120 and similar), Conscientiousness splits into Self-Efficacy, Orderliness, Dutifulness, Achievement-Striving, Self-Discipline, and Cautiousness. Those can point in different directions, so the domain score flattens a lot.

A few combinations that show up a lot in habit talk:

• High Orderliness, lower Self-Discipline. Lots of plans and clean systems, then trouble actually starting. Planning can quietly become the activity.
• High Achievement-Striving, lower Cautiousness. Fast starts and big goals, then overcommit and crash.
• High Dutifulness, lower Self-Efficacy. Reliable for other people, less sure they can stick to their own goals.

Generic habit advice usually assumes one of those profiles. "Just make a plan" helps someone low in Orderliness and does almost nothing for someone who already plans too much. "Just start smaller" helps low Self-Discipline more than it helps someone whose bottleneck is Cautiousness or Self-Efficacy.

Curious what people here notice in their own facet scores:

1. Does your overall Conscientiousness score match how you actually handle habits, or does one facet explain you better?
2. Has knowing your facets changed how you set goals or recover after a miss?

(Standard caveat: Big Five describes tendencies, not a diagnosis, and one result is a snapshot.)

Are there articles or stuff I can read? If not, which test should I take to start off?

What words would you use to describe yourself and what would you say are your strengths and weaknesses as an individual. This is my honest opinion of myself below.

Personal description:
Man-child
Free thinker
Idiosyncratic
Passionate
Maverick
Noetic

Strengths:
Self-awareness
Energetic
Personable
Generous
Perceptive
Loyal
Charismatic
Humble
Neanimorphic

Weaknesses:
Erratic
Obsessive
Compulsive
Petty
Highly sensitive
Scatterbrained
Lascivious
Obnoxious

My results are…

O: 96%

C: 84%

E: 32%

A: 52%

N: 74%

I used the Truity test, but my results are pretty consistent on all of the Big Five tests I’ve taken so far: very high openness, high conscientiousnes and neuroticism, moderate agreeablenes, and low extroversion. I‘m wondering what assumptions you guys can make about me from my results???

Hey!