Too Little, Just Right, or Too Much: Individuals’ Evaluations of Their Conscientiousness and Associated Outcome
Tammy L. Sonnentag, Taylor W. Wadian, Hanne M. Driscoll, José A. Polanco, Stephanie C. Langlais, Caitlin E. Tycz, Jaclyn A. Schutzbach, Margaret J. Wolfson, Kyra Bevenour, Ellie W. Borders, Olivia A. Borglin, Emma-leigh E. Doerksen, Nora E. Edelen, Hannah K. Geiger, Connor S. Hamilton, Giovanna Marin, Megan M. Mathur, Anton A. Mays, Cameron J. Mills, Natalie A. Miselem, Maanasa Nandula, Annaliet Delgado-Rodriguez, Katie A. SabaAbstract: Recent research suggests that a majority (75%) of individuals perceive they have “too much” conscientiousness. Although possessing high levels of conscientiousness is commonly associated with desirable outcomes, some theorizing suggests that possessing too much may be undesirable. The current series of preregistered studies seek to replicate prior findings that a majority of individuals report having “too much” conscientiousness (studies 1, 2, and 3) and examine the outcomes – desirable and undesirable – associated with possessing “too much” conscientiousness (studies 2 and 3). Counter to expectations, results revealed that, across all three studies, a majority of participants (75% Study 1; 68.9% Study 2; 70.8% Study 3) perceived their conscientiousness levels as “just right”; whereas, a much smaller percentage perceived their conscientiousness levels as “too much” (9% Study 1; 19.1% Study 2; 22.1% Study 3). Perceiving “too much” conscientiousness yielded consistently positive outcomes, including less anxiety, less burnout, more grit, and more academic or career success (studies 2 and 3). Implications and directions for future research are described.