EFL Writing Styles across Personality Traits and Gender: A Case for Iranian Academic Context

EFL Writing Styles across Personality Traits and Gender: A Case for Iranian Academic Context

Biook Behnam
Behrooz Azabdaftari
Shima Ahmadi Azad
Islamic Azad University-Tabriz Branch

The ways individuals use words can reflect basic psychological processes, including clues to their thoughts, feelings, perceptions, and personality. This paper seeks to determine whether there is a relationship between Iranian EFL learners' writing styles and their personality and gender. It focuses on gender and two key dimensions of personality (Neuroticism and Extroversion), which were assessed using Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (revised version). The concept of formality/contextuality was suggested as the most important dimension of variation between linguistic expressions. An empirical measure of formality, the F-score, was suggested, based on the frequencies of different word classes. Nouns, adjectives, prepositions, and articles are more frequent in formal styles; pronouns, adverbs, verbs and interjections are more frequent in contextual styles. The frequency of positive and negative emotional words was calculated by the program Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count. The result shows no significant relationship between these variables. The reason is supposed to be other non-linguistic determinants of formality (e.g. situation and educational level) which may have a stronger effect on EFL writing styles.

Keywords: Personality Traits, Gender, Extroversion, Neuroticism, Formality vs. Contextuality

That the words people use are diagnostic of their mental, social, and even physical state is not a new concept. Language serves as a marker of individual differences, and language variables show consistency across time and context. It is believed that examining linguistic style is an independent and meaningful way of researching personality style and cognitive processing. It is generally known that people have their own styles of expression through both written and spoken language (Pennebaker & Graybeal, 2001).
Linguistic varieties related to gender arise because language is closely related to social attitudes. Men and women are socially different in that society lays down different social roles for them and expects different behavior patterns from them. Language simply reflects this social fact (Trudgillm 1990, as cited in Caplan, Crawford, Hyde, & Richardson, 1997).
According to Mairesse and Walker (2005), personality is the highest level variable characterizing individuals. Personality traits influence many aspects of individual behaviors. Indeed, within personality psychology there is a heated debate about the precise number of traits which can be used to describe personality, hence the existence of the three-factor model (Digman, 1990; Costa & McCrae, 1992b;, as cited in Mairesse & Walker, 2005) and five-factor model (Eysenck & Eysenck, 1991, as cited in Mairesse & Walker, 2005), amongst others. Essentially, the first two traits associated with major models—Extroversion (perhaps better described as Extroversion-Introversion) and Neuroticism (Emotionality-Stability)—are undisputed and central to theories of personality, and the majority of the research into personality and its relationship to language has focused on these two traits (Eysenck &
Eysenck, 1991; Costa & McCrae, 1992; Goldberg, 1993; Lippa & Dietz, 2000, as cited in Matthews, Deary, & Whiteman, 2003).

Writing variations in terms of formality vs. contextuality

A classic issue in the study of language is the measurement of variation between different genres or registers. Stylistic variation results from the fact that different people express themselves in different ways, so the number of possible variations is so large. The problem may be substantially simplified by focusing on just one aspect or dimension of style. Perhaps the most frequently mentioned of these aspects is formality. Everybody makes at least an intuitive distinction between formal and informal manners of expression (Heylighen & Dewaele, 1999).
The general term context-dependent or contextual is used for expressions which are ambiguous when considered on their own, but the ambiguity can be resolved by taking into account additional information from the context. The opposite of contextuality may be called formality. Formal language will avoid ambiguity by including the information about the context that would disambiguate the expression by explicitly stating the necessary references, assumptions, and background knowledge which would have remained implicit in a contextual expression of the same meaning (Heylighen & Dewaele, 2002).
The degree of contextuality of an expression will depend on the requirements of the situation, but there will still be an element of personal choice, depending on whether the sender prefers accuracy over flexibility, detachment over involvement, or fears possible misinterpretation more than additional cognitive load (Heylighen & Dewaele, 2002).
The basic approach to measure language formality vs. contextuality, introduced by Heylighen and Dewaele (1999), is to divide the words of the lexicon into two classes, depending on whether they are used mainly to build more context-dependent or more context-independent speech. In one class, all words will be listed with a deictic function, i.e., the ones which require reference to the spatio-temporal or communicative context to be understood. Levelt (1989, as cited in Heylighen & Dewaele, 1999, p. 46) distinguishes four types of deixis: referring to person ("we", "him", "my", ...), place ("here", "those", "upstairs", ...), time ("now", "later", "yesterday", ...), and discourse ("therefore", "yes", "however", ...). Further examples of discourse deixis are exclamations or interjections like "Ooh!", "Well", or "OK" (Heylighen & Dewaele, 1999). In the other, non-deictic, class are the words referring to an intrinsic class of phenomena, which do not normally vary under changes of context. Examples are mostly nouns and adjectives (e.g. "tree", "women", "red", ...)( Heylighen & Dewaele, 2002).
A much simpler, but coarser, measure can be developed by determining an average degree of deixis not for individual words but for the conventional grammatical categories of words. The examples of contextual words belong basically to the categories of pronouns, adverbs, verbs, and interjections. Typically context-independent words are nouns, adjectives, articles, and prepositions (Heylighen & Dewaele, 2002).
Heylighen and Dewaele (1999) have proposed the following formula as a "measure" of formality: F = (noun frequency + adjective freq. + preposition freq. + article freq. – pronoun freq. – verb freq. – adverb freq. – interjection freq. + 100) / 2. The frequencies are here expressed as percentages of the number of words belonging to a particular category with respect to the total number of words in the excerpt. The more formal the language excerpt, the higher the value of F is expected to be (Heylighen & Dewaele, 1999).

Extroversion, neuroticism, and gender correlations with formality vs. contextuality

Heylighen and Dewaele (1999) in a research on three languages of Dutch, Italian and French showed that the frequency of the formal categories (nouns, articles, adjectives, prepositions) increased with an increase of formality, while the frequency of the deictic categories (pronouns, verbs, adverbs—data on interjections are not available for all genres) decreases, except for one or two outliers per category.
Though correlations between personality and linguistic style are not large, they are consistent throughout the literature (Digman & Takemoto-Chock, 1981; Barrick & Mount, 1991; Pennebaker & King, 1999, as cited in Rieser, 2003). Despite the relatively small correlations, Pennebaker and Graybeal (2001, p. 92) stated that "language use correlates with real-world behaviors at least as highly as many traditional personality dimensions".
Gill (2003) reports that extrovert language contains more adverbs, pronouns, and verbs (i.e., more ‘implicit’); it contains fewer nouns, modifiers and prepositions ( i.e., less ‘explicit’), and is less formal.
Extroverts show higher counts of pronouns, adverbs, and verbs words (Cope, 1969; Furnham, 1990; Dewaele & Furnham, 1999, as cited in Gill, 2003). These characteristics of extrovert language are also found for non-native speakers. Dewaele and Furnham (2000, as cited in Gill, 2003) describe this as the implicit language (preference for pronouns, adverbs and verbs), which contrasts with the explicit language characteristics of introverts (preference for nouns, modifiers and prepositions).
In a research on students' use of French language, Herring and Paolillo (2006) show that women’s speech appears markedly less formal, i.e., more context-dependent, than men’s speech. This seems to confirm general sociolinguistic observations, according to which women pay more attention to feelings and to personal relationships, whereas men focus more on external, objective ‘problems’, thus distancing themselves more from their immediate context. Other researches also confirmed this finding (see, Hudson, 1994, Heylighen & Dewaele, 2002, and Colley & Todd, 2002).
According to Heylighen and Dewaele (2002), in addition to personality traits and gender, there are some other non-linguistic variables that affect the degree of contextuality, from which the most important ones are situation and level of education.

Positive and negative emotional words in personality and gender

Psycholinguistic research suggests that emotion words differ from other abstract words in a number of parameters and characteristics and should be treated as a separate group of words, distinct from both concrete and abstract words (Altarriba, Bauer, & Benvenuto, 1999, as cited in Wolfson, 2005). In the English language, emotion vocabulary consists of abstract nouns denoting concepts (anger), some verbs (enjoy), some adverbs (beautifully), adjectives (beautiful), interjections (Oh), and adjectival participles denoting emotional states (stressed, satisfying) (Wolfson, 2005). Positive emotion words include the broadest level of positive feeling dimensions (e.g. happy and love), positively valenced words (e.g. beautiful and nice) and words from the optimism-energy category (e.g. exciting and win). The negative emotion category includes a variety of negatively valenced terms (e.g. ugly and hurt) as well as words from the more specific categories of anxiety- fear, anger, and sadness- depression (Pennebaker & King, 1999).
According to Wolfson (2005), women reported greater intensity of both positive and negative effect than men. Pennebaker and King (1999), Gill (2003), Gill and Oberlander (2004), and Mairesse, Walker, Mehl, and Moore (2007) show that high extroverts use more positive emotion words and fewer negative emotion words. High Neurotics use more negative emotional words and fewer positive ones.
The innovative aspect of this research is in the selection of the analysis units; that is among the context-dependent parts of speech used in determining F score (verbs, adverbs, pronouns, & interjections), just the ones which were deictic were chosen as the units of analysis. For example, the infinite verbs (to go, to write, etc.) were ignored, and some adverb phrases like: next week, three days ago, etc., were added to the category.
The purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of extroversion, neuroticism, and gender on EFL writing styles in terms of formality vs. contextuality and use of positive vs. negative emotional words, hypothesizing that the language of extroverts, neurotics, and females is more contextual, with more positive emotional words than introverts, emotionally stable ones, and males.
Focusing on the fields of personality theories, social psychology of language, and also psycholinguistics and sociolinguistics this research intends to address the following questions:
1. Does extraversion vs. introversion predict the writing style of Iranian EFL learners?
2. Does neuroticism vs. emotional stability predict the writing style of Iranian EFL learners?
3. Does gender predict the writing style of Iranian EFL learners?

Method

Participants

The participants were composed of 213 students (162 females and 51 males) majoring in English Teaching from Tabriz University and Tabriz Azad University, graduate students of English Literature from Tabriz University, and graduate students of English Literature and English Teaching from Tabriz Azad University. They were chosen according to their field of study and academic level.

Instruments

The first part of data collection was done by giving the Persian translation of Eysenck Personality Questionnaire-Revised (EPQ-R) (Eysenck et al., 1985, as cited in Kaviani, 2003) to the participants (Appendix 1). During the second part of the data collection, which lasted for three weeks, three papers with the following topics, molded by Oberlander and Gill (2003), were given to the participants (each in one week interval): Imagine you haven’t seen a good friend for quite some time, and in order to keep him/her up to date with your news you decide to write her/him a letter. In the message you should write about what has happened to you, or what you have done in the past week, trying to remember and write down as much as possible, as quickly as possible.
The second and third tasks were similar: the participants were instructed to write about their plans for the week ahead and what happened to them during the past year, respectively.

Design

The independent variables of this study are personality traits, focusing on two key dimensions of Extroversion (extroversion vs. introversion), and Neuroticism (emotionality vs. stability), and Gender (female/ male). The dependent variables are the degree of formality, positive emotional words, and negative emotional words.
High and low personality sub-groups were created for each personality dimension (extroversion and neuroticism) by splitting off the groups at greater than 1 standard deviation above and below the mean score for each dimension, following Kaviani, 2003.
To determine whether there is a significance relationship between the three dependent variables (Extroversion, Neuroticism, and Gender) and the three independent variables (formality, use of positive emotional words, and negative emotional words) a one-way multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was conducted by using SPSS program. This approach, in which language features are weighted differently to achieve maximum discrimination between the individuals, is well-established in various sociolinguistic analyses of spoken and written language.
Procedure
At the first stage of data collection participants were instructed to fill Eysenck Personality Questionnaire-Revised (Eysenck et al., 1985, as cited in Kaviani, 2003). After a one week interval, the second stage of data collection (written tasks) started (modeled by Gill & Oberlander, 2006). The participants were asked to write a letter to a friend on the given sheets with the following instructions: "Your message should be written in normal English prose, but don’t worry if your grammar is not perfect. Once you have started writing a sentence, you should complete it and not go back to alter or edit it. Also, don’t worry too much about spelling, and don’t bother addressing it to anyone or signing it. Just write down the main body of the text. You should spend 10 minutes on this task."
The texts written by the participants with identified personality and gender were classified into six groups (extroverts, introverts, neurotics, emotionally stable ones, males, and females) and analyzed separately. The measurement of formality was done manually by counting the coded words (Table 1). Since the frequency of interjections was too partial, and the use of articles as determinants of formality is under debate (Hudson, 1994), to have an accurate score of formality, they were not included in the measurement of formality.

Table 1
The frequencies of POSs in the data
Pronoun Adverb Verb Interjection Noun Adjective Preposition Article
Extroversion 22.72 14.26 8.68 0.00 13.49 5.77 12.59 3.51
Introversion 23.31 8.60 16.42 0.04 14.15 6.54 9.62 4.20
Neuroticism 22.40 8.99 10.63 0.04 13.02 8.02 9.68 3.61
Stable 15.05 7.79 13.64 0.14 13.01 4.90 9.13 2.92
Female 20.26 8.67 15.93 0.12 12.74 5.70 9.59 3.35
Male 22.14 8.23 14.16 0.00 13.97 6.05 11.26 15.31

The frequency of positive and negative emotional words for the texts written by males, females, extroverts, introverts, neurotics, and emotionally stable ones was determined by Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count program, available by on-line processing (Pennebaker, & Graybeal, 2001

Results

In total, the number of extroverts, introverts, neurotics, and emotionally stable ones are 37, 35, 46, and 37, respectively. So, in total, 155 individuals (among 213 ones) participated in the second stage of the data collection (writing tasks) and the rest of them were ignored. The results of the data analysis showed that extroverts, on average, scored F= 43.10, positive emotion= 3.04, and negative emotion=1.05, whereas introverts scored F= 44.33, positive emotion= 3.89 and negative emotion= 0.96 (Figure 1).

Figure 1. The comparative result of the effect of extroversion vs. introversion on formality and use of positive and negative words

Neurotics, on average, scored F= 44.35, positive emotion= 3.92, and negative emotion= 1.45, whereas emotionally stable ones scored F= 44.37, positive emotion= 3.50, and negative emotion= 1.15 (Figure 2).

Figure 2.The comparative result of the effect of neuroticism vs. stability on formality and use of positive and negative words

And females, on average, scored F= 44.85, positive emotion= 3.70, and negative emotion= 1.07, whereas males scored F=46.07, positive emotion= 3.41, and negative emotion= 1.37 (Figure3).

Figure 3. The comparative result of the effect of gender on formality and use of positive and negative words

To explore precisely the effect of extroversion, neuroticism, and gender on the degree of formality and use of positive and negative emotional words in writing, a one- way multivariate analysis of these stylistic features was conducted. A multivariate analysis of variance shows that for extroversion P= 0.284, for neuroticism P= 0.098, and for gender P= 0.318. So, none of them is significant (P>0.05).

Discussion

Personality, gender, and formality vs. contextuality

Contrary to Dewaele and Furnham's (2000) original Implicit-Extrovert Hypothesis which predicted that in spontaneous speech among non-native speakers, high extroverts would use more verbs, adverbs and pronouns, and that low extroverts would use more nouns, adjectives, and prepositions, the results of this study did not show any significant relationship between personality (extroversion and neuroticism) and language (formality vs. contextuality).
However, it is noteworthy that Nowson, Oberlander, and Gill (2005) in their study, in agreement with the results of this research, showed that extroversion and neuroticism were less influential than previously supposed. There was a small and non-significant effect in the expected direction. So, support for Implicit-Extrovert and Implicit-Neurotic Hypotheses was not as expected.
Heylighen and Dewaele (2002) applied their F-measure to texts of known gender and found a distinct difference between the sexes. Females score lower, preferring a more contextual style, while men prefer a more formal style. But, contrary to their results, the results of this study did not show any significant relationship between gender and formality. It is worth noting that studies of gender-based differences in language usage have come under attack in recent years. It has been argued (Bing & Bergvall, 1996, as cited in Argamon, Koppe, Fine, & Shimoni, 2003 ) that many such studies are methodologically flawed, for they assume that such significant differences exist and then engage in fishing expeditions to identify them (Argamon, et al., 2003).
To investigate the possible reasons why the results of this study did not support the hypotheses, other non-linguistic determinants of formality can be estimated, which are discussed below.

Situation

The physical situation of letter writings was the university classrooms for all the participants. The examiner was a researcher whose comments and instructions did not produce any anxiety in students. According to Dewaele and Furnham (1999), the higher the level of anxiety, the easier it is to differentiate between introverts and extroverts.
Also, this particular result can be explained by considering some of the situational factors involved in deixis. Heylighen and Dewaele (2002) draw on four categories: the persons involved, the space of the communication, the time, and the prior discourse. When collecting written data, participants were instructed to imagine they were writing to a friend. The data, however, was collected by an unknown person (the researcher) who was equally stranger to all of them. So, the letters would be read by persons unknown to the writer. Therefore, the writers, regardless of their different personality traits, almost equally, can assume a friend in their mind and share a context with him/her. The formality score of them is not high because they share an approximately similar context with a friend since they are conscious that the reader of their letter is an unknown person.

Educational level

All the participants were nearly at the same educational level which led them to show approximately no variation in their writing style in terms of formality vs. contextuality. The writing tasks (three personal letters) were not complex tasks for such a high level of education. According to Dewaele and Furnham (1999), the more complex the task, the easier it is to differentiate between introverts and extroverts.
By considering the above explanation, it can be concluded that the situational factors and educational level in this study are estimated to be stronger than individual differences (extroversion, neuroticism, and gender).

Personality, gender, and positive vs. negative emotional words

Gill (2003, p.70) noted that “high extroverts use more social and positive emotion words, and fewer negations, and negative emotion words; high neurotics use more negative emotion words, and fewer positive emotion words”. But the results of this study, although partially, showed that negative emotional words used by extroverts are more than introverts, and also, positive emotional words used by extroverts are more than introverts. The degree of emotionality in neurotics, in terms of both positive and negative emotional words, is more than emotionally stable persons.
In agreement with the general belief that women claim to be far happier than men with their lives and they are more emotionally expressive, the results of this study, although partially, showed that positive emotional words used by females are more than males, and also, negative emotional words used by females are fewer than males.

Final remarks

The participants used in this study could not be chosen randomly because they should have been proficient enough to write some paragraphs in English. So, their number was limited. Also, among the selected samples, a number of them refused to take part in writing tasks. Thus, the collected data was not as rich as expected.
In the present research, only two dimensions of personality traits (extroversion vs. introversion and neuroticism vs. emotional stability), which are known as the major traits, were investigated. For further research, studying the effect of other dimensions of personality (agreeableness, conscientiousness, openness to experience, and psychoticism) on EFL writing style, and also on EFL speaking style is suggested. The participants used in this research had a relatively advanced level in English language. For further research, a study on the effect of personality traits and gender on EFL writing and speaking style among elementary EFL learners is suggested.

The Authors
Biook Behnam is Associate Professor of Applied Linguistics at Islamic Azad University, Tabriz. His current research interests cover Discourse Analysis and Translation Studies. He has widely presented papers to international conferences in North America, Australia, Europe, China, India and South East Asia, and is currently the Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of Applied Linguistics, Tabriz.
Behrooz Azabdaftari is Emeritus Professor of English Language Teaching at the Islamic Azad University of Tabriz. His experience and knowledge of teaching and researching language are best represented by his publication of at least ten books and fifty articles related to language, literature and translation. His continuing interest has been on the exploration of aspects of Vygotsky’s views. His recent publications include Golbang-e-Afiat and Language and Other Disciplines: Interdisciplinary Studies.
Shima Ahmady Azad has recently finished her MA in TEFL at the Islamic Azad University of Tabriz. Her area of interest includes psychological aspects of ELT. She is currently involved in teaching English at foreign language teaching institutes.

References

Argamon, S., Koppe, M., Fine, J., & Shimoni, A. R. (2003). Gender, genre, and writing style in formal written texts. Text, 23(3) , 200-225.
Caplan, P. J., Crawford, M., Hyde, J. & Richardson, J. T. (1997). Gender differences in human cognition. New York: Oxford University Press.
Colley, A. & Todd, Z. (2002). Gender-linked differences in the style and content of e-mails to friends. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 21 (4), 380-392.
Dewaele, J.M. & Furnham, A. (1999) Extroversion: the unloved variable in applied linguistic research. Language Learning 49 (3). 509-544.
Dewaele, J. M. & Furnham, A. (2000). Personality and speech production: a pilot study of second language learners. Personality and Individual Differences, 28, 355-365.
Gill, A. J. (2003). Personality and language: The projection and perception of personality in computer-mediated communication. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Edinburgh.
Gill, A. J. & Oberlander, J. (2004). Language generation and personality: Two dimensions, two stages, two hemispheres? In Papers from the AAA (American Association for Artificial Intelligence)/ Spring Symposium on Architectures for Modeling Emotion: Cross-Disciplinary Foundations, pp. 104-111. Stanford, CA.
Gill, A. J. & Oberlander, J. (2006). Language with character: A stratified corpus comparison of individual differences in e-mail communication. Discourse Processes, 42(3), 239-270.
Herring, S. C. & Paolillo, j. C. (2006). Gender and genre variation in weblogs. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 43(12), 55-61.
Heylighen, F. & Dewaele, J. (1999). Formality of Language: definition, measurement and behavioral determinants. Retrieved January 15, 2008 from http://www.hcrc.ed.ac.uk/~jon/ papers/idc.pdf
Heylighen, F. & Dewaele, J. (2002). Variation in the contextuality of language: An empirical measure. Foundations of Science 6, 293-340.
Hudson, R. (1994). About 37% of word-tokens are nouns. Language, 70, 331-339.
Mairesse, F. & Walker, M. A. (2005).Words Mark the Nerds: Computational Models of Personality Recognition through Language. Retrieved December 23, 2007 from http://www.dcs.shef.ac.uk/~francois/papers
Mairesse, F., Walker, M. A., Mehl, M. R., & Moore, R. K. (2007). Using Linguistic Cues for the Automatic Recognition of Personality in Conversation and Text. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 30, 457-500.
Matthews, G., Deary, I. J., & Whiteman, M. C. (2003). Personality traits. New York Cambridge University press.
Nowson, S., Oberlande, J., & Gill, A. J. (2005). Weblogs, Genres, and Individual Differences. In Proceedings of the 27th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, pp. 1666-1671. Stresa, Italy, July 2005.
Oberlander, J., & Gill, A. (2003). Individual differences and implicit language: personality, parts-of-speech and pervasiveness. In Proceedings of the 26th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 1035-1040.
Pennebaker, J. W. & Graybeal, A. (2001). Patterns of natural language use: disclosure, personality, and social integration. American Psychological Society. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 10, 90-93.
Pennebaker, J. W. & King, L. A. (1999). Linguistic styles: language use as an individual difference. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 27(6), 1296- 1312.
Rieser, T. E. (2003). The language of performance: The link between language, personality and performance. Unpublished master's thesis, North Carolina State University.
Wolfson, I. (2005). Adjective participles as emotion words. Unpublished master’s thesis. Hamline University Saint Paul, Minnesota.
کاویانی، ح (1382). نظریه ی زیستی شخصیّت، همراه با آزمونهای شخصیّتی آیزنک و کلونیجر. تهران: سنا.

Appendix: Eysenck Personality Questionnaire- Revised

پرسشنامه EPQ-R

لطفا از گذاشتن هر گونه علامت در برگه پرسشنامه خودداری کنید.
راهنمایی: لطفا با انتخاب «بله» یا «خیر» در پاسخنامه مربوطه نسبت به هر سوال، پاسخ خود را تعیین کنید. پاسخ صحیح و غلط وجود ندارد. سریع عمل کنید و درباره معنی هرسوال زیاد فکر نکنید..

ضمنا به یاد داشته باشید که به تمام سوالات باید جواب دهید.

1. شما سرگرمی زیاد دارید؟ بلی خیر
2. قبل از انجام هر کاری، تامل کنید تا کاملا درباره جوانب آن فکر کنید؟ بلی خیر
3. خلق شما غالبا در نوسان است؟ بلی خیر
4. تاکنون به خاطر کاری که می دانسته اید کس دیگری واقعا آن را انجام داده، از شما قدردانی شده است؟ بلی خیر
5. به آنچه دیگران فکر می کنند زیاد فکر می کنید؟ بلی خیر
6. آدم پرحرفی هستید؟ بلی خیر
7. مقروض بودن شما را نگران می کند؟ بلی خیر
8. تاکنون بدون هیچ دلیلی احساس بدبخت بودن کرده اید؟ بلی خیر
9. به موسسات خیریه کمک مالی می کنید؟ بلی خیر
10. تاکنون طمع کرده اید بیش از سهم خودتان بدست آورید؟ بلی خیر
11. نسبتا آدم سرزنده ای هستید؟ بلی خیر
12. دیدن رنج یک کودک یا یک حیوان شما را زیاد ناراحت می کند؟ بلی خیر
13. غالبا درباره چیزهایی که نباید انجام می داده اید یا نباید می گفته اید، نگران هستید؟ بلی خیر
14. از کسانی که نمی دانند چگنه مواظب رفتارشان باشند، بدتان می آید؟ بلی خیر
15. اگر بگوید کاری انجام خواهید داد، آیا همیشه روی قول خوتان می ایستید، بدون توجه به اینکه چقدر می تواند دردسر داشته باشد؟ بلی خیر
16. در یک مهمانی پر جنب و جوش ( سرزنده) آیا معمولا می توانید خود را رها کنید و خوش باشید؟ بلی خیر
17. آدم حساسی هستید؟ بلی خیر
18. مردم همیشه باید به قانون احترام بگذارند؟ بلی خیر
19. تاکنون کس دیگری را به خاطر کاری که می دانسته اید واقعا اشتباه شماست ، تقصیرکار دانسته اید؟ بلی خیر
20. از ملاقات آدمهای جدید لذت می برید؟ بلی خیر
21. رفتار خوب خیلی خوب است؟ بلی خیر
22. احساسات شما زود جریحه دار می شود؟ بلی خیر
23. تمامی عادت های شما خوب و پسندیده است؟ بلی خیر
24. آیا در مراسم اجتماعی تمایل دارید در حاشیه باشد؟ بلی خیر
25. داروهایی ( موادی ) که ممکن است اثرات عجیب و خطرناک داشته باشد مصرف می کنید؟ بلی خیر
26. غالبا احساس بی زاری می کنید؟ بلی خیر
27. تاکنون چیزی (حتی یک سنجاق یا دکمه) را که متعلق به کس دیگری است، برداشته اید؟ بلی خیر
28. زیاد بیرون رفتن را دوست دارید؟ بلی خیر
29. ترجیح می دهید راه خودتان را بروید به جای اینکه طبق مقررات عمل کنید؟ بلی خیر
30. از رنجاندن کسی که دوستش دارید ، لذت می برید؟ بلی خیر
31. غالبا احساس گناه شما را اذیت کرده است؟ بلی خیر
32. گاهی اوقات درباره اموری که چیزی درباره آنها نمیدانید، صحبت می کنید؟ بلی خیر
33. مطالعه کردن را به دیدار با دیگران ترجیح می دهید؟ بلی خیر
34. دشمنانی دارید که بخواهند به شما آسیب برسانند؟ بلی خیر
35. خودتان را فردی عصبانی می دانید؟ بلی خیر
36. دوستان زیادی دارید؟ بلی خیر
37. از شوخی هایی که گاهی ممکن است دیگران را واقعا اذیت کند، لذت می برید؟ بلی خیر
38. آدم غصه خوری هستید؟ بلی خیر
39. در زمان کودکی آنچه به شما گفته می شد، فوری و بدون چون و چرا (بدون غرولند) انجام می دادید؟ بلی خیر
40. آیا هر چه اتفاق می افتد، با روی خوش آنرا می پذیرید؟ بلی خیر
41. رفتار با نزاکت و پاکیزه بودن برای شما اهمیت دارد؟ بلی خیر
42. آیا غالبا بر خلاف خواسته های والدن تان رفتار کرده اید؟ بلی خیر
43. نگران آن هستید که امور وحشتناکی ممکن است رخ دهد؟ بلی خیر
44. تاکنون چیزی را که متعلق به دیگری است شکسته یا گم کرده اید؟ بلی خیر
45. معمولا در انتخاب دوستان جدید، شما پیش قدم می شوید؟ بلی خیر
46. خود را عصبانی یا زود رنج می نامید؟ بلی خیر
47. هنگامی که با دیگرانید ، غالبا ساکت هستید؟ بلی خیر
48. فکر می کنید مراسم ازدواج یک سنت قدیمی است و باید کنار گذاشته شود؟ بلی خیر
49. گاهی وقت ها کمی از خودتان تعریف می کنید؟ بلی خیر
50. نسبت به اکثر مردم، درباره "درست و نادرست" آسان گیر هستید؟ بلی خیر
51. می توانید به راحتی به یک مهمانی خسته کننده نشاط ببخشید؟ بلی خیر
52. نگران سلامتی خود هستید؟ بلی خیر
53. تا به حال حرف بد یا زننده ای درباره کسی گفته اید؟ بلی خیر
54. ازهمکاری با دیگران لذت می برید؟ بلی خیر
55. دوست دارید برای دوستانتان جوک و ماجرای خنده دار تعریف کنید؟ بلی خیر
56. آیا در نظر شما اکثر چیزها یکسان است؟ بلی خیر
57. آیا پیش آمده است که در کودکی نسبت به پدر و مادرتان پررویی کرده باشید؟ بلی خیر
58. دوست دارید با مردم قاطی شوید؟ بلی خیر
59. اگر بفهمید در کارتان اشتباهاتی وجود دارد، ایا نگران می شوید؟ بلی خیر
60. از بی خوابی رنج می برید؟ بلی خیر
61. دیگران گفته اند که شما گاهی اوقات بسیار شتابزده عمل می کنید؟ بلی خیر
62. همیشه قبل از خوردن غذا، دستان را می شویید؟ بلی خیر
63. هنگامی که دیگران با شما حرف می زنند، آیا شما تقریبا همیشه حاضر جواب هستید؟ بلی خیر
64. دوست دارید زودتر از موعد ، سر قرارهایتان برسید؟ بلی خیر
65. غالبا بدون هیچ دلیلی احساس خستگی و بی حالی می کنید؟ بلی خیر
66. تا به حال در بازی تقلب کرده اید؟ بلی خیر
67. از انجام کارهایی که نیااز به سرعت عمل دارد، خوشتان می آید؟ بلی خیر
68. مادر شما زن خوبی است (یا بوده است)؟ بلی خیر
69. غالبا به طور ناگهانی تصمیم می گیرید؟ بلی خیر
70. اغلب احساس می کنید که زندگی خیلی خسته کننده است؟ بلی خیر
71. تاکنون از کسی سوءاستفاه کرده اید؟ بلی خیر
72. غالبا بیشتر از وقتی که دارید، فعالیتهایی را برای خود جور می کنید؟ بلی خیر
73. افراد متعددی تلاش می کنند از شما دوری کنند؟ بلی خیر
74. درباره ظاهرتان زیاد حساس هستید؟ بلی خیر
75. فکر می کنید مردم وقت زیادی را صرف میکنند تا با پس انداز و بیمه، آینده شان را تامین کنند؟ بلی خیر
76. تا به حال آرزو کرده اید که وجود نداشتید؟ بلی خیر
77. اگر مطمئن باشید که هرگز کسی متوجه نخواهد شد آیا از پرداخت مالیات فرار خواهید کرد؟ بلی خیر
78. می توانید به یک مهمانی تحرک و نشاط ببخشید؟ بلی خیر
79. سعی دارید نسبت به مردم با ادب باشید؟ بلی خیر
80. بعد از یک تجربه خجالت آور، برای مدت طولانی ناراحت هستید؟ بلی خیر
81. عموما قبل از انجام هر کاری، درباره آن فکر می کنید؟ بلی خیر
82. تا به حال، بر راه و روش خوتان پافشاری کرده اید؟ بلی خیر
83. دچار عصبانیت هستید؟ بلی خیر
84. غالبا احساس تنهایی می کنید؟ بلی خیر
85. به طور کلی اطمینان دارید که مردم حقیقت را می گویند؟ بلی خیر
86. آیا همیشه به پندهایی که به دیگران می دهید، خودتان عمل می کنید؟ بلی خیر
87. هنگامی که مردم به عیب شما یا اشکالی که در کار شماست پی می برند، زود آزرده خاطر می شوید؟ بلی خیر
88. پیروی از مقررات جامعه بهتر از رفتار بر اساس را و روش فردی است؟ بلی خیر
89. تا به حال سر قرار یا کارتان دیر رسیده اید؟ بلی خیر
90. دوست دارید اطرافان پر از هیجان و تحرک باشد؟ بلی خیر
91. تمایل دارید که دیگران از شما بترسند؟ بلی خیر
92. گاهی اوقات سرشار از انرژی و گاهی خیلی بی حال هستید؟ بلی خیر
93. گاهی کار امروز را به فردا می اندازید؟ بلی خیر
94. مردم فکر می کنند شما آدم بسیار سرزنده ای هستید؟ بلی خیر
95. مردم به شما دروغ های زیادی می کویند؟ بلی خیر
96. باور دارید که فرد وظایف خاصی نسبت به خانواده اش دارد؟ بلی خیر
97. درباره بعضی امور حساس هستید؟ بلی خیر
98. همیشه میل به پذیرفتن اشتباه خود دارید؟ بلی خیر
99. برای حیوانی که در تله افتاده است ، دلتان می سوزد؟ بلی خیر
100. وقتی جوش می آورید، کنترل آن برایتان دشوار است؟ بلی خیر
101. شب ها در خانه تان را به دقت قفل می کنید؟ بلی خیر
102. باور دارید که طرح بیمه ای، فکر خوبی است؟ بلی خیر
103. از دست کسانی که با دقت رانندگی می کنند، کفرتان در می آید؟ بلی خیر
104. هنگام سفر، آیا غالبا در آخرین لحظه به اتوبوس ( یا قطار) می رسید؟ بلی خیر
105. بی آنکه اشتباه از جانب شما باشد، آیا دوستش هایتان به سادگی به هم می خورد؟ بلی خیر
106. گاهی اوقات دوست دارید حیوانات را اذیت و آزار کنید؟ بلی خیر

لطفا وارسی کنید که به تمام سوالات پاسخ داده اید.