The Big Five Personality Traits as predictors of life satisfaction in Egyptian college students

Abstract

Several studies have indicated significant relations between the Big Five personality traits and life satisfaction. However, most of these studies have been carried out on Western samples. The present study aimed to explore the Big Five predictors of life satisfaction in an under-studied sample of Egyptian college students (N = 1,418). They responded to a self-rating scale of life satisfaction and the Arabic Big Five Personality Inventory. Both scales have acceptable to good reliabilities and validities. Men obtained significantly higher mean total scores than did women for extraversion, openness, and conscientiousness, whereas women obtained higher mean total scores than did their male counterparts on neuroticism and agreeableness. In both sexes, all the Pearson correlations between the Big Five and life satisfaction were significant and positive except for neuroticism (negative). The strongest correlation with life satisfaction scores was for neuroticism (negative). Principal components analysis extracted two components in both genders which were labelled: “Positive traits”, and “Well-Being versus neuroticism”. Big Five traits accounted for approximately 22% of the variance in life satisfaction scores among men, and 17% in women. Predictors of life satisfaction were low neuroticism, conscientiousness, extraversion, openness (men), low neuroticism and conscientiousness (women). It was concluded that personality traits are important for life satisfaction in the present sample of Egyptian college students. By and large, the relationships observed in Egyptian college students reflect the general pattern observed in other samples.

Keywords:

• Life satisfaction
• extraversion
• neuroticism
• agreeableness
• openness
• conscientiousness
• Egypt

Introduction

The current investigation was designed to explore the association between life satisfaction and the Big Five personality traits, i.e., extraversion, neuroticism, agreeableness, openness to experience, and conscientiousness. A large nonclinical sample of university students from Egypt took part in this study. They are an under-studied sample in the psychological literature, i.e., outside the WEIRD nations (Western, Educated, Industrial, Rich, Democratic) (Henrich et al., 2010). The majority of studies in this domain have been conducted with participants from WEIRD nations.

The present study is relevant to both the psychology of personality and the new trend or branch in contemporary psychology, i.e., positive psychology. Positive psychology focuses an individual’s perspective on the positive side of life by teaching them how to develop their positive attributes (Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000). Researchers and practitioners in this domain are increasingly interested in the positive factors that help individuals flourish and thrive. Life satisfaction is one such factor that provides an indication of perceived life quality (Antaramian, 2020).

One of the main themes in positive psychology is subjective well-being (henceforth SWB). It is the subjective judgment of how happy people are with their own lives (Diener et al., 2003). The main components of SWB are feelings and emotions linked with happiness and satisfaction (Oishi et al., 2004). Happiness is the affective component of SWB, while life satisfaction represents the cognitive evaluation of a life filled with positive emotions (Myers & Diener, 1995).

The following sections will review: life satisfaction, the Big Five personality traits, previous studies on the life satisfaction and Big Five associations, the present study and its hypotheses.

Life satisfaction

SWB consists of three components: life satisfaction, happiness, and the absence of negative emotions, such as depression or anxiety (Argyle et al., 1995; Deci & Ryan, 2008; Diener, 1984). Diener et al. (1999) defined life satisfaction as an individual’s cognitive evaluation of the degree to which he or she is content with life. Life satisfaction is considered a more stable indicator of SWB. Huebner et al. (2006) stated that life satisfaction is often utilized as the best indicator of a person’s perceived well-being. Frisch (1998) suggests that life satisfaction judgments are based on how people’s needs, goals, and wishes are being met in important areas of life. Therefore, life satisfaction is referred to as perceived quality of life. Previous studies have shown that global life satisfaction is related to the overall quality of life not only in the present, but also in the future (Diener & Chan, 2011).

Life satisfaction has been investigated in relationship to many other constructs. To quote some examples: life satisfaction is a key indicator of mental health and is positively related to a broad spectrum of positive, personal, psychological, behavioral, social, interpersonal, and intrapersonal outcomes (Proctor et al., 2009). Life satisfaction is related positively to hardiness (Acharya & Sethi, 2020), emotional clarity, emotional repair (dimensions of perceived emotional intelligence), and resilience (Ramos-Diaz et al., 2019). Life satisfaction has shown clear discriminant validity from related concepts such as positive affect, negative affect, optimism, and self-esteem (López-Gómez et al., 2020), as well as personality traits.

Measures of well-being appear very stable over time. In a recent large panel study, Anglim et al. (2015) obtained 8-year test–retest correlations for life satisfaction approaching .80 (see also Hahn et al., 2013).

Several factors can effect life satisfaction, including self-esteem, social support, individualism versus collectivism, and cultural homogeneity, amongst other factors (Diener & Diener, 1995). There is consistent evidence that the rich are more satisfied with their lives than the poor, and individuals living in wealthier economies report higher life satisfaction than those living in poorer nations (Diener et al., 2013; Heidemeier, 2017). Abdel-Khalek and El Nayal (2015), carried out a study on life satisfaction using college students from four Arab countries (N = 1,322): Egypt, Lebanon, Kuwait, and Qatar. They found, in general, that the samples from wealthier, countries obtained higher mean scores on life satisfaction than the samples from developing countries. This result was explained in the light of the positive association between life satisfaction and gross domestic product.

Considerable controversy has surrounded the sex-related differences in life satisfaction. Joshanloo and Afshari (2011), reported that female students scored significantly higher than male students on life satisfaction. In a similar vein, López-Gómez et al. (2020), found that women have slightly, but significantly, higher average levels of life satisfaction than men. Egyptian and Lebanese women obtained significantly higher mean scores on life satisfaction than their male counterparts, whereas there were no significant sex differences in the samples from Kuwait and Qatar (Abdel-Khalek & El Nayal, 2015).

The Big Five personality traits

Personality can be defined as a dynamic and organized set of characteristics possessed by a person, that uniquely influence his or her cognitions, motivations, and behaviors in various situations (Rychman, 2004). The Big Five personality traits are the most widely used and recognized model as a comprehensive taxonomy of individual differences in human personality (John & Srivastava, 1999). Stake and Eisele (2010), considered the Big Five to provide a comprehensive map of universal personality traits. Over the last two decades, the Big Five model has become an influential framework for understanding individual differences in personality traits (Furnham & Cheng, 2019; Matthews et al., 2003). McCrae and Costa (2008) stated that many personality psychology researchers conclude that personality may be understood as a function of five basic factors: neuroticism, extraversion, openness, agreeableness, and conscientiousness. The Big Five model is a hierarchical framework, where each broad domain is characterized by a set of narrower traits or six facets (Costa & McCrae, 1992, pp. 16–18).

Neuroticism (N) is the opposite of adjustment or emotional stability. Neurotic individuals have a predisposition to experiencing negative emotions, which can lead to more negative life events (Magnus et al., 1993). Neuroticism consists of six facets: anxiety, angry hostility, depression, self-consciousness, impulsiveness, and vulnerability. Extraversion (E) is a propensity towards social interaction and positive affect (Wilt & Revelle, 2009). Extraversion is associated with processes that generally lead to more positive emotional states and life events. Its facets are as follows: warmth, gregariousness, assertiveness, activity, excitement seeking, and positive emotions. Openness (O) to experience involves characteristics such as being creative, seeking new activities. Its six facets are as follows: fantasy, aesthetics, feelings, actions, ideas, and values. Agreeableness (A) is characterized by pleasantness and a desire to preserve interpersonal harmony (John & Srivastava, 1999). Its six facets are: trust, straightforwardness, altruism, compliance, modesty, and tender-mindedness. A highly agreeable person is thought to be well nurtured, trusting, and cooperative. Conscientiousness (C). Conscientious people are achievement-oriented, have good impulse control, are rule conforming, and consistent (John & Srivastava, 1999). Its six facets are as follows: competence, order, dutifulness, achievement striving, self-discipline, and deliberation.

The important question here is as follows: Which factors of personality are related to high life satisfaction?

Life satisfaction and personality associations

The association between life satisfaction and personality has received substantial attention in the last two decades (e.g., Anglim et al., 2020; Ali, 2019; Connor, 2008; Halama, 2010; Jovanović, 2019; Lachmann et al., 2017; Marcionetti & Rossier, 2016; Mishra et al, 2017; Nishimura & Suzuki, 2016; Smith & Konik, 2021; Udayar et al., 2020). Extensive empirical studies conducted up till now, have confirmed the positive association between the Big Five and life satisfaction and that personality represents one of the most salient predictors of life satisfaction (e.g., Anglim et al., 2020; Diener, 1998; Diener & Lucas, 1999; Heidemeier & Görtiz, 2016).

Personality traits explained differences in life satisfaction better than economic conditions (Heidemeier, 2017). Wood et al. (2008), consider that the five factors of personality can explain one-third of the variance in life satisfaction.

To quote some empirical studies in detail, Joshanloo and Afshari (2011), studied 235 Iranian Muslim university students and found that the Big Five traits explained about 25% of the variance in life satisfaction scores. Among the Big Five traits, extraversion and low neuroticism were found to be the strongest predictors of life satisfaction. In younger people, neuroticism and extraversion were found to predict mental well-being and life satisfaction 40 years later (Gale et al., 2013).

Suldo et al. (2015), investigated the association between the Big Five and life satisfaction in high school students from the United States (N = 624). They indicated that personality factors accounted for approximately 47% of the variance in adolescents’ life satisfaction scores. Low scores of neuroticism emerged as the strongest predictor. Openness, conscientiousness, and extraversion were also significant and unique predictors of life satisfaction. Odaci and Cikrikci (2019), studied 620 Turkish university students and found that the personality traits of extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness and low neuroticism, emerged as significant predictors of life satisfaction. Szczésniak et al. (2019), recruited a sample of 213 participants aged between 18 and 75. They found that life satisfaction correlated with extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness (positive), and neuroticism (negative).

Based on meta-analysis, DeNeve and Cooper (1998) synthesized a pre-Big Five literature, whereas Steel et al. (2008) focused exclusively on the NEO framework. They conducted a meta-analysis of 2,142 correlation coefficients, derived from 347 samples. For the meta-analysis of the Big Five factors and life satisfaction, they used different sample sizes (n from 6208 to 9901). They concluded that only low neuroticism, extraversion, agreeableness, and conscientiousness, respectively, were significantly related to all subjective well-being facets measured.

Anglim et al. (2020) carried out the most comprehensive assessment of the associations between personality (Big Five and HEXACO) and SWB, including life satisfaction (n = 334, 567, k = 462). Their meta-analytic study incorporated a broad range of Big Five measures and synthesized the large body of research in recent years. They concluded that their research confirms that the overlap between basic personality traits and well-being dimensions is substantial. Anglim et al. (2020) concluded also that the average correlation between personality domains and well-being was r=.28, indicating a strong association. For the Big Five model, low neuroticism is a very strong predictor of well-being, extraversion and conscientiousness are fairly strong, and openness and agreeableness are more moderate. The pattern of correlations between personality and SWB in the Anglim et al. (2020) meta-analysis was almost identical to that obtained in Steel et al. (2008), but quite different from that of DeNeve and Cooper (1998).

To study how each personality factor predicts the variance in life satisfaction, some additional investigations were conducted (Meléndez et al., 2019). In a Swedish sample of adolescents, Garcia (2011), found that low neuroticism (β= −.37) and extraversion (β=.34) predicted life satisfaction. However, conscientiousness predicted global psychological well-being (β=.32). Suldo et al. (2015), found four personality traits emerged as significant predictors of life satisfaction, i.e., low neuroticism (β= −.59), conscientiousness (β=.12), extraversion (β=.10), and agreeableness (β=.08).

Weber and Huebner (2015) found that predictors of life satisfaction among southeastern American 7th grade students were as follows: low neuroticism (β= −.38) followed by conscientiousness (β=.22), agreeableness (β=.13) and extraversion (β=.10).

The present study

Several previous studies indicated that personality factors have an important role in life satisfaction (Anglim et al., 2020; Diener & Lucas, 1999). However, the majority of empirical studies in this domain have been carried out with participants from WEIRD nations (Henrich et al., 2010), mainly the English-speaking, Anglo-Saxon, and Christian countries. Few studies have been published from China, Iran, Pakistan, India, Turkey as well as other non-Western countries (see Anglim et al. 2020). The differences in the proportion of variance in life satisfaction explained by the Big Five factors in studies conducted in other cultural settings, would give a better idea about the generalisability of these results. The use of a sample from a different culture, i.e., Egypt, in the present study, would broaden the empirical base in this domain. Egypt is a country profoundly differing in language, history, situation, and culture from the WEIRD nations. One of the general aims of the current investigation was to find out whether the relationship between Big Five and life satisfaction differs from other cultures.

Hypotheses

The present study was designed to test out the following four hypotheses:

1. Sex-related differences in the Big Five and life satisfaction will be statistically significant

2. The correlations between the Big Five and life satisfaction will be statistically significant.

3. More than one component will be extracted from the principal components of the correlation matrices of men and women.

4. Specific Big Five personality traits will predict life satisfaction.

Materials and method

Participants

A volunteer convenience sample (N = 1,418) was recruited for this study (618 men; 800 women). Their ages ranged between 19 and 30 (M = 21.8, SD = 2.3; M = 21.4, SD = 2.5, for men and women respectively). All participants were Egyptian undergraduates in different departments and colleges at Alexandria University, Egypt.

The psychometric measures

The Arabic Big-Five Personality Inventory (ABFPI)

The ABFPI (Abdel-Khalek, 2018, 2019, 2020) was developed based on an item pool containing 455 items in order to measure the five factors: Neuroticism, Extraversion, Agreeableness, Openness, and Conscientiousness. The items for each factor were administered to a separate sample of college students (total N = 1,161). For each factor, the item-remainder correlations were calculated. The 20 items with the highest correlations with the remaining items for each factor were retained. Then, using another sample (N = 450), the correlations between these 20 items and the total score on the same factor of the NEO-FFI (Costa & McCrae, 1992) was calculated. The six items with the highest correlations with the NEO-FFI were retained for each of the five factors, indicating good criterion-related validity. The application of item response theory (Thissen & Steinberg, 2009) resulted in the elimination of five items (Hussein & Abdel-Khalek, 2021). Therefore, the final inventory consisted of 25 short statements. A back translation technique was applied (Brislin, 1970, 1980; International Test Commission, 2001) with good results. The items of the English version of the ABFPI were edited by a native English-speaking Professor (David Lester). The items of the scale were to be answered on a four-point Likert type scale as follows: 1 (No), 2 (Some), 3 (Much), and 4 (Always) (see the Appendix). The total score for each factor could range from 5 to 20, with higher scores on the trait indicating a higher trait score. The inventory has acceptable to high alpha reliabilities and criterion-related validities (Abdel-Khalek, 2019, 2020) (see Table 1). Finally, a confirmatory factor analysis was conducted for the ABFPI (Hussein & Abdel-Khalek, 2021).

Table 1 Reliability and criterion-related validity of the scales.

Scale	Reliability		Criterion validity
	Alpha	Retest	A	B
Life satisfaction	–	.82	.64
Extraversion	.78	.81	.82	.74
Neuroticism	.79	.90	.85	.63
Agreeableness	.75	.89	.49	.50
Openness	.72	.91	.53	.61
Conscientiousness	.80	.87	.68	.73

Note: The interval between the test and retest was 7–14 days.

(A) The criterion was the NEO-FFI (Costa & McCrae, 1992).

(B) The criterion was Goldberg’s (1999) FFM.

The self-rated life satisfaction

A single item self-rating scale was used to assess life satisfaction in the form of a question as follows: “To what degree do you feel satisfied with your life in general?” This question was followed by a 0 to 10 scale. The research participant was requested: (a) To respond according to his or her global estimation and general feeling (not their present state); (b) To know that the zero is the minimum, and that 10 is the maximum score; and (c) To circle a number which seems to them to describe their actual feelings accurately. A high score indicates the rating of life satisfaction at a high level. Its 1-week test–retest reliability was .82, indicating high temporal stability and corroborating the trait-like nature of the scores. Its criterion-related validity against the Satisfaction with Life Scale (Diener et al., 1985) was .64 (p<.0001), indicating good concurrent correlational validity.

Procedure

The ABFPI and the life satisfaction self-rating scale were administered anonymously to students in their classrooms during university hours. Each testing session contained a small number of male and female students. All participants were volunteers and gave verbal consent. Testers had an MA or Ph.D. in psychology. Different samples were recruited for reliability and validity. They were college students with characteristics similar to the main sample of the study. Ethical approval was obtained from the deans of the selected faculties, and the issues of informed consent, confidentiality and privacy were respected.

Data analysis

SPSS, Inc. (2009) was used for the statistical analysis of the data. Descriptive statistics, t tests, d for effect size (Cohen, 1994) were used to test hypothesis I, Pearson correlations for testing hypothesis II, principal components analyses to test hypothesis III, and regression analysis was used to test hypothesis IV.

Results

Table 1 sets out the psychometric properties of the study scales: Cronbach’s alpha and the 1-week test–retest reliability of the Big Five as well as the test–retest reliability for the life satisfaction self-rated scale (N = 173). Criterion-related validity was computed using the Satisfaction with Life Scale (N = 194; Diener et al., 1985; Abdel-Khalek, 2008) for life satisfaction. As to the ABFPI, the NEO-FFI (Costa & McCrae, 1992) and the FFM (Goldberg, 1999) were used as criterion (N = 110; N = 91, respectively). All the participants in this section were volunteer undergraduates. Table 1 indicates that the alpha reliabilities ranged from .72 to .80, the test–retest reliabilities between .81 and .91, and the criterion-related validities from .49 to .85, indicating acceptable to good reliabilities and validities.

To test Hypothesis I, Table 2 presents the descriptive statistics for men and women, the t values, and the d for effect size. This table indicates that all the t values except for life satisfaction were statistically significant, that is, men obtained significantly higher mean total scores than did women for extraversion, openness, and conscientiousness. Women had significantly higher mean total scores than did men for neuroticism and agreeableness. However, the effect sizes (d) were small.

Table 2 Mean (M) standard deviation (SD), t value, and d for effect size of the scales for men (n = 618) and women (n = 800).

Factor	Men		Women		t	d
	M	SD	M	SD
Life satisfaction	6.52	2.95	6.69	2.77	1.10	.06
Extraversion	13.78	3.27	13.13	3.02	3.84**	.21^a
Neuroticism	9.73	3.16	10.98	3.19	7.38**	–.40^a
Agreeableness	16.01	2.96	16.32	2.59	2.10*	.11
Openness	13.99	3.19	13.21	3.27	4.47**	.24^a
Conscientiousness	14.49	3.33	13.87	3.19	3.59**	.19

* p<.05 (2-tailed).

** p<.01 (2-tailed).

a Small effect size.

Table 3 sets out the Pearson correlation coefficients between the scale scores for the combined sample of men and women, while Table 4 presents the correlations separately for men and women to test Hypothesis II. In the current study, we are interested in life satisfaction and Big Five associations. All these correlations were statistically significant and positive except for life satisfaction and neuroticism (negative) in all cases. The strongest correlation with life satisfaction scores was for neuroticism (negative), then conscientiousness, extraversion, openness, and agreeableness, respectively.

Table 3 Pearson correlations between the scales for the combined sample of men and women (N = 1,418).

Scale	S	E	N	A	O	C
Life satisfaction (S)	–
Extraversion (E)	.233**	–
Neuroticism (N)	–.318**	–.303**	–
Agreeableness (A)	.120**	.270**	.088**	–
Openness (O)	.162**	.181**	–.095**	.202**	–
Conscientiousness (C)	.294**	.206**	–.121**	.289**	.382**	–

P<.01 (2-tailed).

Table 4 Pearson correlations between the scales for men (n = 618; the upper matrix) and women (n = 800; the lower matrix).

Scale	S	E	N	A	O	C
Life satisfaction (S)	–	.287**	–.345**	.133**	.207**	.316**
Extraversion (E)	.203**	–	–.302**	.275**	.181**	.206**
Neuroticism (N)	–.335**	–.258**	–	.044	–.034	–.129**
Agreeableness (A)	.098*	.263**	.112**	–	.215**	.257**
Openness (O)	.111**	.180**	–.108**	.179**	–	.398**
Conscientiousness (C)	.287**	.186**	–.077	.318**	.352**	–

* p<.05 (2-tailed).

** p<.01 (2-tailed).

To test Hypothesis III, principal components analysis was performed to examine the factorial structure of the scale scores for men and women separately. The Kaiser criterion (eigenvalue ≥1.0) was applied to extract significant components. Orthogonal (Varimax) and oblique (Oblimin) rotation of axes were conducted. The resulting factors after rotation were independent of each other in the orthogonal solution, whereas in the oblique rotation, the factors can correlate with each other. However, the differences between the two solutions were small. Therefore, the varimax results were reported. Kaiser–Meyer–Oklin measure of sampling adequacy was .658 for men and .604 for women. Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity (Approx. Chi-square)=449.261 for men and 490.156 for women. Reference to Table 5 indicates that two components were extracted for men and women. They accounted for 55.2% and 53.7% of the total variance, respectively. In general, the differences between male and female components were small. The first component could be labelled “Positive traits”, whereas the second component could be labelled “Well-being versus neuroticism” in both sexes.

Table 5 Orthogonal (Varimax) two factors solution for the scales for men (n = 618) and women (n = 800).

	Men		Women
	I	II	I	II
Life satisfaction	.249	.703	.204	.702
Extraversion	.311	.598	.398	.470
Neuroticism	.183	−.844	.134	−.853
Agreeableness	.692	−.007	.766	.145
Openness	.722	.093	.595	.158
Conscientiousness	.689	.272	.729	.207
Eigen value	1.668	1.664	1.690	28.166
% of variance	27.801	27.427	1.530	28.506
Total variance	55.228		53.671

To test Hypothesis IV, regression analysis for predicting life satisfaction was conducted for men and women, separately. Table 6 presents the results. The predictors of life satisfaction for men were low neuroticism, conscientiousness, extraversion, and openness, but not agreeableness. For women, the predictors of life satisfaction were low neuroticism, and conscientiousness, but not extraversion, agreeableness and openness. The R² for men was .22, whereas it was .17 for woman.

Table 6 Big Five for predicting life satisfaction scores.

Predictors	B	β	SE	t	p
Men
Extraversion	.114	.126	.036	3.126	.002
Neuroticism	–.257	–.274	.036	–7.069	.0001
Agreeableness	.040	.040	.039	1.012	.312
Openness	.078	.084	.037	2.094	.037
Conscientiousness	.185	.208	.036	5.091	.0001
(Constant)	3.019		.883	3.421	.001
	R^2=.218 F ratio = 33.267, p<.0001
Women
Extraversion	.054	.059	.034	1.580	.115
Neuroticism	–.249	–.290	.031	–7.966	.0001
Agreeableness	.044	.043	.040	1.118	.264
Openness	.001	.001	.030	.033	.973
Conscientiousness	.199	.233	.032	6.133	.0001
(Constant)	5.199		.793	6.555	.0001
	R^2=.174 F ratio = 30.141, p<.0001

Discussion

Many research studies have been conducted to estimate the association between the Big Five and life satisfaction. However, the majority of these studies used Western, English-speaking and Christian samples. Fewer studies were from non-Western countries. Following another direction, the present study was carried out on Eastern or non-Western, Arabic-speaking, and mainly Muslim participants from Egypt. The use of such a population makes the cross-cultural comparison viable. In general, the aims of the current investigation have been successfully demonstrated.

Regarding the first hypothesis, the sex-related difference in life satisfaction, was not statistically significant. Previous results are inconsistent. That is, women had significantly higher mean scores than did men (Joshanloo & Afshari, 2011; López-Gómez et al., 2020), as well as Egyptian and Lebanese participants. However, there were no significant sex differences in Kuwaiti and Qatari samples (Abdel-Khalek & El Nayal, 2015). Other studies reported non-significant differences in life satisfaction (Dorahy et al., 2000; Giusta et al., 2011). These inconsistent results may be due to the fact that life satisfaction is a complex construct. Several factors can affect it, such as socio-economic-psychological factors. The impact of these factors on life satisfaction levels deserves a separate study.

All the sex-related differences in the Big Five were statistically significant. That is, men obtained higher mean total scores on extraversion, openness, and conscientiousness, whereas women had higher mean total scores on neuroticism and agreeableness. However, all the effect sizes (d) were small except for agreeableness (n.s.). In comparison with 32 previous studies, the higher mean scores on neuroticism and agreeableness for women were congruent with 84% and 75% of these studies (Abdel-Khalek, 2021; Tables 1 and 2). The higher mean scores on extraversion and openness among men than in women was consistent with the last-mentioned study on Egyptian college students. Therefore, sex-related differences in the Big Five are real but small. By and large, the first Hypothesis was partially verified.

As to the second Hypothesis, life satisfaction was significantly associated with all Big Five traits. In both sexes, the highest correlation was between life satisfaction and neuroticism (negative), indicating the important relationship between life satisfaction and emotional stability, mental health and quality of life (Diener & Chan, 2011; Proctor et al., 2009). In both sexes also, the second highest association was between life satisfaction and conscientiousness. Therefore, the second Hypothesis was fully verified. Lucas and Fujita (2000) stated that the constructive atmosphere created by positive personality traits such as extraversion and agreeableness enhances life satisfaction by raising positive mood. On the other hand, the damaging cognitive and emotional reactions created by neuroticism have an adverse impact on life satisfaction.

To test the third Hypothesis, principal components analysis extracted two components, which were labelled in both sexes: “Positive traits” and “Well-being versus neuroticism”. The last component is bipolar, its first pole contains extraversion and life satisfaction. Therefore, it could be labelled “well-being” based on Francis et al.’s (1998), “happiness as stable extraversion”. Therefore, the third Hypothesis was verified.

Notwithstanding the close similarity between the extracted two components and their loadings among men and women, the Big Five predictors of life satisfaction were different. The predictors of life satisfaction were low neuroticism, conscientiousness, extraversion, and openness in men. whereas the predictors of life satisfaction in women were low neuroticism and conscientiousness. The Big Five traits accounted for approximately 22% of the variance in life satisfaction scores among men, and 17% in women. Low neuroticism emerged as the strongest predictor of life satisfaction scores in both sexes. It is evident that the Big Five predictors of life satisfaction in the present sample of men was near to that obtained in both Anglim et al.’s (2020) and Steel et al.’s (2008) meta-analyses. However, the Big Five predictors of life satisfaction among women in the current investigation were similar only with the afore-mentioned two meta-analyses in low neuroticism and conscientiousness and not with extraversion and openness. The reason for this result may by the more introverted and reserved personality of the Arab women in comparison with men (see Table 2).

It is important to compare the present results with previous meta-analyses regarding the correlations and beta weights. Table 7 indicates good similarity of the correlations between the Big Five and life satisfaction between the present study and the meta-analytic correlations in the Anglim et al. (2020) study. There is also similarity in the beta weights between the present study and Steel et al.’s (2008) results. It could be concluded that the present results on a large Egyptian sample are very similar to the two most important meta-analytic studies.

Table 7 Correlation between Big Five and life satisfaction and beta weights in the present study and previous meta-analyses.

Big Five factors	Correlations		Beta weights
			The present study		Steel et al. (2008)
			The present study	Anglim et al. (2020)		Men	Women
	Extraversion	.23	.32	.13	.06	.17
Neuroticism	–.32	−.39	−.27	−.29	−.29
Agreeableness	.12	.20	.04	.04	−.02
Openness	.16	.08	.08	.00	.03
Conscientiousness	.29	.27	.21	.23	.08
R^2			.22	.17	.17

There is a need to comment on the merits of using a single-item self-rating scale of life satisfaction. Michalos and Kahlke (2010), found that a single item asking about satisfaction with overall life was stable at .67 and .65 for one and two years, respectively. Lucas and Donnellan (2012) estimated the reliability of single-item life satisfaction measures in four large representative samples and found that the reliabilities ranged between .68 and .74 with a mean of .72. Diener et al. (2013), stated that national mean levels of life satisfaction provide strong evidence for the validity of life satisfaction scales. Furthermore, life satisfaction scores predict health and longevity (Diener & Chan, 2011).

In a similar vein, Konow and Early (1999) described evidence that self-reported happiness levels are correlated with the following: (a) objective factors such as unemployment, (b) recall of the person's positive versus negative life events, (c) assessment of happiness by friends, spouse, and family members, (d) duration of genuine smiles, (e) heart rate and blood pressure measures as responses to stress, (f) psychosomatic disorders, (g) response to stress by skin resistance measures, and (h) electroencephalogram measures of prefrontal brain activity. Therefore, there are good reasons to use the single item self-rating scale of life satisfaction.

Limitations

Notwithstanding the specific strengths of the present study, namely the large sample size and the acceptable to good psychometric properties of the scales, some limitations have to be acknowledged. Foremost among these is the convenience and non-probability sampling method used in the present study. This sample was recruited from one Egyptian university. In addition, university students are a particular segment of any given population as to their age group and most probably their high intelligence and education, in comparison to the general population. Therefore, a replication of this study using a sample from the general population with a large age range is needed. This is a question for further investigation. In a different respect, it is important to refer to the low R² and therefore the explanatory power of the predictors was reduced. Furthermore, the single item self-rating scale of life satisfaction has limitations.

Conclusion

In the age of positive psychology (Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000; Sheldon, 2004), there remains an important question on the contribution of personality traits to subjective well-being. One of the main subjects in this endeavor is the association between life satisfaction and the Big Five personality traits. Despite the publication of many studies in the psychological literature, to the best of our knowledge, there was no research in this area with Egyptian participants.

Using a large sample of Egyptian college students, the present results were in line with previous findings. That is, all the Big Five personality traits were significantly associated with life satisfaction. However, not all the Big Five factors contribute to life satisfaction, only low neuroticism, conscientiousness, extraversion, openness (in men), and low neuroticism and conscientiousness (in women) were significant and unique predictors of the variance in life satisfaction. The Big Five personality traits explain approximately 22% and 17% of the variance in life satisfaction scores among men and women, respectively. The present study confirms that only specific personality factors are predictors of life satisfaction as reported by Anglim et al. (2020) and Steel et al. (2008).

The strongest predictor of life satisfaction in both sexes was low neuroticism. As neuroticism is linked to experiencing negative thoughts and emotions, the negative association found was predictable. On the basis of the present findings, we can conclude that the Big Five personality traits are important in the understanding of life satisfaction.

Acknowledgments

We thank all the college students for their participation in the study, and the research assistants for helping in the collection of data and for the statistical analysis: Dr. Aya Ahmed, Yomna and Yossra Kamal, and Mohamed Anwar.

Disclosure statement

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Additional information

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, writing and publication of this article.

Appendix

The Arabic Big-Five personality inventory (ABFPI)

Instructions: Please read each of the following statements carefully, and decide how much it describes your feelings and behavior. Indicate how it applies to you in general, by circling one of the following words in front of each statement.

Table

1. I like to socialize with people	No	Some	Much	Always
2. I have many friends	No	Some	Much	Always
3. I am a social person	No	Some	Much	Always
4. I really enjoy talking to people	No	Some	Much	Always
5. I tend to be introvert	No	Some	Much	Always
6. I am an anxious person	No	Some	Much	Always
7. I suffer from pains and aches	No	Some	Much	Always
8. I feel sad	No	Some	Much	Always
9. I feel tense	No	Some	Much	Always
10. I feel lonely	No	Some	Much	Always
11. I care about others' feelings	No	Some	Much	Always
12. I am sympathetic with others	No	Some	Much	Always
13 I indeed care about others	No	Some	Much	Always
14. I like helping others	No	Some	Much	Always
15. I am friendly with others	No	Some	Much	Always
16. I like new ideas	No	Some	Much	Always
17. I like artwork	No	Some	Much	Always
18. I am open to new experiences	No	Some	Much	Always
19. I like to do new and creative things	No	Some	Much	Always
20. I have wide interests	No	Some	Much	Always
21. Time is important to me	No	Some	Much	Always
22. I strive to be distinguished	No	Some	Much	Always
23. I am an organized and disciplined person	No	Some	Much	Always
24. I work hard and well	No	Some	Much	Always
25. I have a strong motivation for success	No	Some	Much	Always