Resultados epidemiológicos

The second segment of the survey contained all personality trait scales, which I describe next. For this section of the survey I used the 'randomizer' option of the survey software provider ‘Qualtrics’, that randomly presents respondents with one of the four different personality scales41, the randomisation is spread evenly among all scales42. The design of the survey means that each respondent is only presented with one of the personality measures, essentially resulting in four different samples. For this reason I hereafter refer to each group of respondents that was presented with a personality measure by the name of the personality measure. For example, those who were presented with the Big Five measure I refer to as the 'Big Five sample'.

3.3.1Big Five measure

To measure the personality traits of the Big Five model I chose to adopt the 15-item Big Five inventory (BFI-S) (Gerlitz and Schupp 2005; Lang et al. 2011). The BFI-S consists of 15 items, 3 items for each of the five personality traits43. Each item is scored on a 7-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (Strongly agree) to 7 (Strongly

41 _{I included a fifth scale, the Rosenbaum self-control schedule, which has been connected to pro-social}

behaviour under certain conditions (Martinsson et al. 2012; Kocher et al. 2017; Martinsson et al. 2010). However, none of the self-control analyses yielded significant associations with SRI engagement. In the interest of brevity, I omitted these results form this paper, but the analyses are available upon request. In this section I also included a measure of social preferences, the SVO-slider measure (SVO) Murphy et al. (2011), I included the SVO for each scale apart from HEXACO (due to the length of the HEXACO scale), I randomised the order in which respondents saw the two measures (an even number of randomly chosen respondents saw the SVO first and then the personality scale and vice versa). I include in my models a dummy variable that accounts for a possible order effect for all samples apart from the HEXACO. I did not include the SVO-slider measure in this analysis since it would was not part of the measures that was presented to the HEXACO sample and thus it would not have allowed me to directly compare the results for the Big Five and the HEXACO measures which is one of the main research questions for this investigation.

42 _{In order to randomly assign respondents to the different variations of the survey I essentially created} 3 different versions of the survey. The version of the survey that contained the HEXACO measure did not include the measure for social preferences. This meant that there was only one survey version for the HEXACO which resulted in about one fourth of the number of respondents being randomly assigned to the HEXACO measure, which in turn means that the size of the HEXACO sample is only about one fourth compared to the other samples. Please refer to appendix A1 for a stylized figure of the survey structure.

disagree). Some items are reverse coded. The mean score across each of the three items are added and divided by three to arrive at a mean score for each of the five traits. The BFI-S is a shortened version of the original 44-item long Big Five Inventory (John et al. 1991). The BFI-S has been shown to have good internal consistency and has been validated against longer measures assessing the Big Five traits; it has been shown to reliably capture the Big Five traits (Hirsh 2010). I chose to use the BFI-S as opposed to the numerous alternative instruments44 mainly because it has been part of large-scale household surveys such as the British Household Panel Survey and its German and Australian counterparts and is therefore widely used in the literature on personality psychology and economics (Brown and Taylor 2014; Lang et al. 2011). Furthermore, the brevity of the instrument makes it ideal for my type of study; I survey a large number of high net-worth individual investors. In this type of sample the length of the survey can be an issue, especially compared to student samples. The respondents are wealthy individuals and are more likely than, for example, students to not complete the entire survey if it were to take up too much of their time.

3.3.2The HEXACO measure

To measure HEXACO traits I use the HEXACO-60 a 60-item measure with ten items for each of the six traits of the HEXACO model of personality structure45 (Ashton and Lee 2009). Each item is scored on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Some items are reverse coded. The mean score across each of the 10 items are calculated to arrive at a score for each of the six traits. The HEXACO-60 is a short version of the original 100-item long HEXACO Personality Inventory-Revised measure (HEXACO-PI-R) (Lee and Ashton 2004, 2006; Ashton and Lee 2008). The HEXACO-60 has been validated in self-report data and showed good levels of internal consistency (the items for each trait are highly correlated), low interscale correlations (each trait measures a different construct), as well as high convergent validity (high levels of correlations between self-reports and observer reports) (Ashton and Lee 2009). I chose to adopt the HEXACO-60 measure instead of alternatives, for two reasons. First, it is much shorter than the original 192-item long HEXACO-PI-R (Ashton et al. 2004) making it better suited for an investigation of a

44 _{The most common measures for the big five are the 240-item long NEO PI-R and the 60-item long} NEO-FFI (Costa and McCrea 1992).

sample such as ours, as explained above. Second, although there is a shorter 24-item version, the 60-item version was shown to have better internal consistency; meaning the individual items for each trait are more strongly correlated (de Vries 2013).

3.3.3 Empathy measure

To measure empathy, I use the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI) (Davis 1983). The IRI measures four different dimensions of empathy (Empathic Concern, Personal Distress, Perspective Taking, and Fantasy) with 28 items, 7 items per trait46. The items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from 0 (Does not describe me well) to 4 (Describes me very well). ). Some items are reverse coded. The mean score across each of the 7 items are calculated to arrive at a score for each of the four traits. The IRI is the most widely used measure for empathy, and it has been extensively validated (Davis 1980; Artinger et al. 2014). Furthermore, the IRI is the only empathy measure that allows the measurement of the two-systems of empathy (Shamay-Tsoory et al. 2009).

3.3.4 Dark Triad measure

To measure the three-dimensional dark side of personality, I used the Short Dark triad (SD3) a 27-item scale, with 9 items per trait47 _{(Jones and Paulhus 2014). The}

SD3 is a shortened version of the original 41-item long Dark Triad measure (Paulhus and Williams 2002). The items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (Disagree strongly) to 5 (Agree strongly). Some items are reverse coded. The mean score across each of the 9 items are calculated to arrive at a score for each of the three traits. Jones & Paulhus (2014), validated the SD3 in both student and community samples, and have also compared it to the main alternative, a short measure of the Dark Triad, called the 'Dirty Dozen' (Jonason and Webster 2010). Furthermore, the SD3 was validated against canonical measures for each trait namely: the Mach-IV scale (Christie and Geis 1970) measuring Machiavellianism, the Self-Report Psychopathy Scale (Williams et al. 2007), and the Narcissistic Personality Inventory (Raskin and Hall 1979). The SD3 showed good internal consistency and, compared to the Dirty Dozen measure correlated more strongly with

46 _{Please refer to appendix A9 for the IRI measure, including instructions.} 47 _{Please refer to appendix A10 for the SD3 measure, including instructions.}

the aforementioned scales that measure each of the Dark Triad traits separately. Furthermore, the SD3 self-report measure was validated against observer reports, showing high convergent validity (consistently high correlations). Overall the SD3 is a very reliable measure for the Dark Triad traits. And due to its length, it is a suitable instrument for large-scale survey studies such as ours where survey length can be an issue, as explained above.