Anu Realo

General trust in social surveys is usually measured with a Single-Item General Trust (SIGT) question that asks whether “most people” can be trusted. The concept of the radius of trust challenges this approach by highlighting that trust may vary with the social distance between those who express trust and those who are trusted. This has led to the addition of six specific trust questions to the World Values Survey (WVS) questionnaire since Wave 5, which ask respondents to rate their trust in their family, neighborhood, and people they know personally, as well as in people of another religion, people of another nationality, and people they meet for the first time. Analyzing respondents’ answers to the SIGT and six specific trust items in the Integrated Values Surveys (IVS) dataset (1981-2022) across 88 countries and territories and the three most recent survey waves, we find that trust is a complex construct whose invariant property across cultures is a fixed-length vector composed of the squares of its two components: ingroup and outgroup trust. The phrase “most people” in the SIGT question appears to refer to “familiar strangers”—people whom respondents do not know personally but are likely to encounter in everyday life. It is trust in these familiar strangers, rather than in more distant outgroups, which is most strongly associated with the Human Development Index. This association, however, becomes pronounced only at very high levels of human development.

The aim of this study was to contribute to the understanding of the gender equality paradox by examining within-country variation in the size of the gender gap in Five-Factor Model (FFM) personality traits across regions in three geographically large and socially diverse countries, and to explore whether this variation was associated with various regional-level indicators. Multilevel analyses were conducted to assess regional gender differences in FFM personality trait scores using data from Germany (four datasets), Russia (one dataset), and the US (two datasets). Samples ranged from 6,476 to 29,398, with data collected between 2005 and 2017. When the size of gender differences varied across regions, we examined whether this variation was associated with regional indices of human development (SHDI) and its subcomponents, gender equality, individualism/collectivism, and survival/self-expression values. Regional variation in gender differences was most consistent for Neuroticism, Openness, and Conscientiousness. In several datasets, regions with higher educational attainment, health, and individualism showed larger gender differences in these traits, consistent with the direction of the gender equality paradox observed across countries. These findings suggest that societal and contextual factors may contribute to gender differences in personality not only across countries but also across regions within countries.

The impact of item-specific and common-trait variance on self-other agreement in NEO-PI-R/3 personality ratings was examined in five samples (N = 12,233) representing Czech, Estonian, Flemish, German, and U.S. English speakers. Common variance, reflected in covariation among items, was assessed by comparing self-other correlations for facet and domain scores with the mean item-level correlations. Although common variance accounted for 70-75% of facet and about 90% of domain score variance, it contributed only 40-50% to self-other agreement. These findings suggest that accurate personality assessment begins with item-level nuances, with broader traits emerging only after aggregating many items. Similar item-level agreement across languages indicates that personality nuances possess universal qualities transcending linguistic and cultural differences.

This study examines how age moderates gender differences in Five-Factor Model personality traits across cultures. Prior research suggests that women generally score higher than men on these traits, with a larger gender gap observed in personality traits in more economically developed, egalitarian, and individualistic countries. Gender differences also vary across age, yet the timing of these changes and the extent to which they are culturally universal remain unclear. Using multilevel modeling in a large cross-sectional online sample (N = 3,038,567; ages 10-65 years, 68 countries), we found that age significantly moderated gender differences in Five-Factor Model personality traits, with substantial cross-national variation. The gender gap in Neuroticism, Extraversion, and Openness was wider among older adults in countries with higher levels of individualistic and self-expressive values, higher Human Development Education Index scores, and later mean ages at first marriage and childbearing for women. These findings suggest that broader educational, cultural, and family-related contexts may shape the expression of personality traits across the lifespan. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).

ObjectiveResearch suggests that self-control may mediate the relationships between the Big Five personality traits and subjective well-being (SWB), yet its role remains unclear. MethodThe mediating effect of self-control (measured at Time 2 (T2) on the relationships between the Big Five personality traits (measured at Time 1 (T1)) and components of SWB (measured at Time 3 (T3)) were examined in three longitudinal panel datasets of which three assessment waves were considered: HILDA (Australia, N = 11,737, Mage at T1= 46.19), SOEP (Germany, N = 1,268, Mage at T1= 52.94), and MIDUS (United States, N = 2,614, Mage at T1= 46.30). The intervals from T1 to T3 were 4 years in HILDA, 5 years in SOEP, and 20 years in MIDUS. ResultsSelf-control mediated the associations of Neuroticism and Conscientiousness with life satisfaction across all samples, and with positive and negative affect in HILDA and MIDUS samples. The mediating role of self-control varied by sex, with Extraversion demonstrating a significant pathway for women but not men in HILDA.ConclusionsThese findings indicate that self-control links personality traits to SWB, with potential implications for intervention.

This study examines how age moderates gender differences in Five-Factor Model (FFM) personality traits across cultures. Prior research suggests that women generally score higher than men on these traits, with a larger gender gap observed in personality traits in more economically developed, egalitarian, and individualistic countries. Gender differences also vary across age, yet the timing of these changes and the extent to which they are culturally universal remain unclear. Using multilevel modelling in a large cross-sectional online sample (N = 3,038,567; ages 10–65 years, 68 countries), we found that age significantly moderated gender differences in FFM personality traits, with substantial cross-national variation. The gender gap in Neuroticism, Extraversion, and Openness was wider among older adults in countries with higher levels of individualistic and self-expressive values, higher Human Development Education Index scores, and later mean ages at first marriage and childbearing for women. These findings suggest that broader educational, cultural, and family-related contexts may shape the expression of personality traits across the lifespan.

Objective: The aim of this study was to contribute to the understanding of the gender equality paradox by examining within-country variation in the size of the gender/sex gap in the Five-Factor Model (FFM) personality traits within three geographically large and socially diverse countries and to explore whether gender/sex differences in personality trait scores across regions in these countries were associated with various regional-level indicators. Method: Multilevel analysis was conducted to assess regional gender/sex differences in FFM personality trait scores using data from Germany (three samples), Russia (one sample), and the United States (two samples). When the gender/sex gap varied across regions, we assessed whether this variation was explained by regional indices of human development and its subcomponents, gender equality, individualism/collectivism, and survival/self-expression values. Results: Significant regional differences were observed for Openness and Conscientiousness across most samples, with further multilevel analysis revealing significant gender/sex differences in these two traits. These differences were explained by regional educational attainment in four out of seven samples. Conclusions: Some evidence of a within-country gender-equality paradox was found for Openness and Conscientiousness, with higher regional educational attainment associated with widening gender/sex gaps in these traits.

ObjectiveWhile loneliness is intertwined with many mental and physical health problems, its origins are not yet well-understood. We sought to better understand its link to personality in a large national cohort. MethodsCombining self- and informant ratings in multiple samples, we conducted the largest study to date to examine loneliness’ true correlations (rtrues) with the Big Five personality traits, free of single-method biases and transient and random errors. ResultsAcross three samples (Estonian-speaking, N = 20,893; Russian-speaking, N = 762; English-speaking, N = 599), we found a strong relationship between loneliness and Neuroticism (rtrue = .60 to .70). Loneliness also had robust but much weaker associations with Extraversion (rtrue = -.20 to -.30), and only weak associations (rtrue = .10 to -.20) with Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, and Openness. Collectively, the Big Five accounted for over 50% of loneliness variance. In a subsample, the associations were only slightly smaller longitudinally over approximately 10 years. ConclusionOverall, feeling lonely is more closely related to Neuroticism than previously understood, and the association endures over time.

The main aim of the study is to disentangle the effects of two contextual factors—human development and gender egalitarianism—on the increasing size of gender differences in personality traits across countries. A three-way 2x2x2 factorial design was used to examine the effects of gender, human development, and gender egalitarianism on the Five-Factor Model (FFM) personality traits in samples from four countries that vary in their levels of contextual factors—Burkina Faso (low human development/low gender egalitarianism), Moldova (low human development/high gender egalitarianism), Qatar (high human development/low gender egalitarianism), and Switzerland (high human development/high gender egalitarianism). The level of human development was the main contextual factor influencing the size of gender differences in Neuroticism, Agreeableness, and Openness while gender egalitarianism contributed to the gender gap in Neuroticism and Agreeableness only in interaction with human development. A high level of human development is a necessary but not sufficient condition for larger gender differences in Neuroticism and Agreeableness—only once such a level is reached does gender egalitarianism make an additional contribution to widening the gender gap.

The concept of scientific wealth is defined as the average number of citations per paper published by scientists from a given country or territory over a fixed period. This analysis is based on data from Essential Science Indicators (ESI; Clarivate^TM), which ranks authors, institutions, countries, and journals according to publication and citation performance between 2014 and 2024. Twenty years ago, Estonia’s scientific impact was 20% below the ESI world average. Today, the average citation rate of articles by Estonian researchers is 81.7% above the ESI world average, placing Estonia third globally, after Iceland and Singapore, and ahead of its Nordic neighbors and role models, Finland and Sweden. The rapid growth of Estonian science has yet to be fully explained. None of the four groups of factors analyzed ‒ science policies, funding, foreign aid, and research ethos ‒ can fully explain Estonia’s success on its own, especially when compared to its Baltic neighbors, Latvia and Lithuania. Estonia is a prime example of how a fortunate combination of factors can lead to the fastest growth in scientific wealth worldwide, although this specific combination remains to be identified.