character traits for problem solving

• Connect with us on LinkedIn
• Our Blog RSS Feed

Stay informed.

Keep up with the latest in careers, hiring and industry developments.

The Top 10 Characteristics of Problem Solvers

September 24th, 2017

Have you ever noticed that some people seem to be natural born problem solvers? Look closer, and you’ll discover that problem solving is more a skill than a gift. Effective problem solvers share ten common characteristics.

1. They have an “attitude”!

Simply expressed, effective problem solvers invariably see problems as opportunities, a chance to learn something new, to grow, to succeed where others have failed, or to prove that “it can be done”.  Underlying these attitudes is a deeply held conviction that, with adequate preparation, the right answer will come.

2. They re-define the problem.

Problem solving is a primary consulting skill. Seasoned consultants know that, very often, the initial definition of the problem (by the client) is incorrect or incomplete. They learn to discount statements such as, “Obviously, the problem is that …” and follow their own leadings, but…

3. They have a system.

Perhaps the most common model is the old consulting acronym: DACR/S in which the letters stand for Describe, Analyze, Conclude, and Recommend/Solve. As with many formulas, its usefulness stems from the step-by-step approach it represents. Effective problem solvers take the steps in order and apply them literally. For example, in describing the problem (the first step), they strenuously avoid making premature judgments or ruling out possibilities. In analyzing the information, they are careful that their own prejudices do not interfere. In developing conclusions, they are aware of the need to test them thoroughly. Finally, most astute problem solvers recognize that there is almost always more than one solution, so they develop several alternatives from which to choose.

4. They avoid the experience trap.

The world is becoming increasingly non-linear. Things happen in pairs, triads, and groups and often don’t follow traditional lines from past to present and cause to effect. In such an environment, where synchronicity and simultaneity rather than linearity prevails, past experience must be taken with a grain of salt. Seasoned problem solvers know the pitfalls of relying on what worked in the past as a guide to what will work in the future. They learn to expect the unexpected, illogical, and non-linear.

5. They consider every position as though it were their own.

For effective problem solvers, standing in the other person’s shoes is more than a cute saying. It’s a fundamental way of looking at the problem from every perspective. This ability to shift perspectives quickly and easily is a key characteristic of effective problem solvers. As one especially capable consultant put it, “I take the other fellow’s position, and then I expand upon it until I understand it better than he does”.

6. They recognize conflict as often a prerequisite to solution.

When the stakes are high in a problem situation, the parties are often reluctant to show their hands and cautious about giving away too much. In such instances, managed conflict can be an effective tool for flushing out the real facts of a situation.

7. They listen to their intuition.

Somewhere during the latter stages of the fact-finding (description) process, effective problem solvers experience what can best be called, “inklings”-gut-level feelings about the situation. When this happens, they listen, hypothesize, test and re-test. They realize that, while intuition may be partially innate, effective intuition is overwhelmingly a developed faculty-and they work to develop it!

8. They invariably go beyond “solving the problem”.

On a time scale, just solving the problem at hand brings you to the present, to a point you might call, ground-zero. Truly effective problem solvers push further. They go beyond simply solving the problem to discover the underlying opportunities that often lie concealed within the intricacies of the situation. Implicit in this approach is the premise that every problem is an opportunity in disguise.

9. They seek permanent solutions.

Permanent, as opposed to band-aid solutions, has two characteristics: (1) they address all aspects of the problem, and (2) they are win/win in that they offer acceptable benefits to all parties involved.  Symptomatic problem solving, like bad surgery or dentistry, leaves part of the decay untouched, with the result that, over time, it festers and erupts.  Just for the record, a permanent solution is one that STAYS solved and doesn’t come back to bite you.

10. They gain agreement and commitment from the parties involved.

It’s easy, in the heady rush of finding “the answer” to a problem, to fail to gain agreement and commitment on the part of everyone involved. For effective problem solvers, just “going along” via tacit agreement isn’t enough. There must be explicit statements from all parties that they concur and are willing to commit to the solution. Agreement and concurrence really constitute a third characteristic of the “permanent” solution discussed above, but they are so often ignored that it is important that they be viewed separately.

Written by Shale Paul, Copyright Coach University. All Rights Reserved.

Share this:

Comments are closed.

• Newsletter Content
• Software Sales Candidates

10 Characteristics of Good Problem Solvers

Professional psychologist, motivational writer

Good problem solvers are good thinkers. They have less drama and problems to begin with and don't get overly emotional when faced with a problem. They usually see problems as challenges and life experiences and try to stand above them, objectively.

Good problem solvers use a combination of intuition and logic to come up with their solutions. Intuition has more to do with the emotional and instinctive side of us and logic is more related to our cognition and thinking. Good problem solvers use both of these forces to get as much information as they can to come up with the best possible solution. In addition, they are reasonably open minded but logically skeptical.

Some of the general characteristics of good problem solvers are:

1. They don't need to be right all the time: They focus on finding the right solution rather than wanting to prove they are right at all costs.

2. They go beyond their own conditioning: They go beyond a fixated mind set and open up to new ways of thinking and can explore options.

3. They look for opportunity within the problem: They see problems as challenges and try to learn from them.

4. They know the difference between complex and simple thinking: They know when to do a systematic and complex thinking and when to go through short cuts and find an easy solution.

5. They have clear definition of what the problem is: They can specifically identity the problem.

6. They use the power of words to connect with people: They are socially well developed and find ways to connect with people and try to find happy-middle solutions.

7. They don't create problems for others: They understand that to have their problem solved they can't create problems for others. Good problems solvers who create fair solutions make a conscious effort not to harm others for a self-interest intention. They know such acts will have long term consequences even if the problem is temporarily solved.

8. They do prevention more than intervention: Good problem solvers have a number of skills to prevent problems from happening in the first place. They usually face less drama, conflict, and stressful situations since they have clear boundaries, don't let their rights violated and do not violate other people's rights. They are more of a positive thinker so naturally they are surrounded with more positivity and have more energy to be productive.

9. They explore their options: They see more than one solution to a problem and find new and productive ways to deal with new problems as they arise. They also have a backup plan if the first solution does not work and can ask for support and advise when needed.

10. They have reasonable expectations: Good problem solvers have reasonable expectations as to what the solution would be. They understand that there are many elements effecting a situation and that idealistic ways of thinking and going about solving a problem will be counterproductive.

At the end, good problem solvers do not have too many irrational fears when dealing with problems. They can visualize the worst case scenario, work their way out of it and let go of the fear attached to it. Fear can make your logic and intuition shady and your decisions unproductive.

Popular in the Community

From our partner, huffpost shopping’s best finds, more in life.

Questions? Visit the CDO Welcome Desk or email us at [email protected] .  |  CDO Welcome Desk Hours: M-F, 9am-4pm (Note - Summer Hours start June 3: M-TH, 9am-4pm) | The Virtual Interview Room is available for spring and summer bookings!

• Bio / Pharma / Healthcare
• CPG / Retail
• Data Science & Analytics
• Entertainment, Media, & Sports
• Entrepreneurship
• Product Management
• Sustainability
• Diversity & Inclusion
• International Students
• Writing the Code – URM Programming
• MBA / LGO / MSMS
• Featured Jobs
• Career Central
• Parker Dewey: Micro-Internships
• Alumni Job Board
• CDO Employer Relations & Recruiting
• CDO Club Liaisons
• MIT Sloan Industry Advisors
• MIT Sloan Faculty
• MBA Career Peers
• Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion
• CDO Year In Review
• Employment Reports
• Employment Directories
• Employment Surveys

The Personality Traits That Define a Successful Problem-Solver

• Share This: Share The Personality Traits That Define a Successful Problem-Solver on Facebook Share The Personality Traits That Define a Successful Problem-Solver on LinkedIn Share The Personality Traits That Define a Successful Problem-Solver on X

Problems are an unavoidable fact of life. Do not be surprised as an entrepreneur if your days are consistently filled with a continuous wave of problems.

However, Entrepreneur Network partner Brian Tracy recommends you do your best to control your attitude. If you are able to control your emotional tendencies, you will be able to deal with problems more tactfully. Next, try to embrace a solution-oriented personality and focus on what can be done in the moment. Switch your mind from the problem (the negative) to the solution (the positive).

Click here to watch the video.

A Library of Essential Behavioural Training Courses

Explore Library

Are you tired of feeling overwhelmed when faced with complex problems? Do you want to enhance your problem-solving skills and become a master at finding innovative solutions? Look no further courses on problem solving , ! In this blog post, we will delve into the key traits and strategies that can help you unlock your problem-solving potential. Whether it’s navigating through personal or professional challenges, these tried-and-true approaches will empower you to tackle any obstacle with confidence. Get ready to unleash your inner problem-solver and embark on a journey towards success like never before!

What are Problem-Solving Skills?: Defining problem-solving skills and why they are essential for personal and professional growth.

Problem-solving skills are a crucial set of abilities that allow individuals to approach and overcome challenges effectively. They involve the ability to identify, analyze, and solve problems in a logical and systematic manner. These skills are essential for personal and professional growth as they enable individuals to navigate through life’s complexities and achieve their goals.

Defining problem-solving skills can be challenging because it encompasses various cognitive processes such as critical thinking, creativity, decision-making, and reasoning. However, at its core, problem-solving is about finding solutions to issues or obstacles that require some form of action or decision.

These skills are vital in all aspects of life, whether in personal relationships, academics, or the workplace. In personal relationships, being able to resolve conflicts effectively requires problem-solving skills. In academia, students need these skills to excel in their studies by understanding complex concepts and applying them in assignments. In the workplace, employees with strong problem-solving abilities can tackle challenges independently and contribute positively to achieving organizational objectives.

One reason why problem-solving skills are essential for personal growth is that they promote self-reliance. When faced with an issue or obstacle, individuals with strong problem-solving abilities do not rely on others to provide solutions but instead take initiative and find ways to overcome it themselves. This independence leads to increased self-confidence and a sense of accomplishment when successful resolutions are achieved.

Key Traits of Effective Problem Solvers: Exploring the common characteristics shared by individuals who excel at problem-solving.

Effective problem solvers are highly sought after in today’s fast-paced and constantly changing world. Whether it’s in the workplace, academia, or personal life, individuals who possess strong problem solving course are able to navigate challenges and find solutions efficiently. But what makes someone an effective problem solver? What characteristics do they possess that set them apart from others? In this section, we will explore the key traits of effective problem solvers and how they contribute to their success.

Analytical thinking:

One of the key traits of effective problem solvers is their ability to think analytically. They have a natural inclination towards breaking down complex problems into smaller, more manageable parts. This allows them to understand the root cause of a problem and identify potential solutions.

Creative mindset:

Effective problem solvers possess a creative mindset that enables them to approach problems with fresh perspectives. They are not limited by traditional or conventional methods; instead, they actively seek out new ideas and alternative solutions.

Persistence:

Problem-solving requires patience and persistence as not every solution will work on the first try. Effective problem solvers have a tenacious attitude towards finding solutions and are willing to put in the effort required for success.

Curiosity is another common trait among effective problem solvers. They have a natural desire to learn and understand things deeply, which allows them to ask insightful questions that lead them towards better solutions.

– Critical thinking

Critical thinking is an essential skill for mastering problem-solving. It involves using logical and analytical reasoning to evaluate information, identify patterns and connections, and make well-informed decisions. In today’s fast-paced and ever-changing world, the ability to think critically is becoming more valuable than ever before.

At its core, critical thinking requires us to question our assumptions and beliefs, challenge the status quo, and approach problems from different perspectives. It goes beyond simply accepting information at face value but rather encourages us to dig deeper, analyze evidence, and draw our own conclusions. By honing this skill, we can become better problem-solvers by making more informed choices that lead to effective solutions.

One of the key traits of critical thinking is open-mindedness. This means being receptive to new ideas, opinions, and viewpoints without judgment or bias. Being open-minded allows us to consider all possibilities before reaching a conclusion and helps us avoid falling into the trap of confirmation bias – where we only seek out information that confirms our existing beliefs.

– Creativity

Creativity is a key trait that is essential for mastering problem solving course online . It involves thinking outside of the box, coming up with innovative solutions, and approaching problems from different angles. In this section, we will discuss the importance of creativity in problem-solving and provide strategies for enhancing your creative thinking abilities.

Why Creativity Matters in Problem-Solving:

When faced with a complex problem, traditional methods may not always lead to successful solutions. This is where creativity comes into play. By thinking creatively, you are able to break away from conventional ways of solving problems and explore new possibilities. This can lead to more efficient and effective solutions that may have been overlooked otherwise.

Additionally, being creative allows you to approach problems with an open mind and a sense of curiosity rather than being restricted by preconceived notions or biases. This enables you to see the problem from different perspectives and consider all potential solutions before making a decision.

Strategies for Enhancing Creativity:

• Embrace Divergent Thinking: Divergent thinking refers to the ability to generate multiple ideas or solutions for a given problem. To enhance this skill, try brainstorming without any limitations or restrictions. Allow yourself to think freely and come up with as many ideas as possible without judgment.
• Practice Mind Mapping : A mind map is a visual representation of thoughts or ideas connected around a central concept or topic. Using this technique can help you organize your thoughts and make connections between different ideas, leading to more creative solutions.

– Adaptability

Adaptability is a crucial trait for mastering problem-solving skills. In today’s fast-paced and ever-changing world, the ability to adapt to new situations and challenges is essential for success. It involves being open-minded, flexible, and proactive in finding solutions to problems.

One of the main reasons why adaptability is so important for problem-solving is because it allows individuals to approach a problem from different perspectives. When faced with a challenge, adaptable individuals are able to step back and look at the situation objectively, without being limited by their own biases or habits. This enables them to see potential solutions that others may have overlooked. Furthermore, adaptability also involves continuously learning and growing from experiences. Instead of getting stuck in one way of thinking or doing things, adaptable individuals are open to trying new approaches and learning from their mistakes. This not only helps in finding solutions but also allows for personal growth and development.

In addition, being adaptable means being able to adjust quickly when plans change or unexpected obstacles arise. This requires a certain level of resilience and resourcefulness – the ability to think on your feet and come up with creative solutions under pressure. Adaptable individuals are not easily discouraged by setbacks or failures; instead, they use them as opportunities for growth and improvement.

– Persistence

Persistence is a crucial trait for mastering problem-solving skills. It is the ability to continue working towards a solution despite facing obstacles, setbacks, and challenges. In other words, it is the determination and resilience to keep going until you reach your desired outcome.

One of the main reasons why persistence is essential in problem-solving is that not all problems have easy solutions. Some can be complex and require time and effort to solve. Without persistence, one may easily give up when faced with difficulties, leaving the problem unsolved. However, individuals who possess this trait are more likely to find success in problem-solving as they are willing to put in the necessary work and effort.

Moreover, being persistent also means having a growth mindset rather than a fixed mindset. A growth mindset allows one to see setbacks or failures as opportunities for learning and improvement. This mindset enables individuals to view problems as challenges that can be overcome with effort and perseverance instead of insurmountable barriers.

In addition to having the right mindset, there are several strategies that can help cultivate persistence in problem-solving:

1) Break down the problem into smaller parts: Sometimes, problems may seem overwhelming at first glance. Breaking them down into smaller, more manageable chunks makes them less daunting and easier to tackle.

2) Set achievable goals: Setting realistic goals helps individuals stay motivated as they work towards solving a problem step by step. Celebrating each small victory along the way can also boost motivation and determination.

Why choose us?

In today’s fast-paced and constantly changing world, mastering problem-solving skills is crucial for success in any aspect of life. By cultivating key traits such as patience, creativity, and resilience, along with implementing effective strategies like breaking down the problem into smaller steps and seeking out different perspectives, anyone can become a skilled problem-solver. With determination and practice, you too can overcome any challenge that comes your way. So go forth confidently knowing that you have the tools to tackle any problem that may arise.

© 2023 Dynamic Pixel Multimedia Solutions

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

The Two Traits of the Best Problem-Solving Teams

• Alison Reynolds
• David Lewis

You need both diversity and safety.

An analysis of 150 senior teams showed that the ones who solve problems the fastest tend to be cognitively diverse. But this isn’t always true — sometimes, those teams still struggle. So what separates the best teams from the rest? It turns out that it’s a combination of cognitive diversity and psychological safety. Teams high in both traits show curious and encouraging behavior, and also the level of forcefulness and experimentation needed to keep their momentum. Teams low in either trait were either too combative (if they were high in cognitive diversity and low in psychological safety) or too prone to group-think (if the reverse was true).

Imagine you are a fly on the wall in a corporate training center where a management team of 12 is participating in a session on executing strategy. The team is midway through attempting to solve a new, uncertain, and complex problem. The facilitators look on as at first the exercise follows its usual path. But then activity grinds to a halt — people have no idea what to do. Suddenly, a more junior member of the team raises her hand and exclaims, “I think I know what we should do!” Relieved, the team follows her instructions enthusiastically. There is no doubt she has the answer — but as she directs her colleagues, she makes one mistake and the activity breaks down. Not a word is spoken but the entire group exude disappointment. Her confidence evaporates. Even though she has clearly learnt something important, she does not contribute again. The group gives up.

• AR Alison Reynolds  is a member of faculty at the UK’s Ashridge Business School where she works with executive groups in the field of leadership development, strategy execution and organization development. She has previously worked in the public sector and management consulting, and is an advisor to a number of small businesses and charities.
• DL David Lewis  is Director of London Business School’s Senior Executive Programme and teaches on strategy execution and leading in uncertainty. He is a consultant and works with global corporations, advising and coaching board teams.  He is co-founder of a research company focusing on developing tools to enhance individual, team and organization performance through better interaction.

Partner Center

Solution-Based Thinking: Top Traits of Great Problem Solvers

According to a Job Outlook 2017 survey of employers, the top three attributes sought most frequently in candidates are:

• Demonstration of strong teamwork (78 percent)
• Problem-solving skills (77.3 percent)
• Excellent written communication competency (75 percent)

At just over 77 percent, it’s evident that the act of problem-solving is a universal skill which applies to all positions within varying industries. We will all likely find ourselves tasked with some form of problem-solving at one time or another. Unfortunately, however, solution-based thinking doesn’t always come naturally to all of us.

First, however, let’s review why this quality is so widely valued in the job market.

Why do employers value problem-solvers?

1.   problem solvers can handle any situation..

When these individuals are faced with a problem with no immediate solution in sight, they don’t panic immediately. Instead, they remain calm and figure out how they can solve the issue.

2.   Problem solvers bring ideas and solutions to the table.

They do not wait to be told to do things. They make suggestions on how to improve workflow. They try to proactively shape their environment instead of accepting the present circumstances.

3.   Problem solvers make the right decisions for an organization.

These individuals think analytically, therefore, it is easier for them to make the right decisions.

What are the common traits of good problem solvers?

1.   problem solvers know what the problem is..

In many situations, they are able to identify specific or potential roadblocks before others do.

2.   Problem solvers know when to apply simple or complex solutions.

Problems can come with all levels of complications. A good problem solver knows when to apply systematic and complex solutions to the issue or when to make use of shortcuts and find an easier route to the solution.

3.   Problem solvers view problems as opportunities to grow.

Those with solution-based thinking often view problems as situations that will help them learn and improve upon their existing expertise.

4.   Problem solvers think outside the box.

The act of trouble-shooting alone causes the mind to delve beyond what is most obvious.  True problem-solvers are open to new ways of thinking and exploration toward solutions.

5.   Problem solvers do not feel that they are always right.

Individuals who are focused on finding the right solution are more concerned with what is best for the present circumstance than proving themselves right (or someone else wrong, for that matter). They will also not be found bragging about being right (even if they are).

6.   Problem solvers have well-developed social skills.

They connect well with people; both in person and online. This trait also helps them find solutions through other channels.

7.   Problem solvers would rather prevent than intervene.

Solution-based thinkers know that the best way to be more productive in an organization is to prevent problems from developing in the first place. They are therefore, quite centered on quality and due-diligence.

8.   Problem solvers explore all options.

They rarely rely upon a single solution to a problem. As trouble-shooters, they are always ready with a backup plan or a new angle toward handling the issue.

9.   Problem solvers have reasonable expectations in specific situations.

They understand that several issues can often have a hand in one problem, requiring patience when it comes to isolating the issue at play. For this reason, they are aware that each problem should be approached with realistic expectations.

10.   Problem solvers do not create more problems for other people.

The goal of a true problem solver is to discover solutions that will not harm or overly inconvenience others. They are aware that if they must apply a solution which may adversely affect their colleagues, the solution will be temporary and actions will be taken to reduce negative consequences for the rest of the company.

However, for those who may not be natural trouble-shooters at heart, here are some suggested steps toward improving your solution-based thinking and follow-through.

Steps to Problem Solving:

1.   identify the problem..

Once you’ve identified the problem, try to figure out why and how it occurred.

2.   Determine the criteria for your solution.

Before generating a solution, you must first define what you hope to achieve. For example, your solution must stay within a specific budget or time frame.

3.   Create possible solutions.

Try to generate several possible ways to rectify the problem. Do not rely on a single solution. If the problem is complex, you may need to consult experts or perform further research on the subject.

4.   Analyze each possible solution.

Analyze each potential solution alongside the criteria that you created. Create a table to make it easier for you to view which solution should be applied.

5.   Choose the best solution.

Choose the solution that is most practical or most feasible.

6.   Create an implementation plan.

You need to have a working strategy to implement your solution. This plan should also help track the plan’s ongoing success. Try to include time and cost estimates.

7.   Document all information connected to your solution.

Make list of all information you’ve acquire from steps 1 through 6. Attempt to keep your findings to two pages or less for ease of reference.

8.   Meet with your manager or supervisor.

Present your solution plan to your boss as you give him a copy of your document. Explain why you feel these are the best choices toward solution.

As we know, in order to stand out in the workplace, contribution is crucial. Managers and supervisors already face many day to day problems. When they know they have an employee who is ready to face and work through challenges, that individual is naturally valued by his or her superiors and by the organization as a whole.

Fred Coon, CEO  

At SC&C we offer  Career Analysis   to help senior decision-makers from all walks of life identify strategies and tactics to increase their value-add employment potential.

Share This Story, Choose Your Platform!

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Personality traits and complex problem solving: personality disorders and their effects on complex problem-solving ability.

• 1 College of Education, Institute of Educational Sciences and Research, Salzburg, Austria
• 2 Department of Psychology, University of Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany
• 3 Department of Psychology, University of Graz, Graz, Austria
• 4 Department of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, Paracelsus Medical Private University, Salzburg, Austria
• 5 Institute of Synergetics and Psychotherapy Research, Paracelsus Medical Private University, Salzburg, Austria

Complex problem solving (CPS) can be interpreted as the number of psychological mechanisms that allow us to reach our targets in difficult situations, that can be classified as complex, dynamic, non-transparent, interconnected, and multilayered, and also polytelic. The previous results demonstrated associations between the personality dimensions neuroticism, conscientiousness, and extraversion and problem-solving performance. However, there are no studies dealing with personality disorders in connection with CPS skills. Therefore, the current study examines a clinical sample consisting of people with personality and/or depressive disorders. As we have data for all the potential personality disorders and also data from each patient regarding to potential depression, we meet the whole range from healthy to impaired for each personality disorder and for depression. We make use of a unique operationalization: CPS was surveyed in a simulation game, making use of the microworld approach. This study was designed to investigate the hypothesis that personality traits are related to CPS performance. Results show that schizotypal, histrionic, dependent, and depressive persons are less likely to successfully solve problems, while persons having the additional behavioral characteristics of resilience, action orientation, and motivation for creation are more likely to successfully solve complex problems.

Introduction

A problem arises when a person is unable to reach the desired goal. Problem-solving refers to the cognitive activities aimed at removing the obstacle separating the present situation from the target situation ( Betsch et al., 2011 ). In our daily lives, we are constantly confronted with new challenges and a plethora of possibilities to address them. Accordingly, problem-solving requires the ability to identify these possibilities and select the best option in the unfamiliar situations. It is, therefore, an important competence to deal with new conditions, adapt to changing circumstances, and react flexibly to new challenges ( Kipman, 2020 ).

Even tasks for which the sequence of choices to be taken is relatively straight-forward, such as in the process of navigating to a certain destination in a foreign city or cooperative decision-making during psychotherapy, appear as a highly diversified process, when considered in detail ( Schiepek, 2009 ; Schiepek et al., 2016a ). However, most problems we face in everyday life are not as well defined and do not necessarily have an unambiguous solution. The ability to deal with such sophisticated problems, i.e., complex problem solving (CPS) , is of particular relevance in everyday settings.

Funke (2001 , 2003 , 2012) and Dörner and Funke (2017) , identified five dimensions along which complex problems can be characterized: (i) The complexity of the problem arises from the number of variables contributing to the problem, which in turn affect the number of possible solutions. (ii) The connectivity of the problem arises from the number of interconnections between these variables. (iii) The dynamics of the problem arise from changes in the problem variables or their interconnections over time. These changes can be a result of the person’s actions or are inherent to the problem, i.e., characteristics of the variables themselves or a result of interactions between the variables. (iv) The non-transparency of a problem refers to the extent to which the target situation, the variables involved, their interactions and dynamics cannot be ascertained. (v) Finally, complex problems are usually polytelic , i.e., they have more than one target situation.

Accordingly, CPS requires the ability to model the problem space, i.e., understand which variables are involved and how they are interconnected, the ability to handle a large number of variables at the same time, judge the relevance and success probability of possibilities, identify the interconnections between variables and the inherent dynamics thereof, judge the consequences of one’s own actions with regards to the problem space, and collect relevant knowledge to deal with non-transparency.

Tasks to measure this complex set of abilities were developed by Dörner (1980 , 1986) , who criticized that the measurement of general intelligence tended to use simple tasks that are not comparable with the level of complexity of real-world problems. He proposed measuring intelligent behavior in computerized environments specifically adapted to simulate the properties of sophisticated problems in everyday settings ( Danner et al., 2011b ). cf. Dörner et al. (1983) in research used settings referred to as Microworlds to assess the way participants acted under heterogeneous, dynamic, and non-transparent conditions. Participants were instructed to administrate a tiny German village by the name of Lohhausen by creating the ideal conditions for the village and its inhabitants ( Hussy, 1998 , p. 140–141). This microworld comprised more than 2,000 variables, guaranteeing an elevated level of complexity, which also required a high-level operationalization of CPS. However, the general validity of the performance at Lohhausen turned out to be a questionable issue, since the performance was operationalized as a factor composed of 6 main criteria, some of which were subjective assessments. Accordingly, the parameter definition for CPS performance was rather ambiguous. The reason for this ambiguity is that the vague description of the objective, i.e., to establish a respectable standard of well-being among the inhabitants—gave room for subjective interpretation (cf. Hussy, 1998 , p. 146–150). Since then, the psychometric validity of the CPS performance in complex microworlds has been demonstrated by several researchers (e.g., Wittmann and Hattrup, 2004 ; Danner et al., 2011a ).

Because of the high-translational relevance of the topic, the question arises how and which individual differences contribute to more or less efficient solving of the complex problems, such as Microworlds. Individual differences in problem-solving have been described along a cognitive dimension, i.e., the problem-solving style , and an emotional–motivational dimension, i.e., the problem orientation ( D’Zurilla et al., 2011 ). Cognitively, problems can be solved in a rational style , i.e., systematically and deliberate, in an impulsive style , i.e., careless, hurried, and often incomplete, or in an avoidance style via passivity and inaction leading to procrastination ( D’Zurilla et al., 2002 , as cited in D’Zurilla et al., 2011 ). Emotionally, people with a positive problem orientation , see problems as an opportunity for success, i.e., a “challenge” and are confident that the problem is solvable, and that they will be able to solve it. People with a negative problem orientation view problems as an opportunity for failure, i.e., a “threat” and doubt their ability to solve the problem ( D’Zurilla et al., 2011 ).

Some studies have already related basic personality traits, such as the BIG-5, to the way a person tackles complex problems. For example, it has been demonstrated that individuals who score high in conscientiousness, openness for experience, and extraversion also have higher problem-solving abilities. In contrast, individuals with higher scores in neuroticism show poor problem-solving abilities ( D’Zurilla et al., 2011 ). McMurran et al. (2001) demonstrate that this is a result of the way in which neurotic individuals approach problems. Neuroticisms was significantly associated with an impulsive or avoidant problem-solving style, and a negative problem orientation. Vice versa, Arslan (2016) identified a positive relationship between constructive problem-solving and being extrovert, receptive, and open to new learning experiences, and also high in tolerability and accountability.

The present study seeks to extend these findings to individuals with “extreme” levels of personality traits, i.e., individuals with personality disorders, taking into consideration the way in which personality characteristics manifest in everyday situations, such as work–place situations. Following the most current diagnostic approach to personality disorders as outlined in the ICD-11, the individual accentuations of 9 disorder-relevant personality traits were taken into account, including:

(i) Paranoid traits , i.e., the extent of mistrust toward others.

(ii) Schizoid traits , i.e., the inability to express feelings and experience pleasure, resulting in fierce separation from affective contacts and also friends and social gatherings with an excessive preference for the magical worlds.

(iii) Antisocial traits , i.e., the extent of disregard for social obligations and callous lack of involvement in feelings for others, resulting in aggressive behavior.

(iv) Borderline traits , i.e., the tendency to act out impulses without regard to consequences, associated with unpredictable and erratic moods.

(v) Histrionic traits , i.e., the tendency to overdramatize and show a theatrical, exaggerated expression of feelings, suggestibility, egocentricity, hedonism, and a constant desire for recognition, external stimuli, and attention.

(vi) Dependent traits , i.e., excessive and inappropriate agreeableness ( Costa and McCrae, 1986 ) resulting in major anxiety about separation, feelings of helplessness, and a tendency to subordinate oneself to the desires of others.

(vii) Schizotypal traits , i.e., extreme levels of introversion, resulting in social disengagement.

(viii) Obsessive-compulsive (anankastic) traits , i.e., excessive conscientiousness, involving feelings of doubt, perfectionism, and inflexibility.

(ix) Depressive traits , i.e., the tendency toward persistent feelings of sadness and loss of interest.

Few studies have assessed problem-solving, much less CPS, in patients with personality disorders. Previous research shows, that patients with histrionic and narcissistic personality types show an impulsive problem-solving style, whereas avoidant and dependent individuals show a negative problem orientation ( McMurran et al., 2007 ). In addition, people who are in a depressive mood ( Lyubomirsky et al., 1999 ), or even clinically depressed and anxious have difficulties generating effective solutions to problems ( Marx et al., 1992 ). Accordingly, we hypothesize a negative association between high accentuations of disorder-related personality traits and CPS. The aim of the present study was to explore, which disorders were most severely affected and whether this association also manifested in work-related situations.

Action-orientated problem-solving is particularly required in areas where people are under a lot of stress, for example, in entrepreneurship, team leading in the clinical settings, or firefighting. Especially when a work-related crisis appears, action-oriented problem-solving is important, because it unites handling both novel and routine demands ( Rudolph and Repenning, 2002 , as cited in Rudolph et al., 2009 ). Rudolph et al. (2009) found that only by taking action, information cues become available. Accordingly, both CPS and everyday situations in the work-place require the ability to cope with stressful events and protect oneself from the negative effects of stress, i.e., resilience ( Lee and Cranford, 2008 , as cited in Wagnild and Young, 1993 ; Fletcher and Sarkar, 2013 ). Indeed, individuals with a high trait resilience are more willing to take action in problem-solving ( Li and Yang, 2009 , as cited in Li et al., 2013 ). This is consistent with previous research demonstrating that effective problem-solving abilities go along with high-psychological resilience ( Garcia-Dia et al., 2013 ; Williamson et al., 2013 ; Crowther et al., 2016 , as cited in Pinar et al., 2018 ). Pinar et al. (2018) even found that problem-solving competencies can be increased by increasing psychological resilience and self-confidence levels. Accordingly, identifying which personality disorders are most severely affected in these areas may also provide hints for psychotherapy.

Materials and methods

Participants.

The present study included data from N = 242 adults (49.1% male) with personality disorders and/or depressive disorders, with ages ranging from 17 to 48 years (mean: 26.5 years). The participants were given five assessment batteries and a set of demographic variables, which included game experience. They were also given a commercial complex problem-solving (CPS) game known as Cities: Skylines involving the construction and managing of a city like a mayor would with the goal of growing the city while not running out of money. Participants were patients from psychiatric and psychosomatic hospitals, who got follow-up treatment directly after leaving the hospital. The treatment took place in a panel practice for aftercare where the CPS experiment was done (see Figure 1 ).

Figure 1. Exemplary model of some (not all) factors that influence the number of inhabitants and the general happiness of the population in Cities: Skylines (CSL). The number of related variables illustrates the complexity, connectivity, and polytely in the simulated environment.

Personality questionnaires

In order to obtain a comprehensive diagnosis and measure disordered personality traits in a continuous fashion, three personality questionnaires were used, including the PSSI, SCID-5-PD, and MMPI-II. While the PSSI scores were used in the statistical analysis, SCID-5-PD scores and MMPI-II scores were used to confirm the PSSI diagnosis. Furthermore, in order to assess the manifestation of disordered personality traits in work-related situations, we used the BIP.

The Persönlichkeits-Stil und Störungs-Inventar (PSSI; Kuhl and Kazen, 2009 ) is a self-report instrument that measures the comparative manifestation of the character traits. These are designed as non-pathological analogs of the personality disorders described in the psychiatric diagnostic manuals DSM-IV and ICD-10. The PSSI comprises 140 items assigned to 14 scales: PN (willful-paranoid), SZ (independent-schizoid), ST (intuitive-schizotypal), BL (impulsive-borderline), HI (agreeable-histrionic), NA (ambitious-narcissistic), SU (self-critical-avoidant), AB (loyal-dependent), ZW (conscientious-compulsive—anankastic), NT (critical-negativistic), DP (calm-depressive), SL (helpful-selfless), RH (optimistic-rhapsodic), and AS (self-assertive-antisocial). Patients rate each item on a 4-point Likert scale (from 0 to 3) and continuous scale values are calculated as the sum of the 10 item ratings belonging to a scale. Accordingly, a maximum value of 30 can be achieved for each scale. In this study, we focused on the nine traits PN, SZ, ST, BL, HI, AB, ZW, DP, and AS, as the other measured traits are not listed as personality disorders in the ICD-10 or DSM-V.

The Strukturiertes Klinisches Interview für DSM-5—Persönlichkeitsstörungen (SCID-5-PD; First et al., 2019 ) is a semi-structured diagnostic questionnaire that can be used to evaluate the 10 personality disorders included in the DSM-5 in clusters A, B, and C, as well as disorders in the category “not otherwise specified personality disorder.” Each DSM-5 criterion is assigned corresponding interview questions to assist the interviewer in assessing the criterion. It is possible to utilize the SCID-5-PD to categorically diagnose personality disorders (present or absent) ( First et al., 2019 ). In addition, regulations are also included which can be used to create dimensional ratings.

The MMPI ® –2 ( Butcher et al., 2000 ) is a revised and completely re-normed version of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI). With the help of the MMPI ® –2, a relatively complete picture of the personality structure can be obtained in an economical way.

The Bochumer Inventar zur berufsbezogenen Persönlichkeitsbeschreibung (BIP; Hossiep and Paschen, 2019 ) measures personality traits in a work-related context. A total of 210 items are assigned to 4 global dimensions including 14 subscales. These include work orientation (diligence, agility, and focus), professional approach ( performance-, creativity-, and management motivation), social competencies (sensitivity, social skills, sociability, teamwork, and assertiveness), and mental constitution (emotional stability, resilience, and self-confidence) on a continuous scale. Patients respond to each item on a 6-point Likert scale.

Game experience

As possible previous experience with the CPS game may affect the level of problem-solving efficiency during the test, participants were asked to rate their previous engagement with simulation-based urban development games on a 4-point Likert scale with response options running from “none” to “very much.” The same poll also featured a listing of 20 symbols from Cities: Skylines, in combination with their meanings (e.g., “no electricity”) for participants to make use of during their quest. At the end, participants were asked to rate their experience based on a 5-point scaling reaching from 1 (extremely simple) to 5 (super challenging). At last, the researcher also marked on each poll sheet, whether (a) the individual patient was able to accomplish the mission (Success, Failure, or Patient Breakup), and (b) the exact time frame of the testing session (morning, afternoon, or evening).

Cities: Skylines (CSL)

The computer-based simulation game Cities: Skylines ( Paradox Interactive, 2015a ), which can be downloaded from Steam for about 30 dollars, explores the construction and management of a city and was implemented in the current study as a Microworld scenario. Much like in the successful microworld Lohhausen ( Dörner et al., 1983 ), gamers in Cities: Skylines basically act in lieu of the city’s mayor, taking over all of his authority and duties. As promised in the user manual, it “offers endless sandbox play in a city that keeps offering new areas, resources, and technologies to explore, continually presenting the player with new challenges to overcome” ( Paradox Interactive, 2015b , p. 4). The game fulfills the parameters of Brehmer and Dörner’s (1993) microworlds and meets the standards of complex problems according to Funke ’s ( 2001; 2012 ). The examples below illustrate the way in which these features are relevant for Cities: Skylines (see Figure 2 ; see also de Kooter, 2015 ; Paradox Interactive, 2015b ):

Figure 2. Procedure of the study.

(i) Complexity is fulfilled because the system is made up of a variety of components including a vast series of different constructions (areas, basic resources, roads, constructions, electricity, water supplies, etc.), options (fiscal matters, budgeting, credit, traffic management, security, healthcare, and education), and parameters (population density, inhabitant satisfaction, environmental issues, and delinquency). As an example, while purchasing a wind turbine, the participant may weigh related costs, budgeted funds for the week, potential noise pollution, the way the turbine blends into the landscape vs. the rate of efficiency, along with the hardware required to connect the device to the town’s existing network, etc.

(ii) Connectivity is fulfilled because the parameters in the model are heavily interconnected. Each component is related to at least one other element (see Figure 2 ) implementing a network of correlations and interdependencies. As an example, residential zones should not be located in proximity to wind turbines, as the amount of noise pollution caused by their operation might affect the quality of life in that zone, which again might make the area less attractive and lower the property values.

(iii) Dynamics are fulfilled because the demands of the population are subject to autonomous change, while other variables, e.g., zoning requirements also depend in part on the actions of the participants. While the dynamics of the game cause the population and the territory of the city to grow, the whole infrastructure becomes inadequate over time and needs to be adapted. Water and electricity infrastructures, the number of schools, clinics, municipal cemeteries, etc., that used to suffice for the population then need to be expanded. Moreover, depending on its frequentation, each building or road has a certain life span until it is left abandoned and will have to be replaced.

(iv) Non-transparency is not featured as an essential part of the Cities: Skylines gameplay, but is instead primarily caused by its connectivity and intricacy. While playing the game, the number of variables and their interconnections make active exploration essential. Independent of the player’s actions; however, there are also very non-transparent features, such as random death waves or an (unexpectedly) higher incidence of fires in the area following the first construction of a firefighter center by the player.

(v) Polytely arises since the objective to increase the population of the city requires the simultaneous achievement of a large number of minor tasks, which may be conflicting (e.g., strategic allocation of bus stops for both students and employees). The situation is further complicated by unforeseen complications (e.g., water pollution causing disease spread), which force the player to abandon his/her ongoing task and give full attention to the new issue. The source of the problem must be evaluated while new strategies for potential solutions are weighed against proven approaches. For the current research, each patient was provided with identical settings, including a sizeable, completely functional city with a number of 2,600 residents, 50,000 game money points, and a general population satisfaction level of 90%. Their subsequent task was to boost the population of the cities to 5,000 residents while making sure that the residents were not poorly (as measured by an average satisfaction level of at least 75%) and the bank balance remained positive. On the contrary, the task was left unaccomplished if (a) the population of the urban areas dropped to 1,000, (b) the balance of the account dropped to 0, or (c) the maximum game time of 120 min had elapsed. Patients received the tip, that it was necessary to set priorities and focus on the mission.

Based on the task of raising the number of inhabitants of the city, a parameter of CPS performance was calculated as the average growth of the population relative to the target size of 5,000:

Gamers were instructed not to modify the time settings during the game, to allow for comparable measurements across participants.

Given that the participants were patients from psychiatric and psychosomatic hospitals, many of them lacked game experience. To increase test fairness between patients with different levels of game experience, all the participants were provided with a brief introduction on how to handle a list of fundamental game features:

• placement of streets, buildings, water pumps, and wind turbines;

• positioning of roads, structures, water pipes, and turbines;

• division of zones (housing, businesses, and industries/offices zones) and the mode of bulldozing;

• structural survey of power, water lines, and waste collection;

• search for the info stats to view the requirements of the residents;

Statistical analysis

For all the statistical analyses, SPSS version 26.0 (2020) was used.

On the basis of the ICD-11 definition, the personality traits were not analyzed categorically (as before), but dimensionally. To relate the expression of currently recognized personality disorders to performance in CPS, we used correlation analyses between CPS performance and the 9 scale scores of the PSSI (verified by the SCID and MMPI-2) and also the 4 overall dimensions of the BIP. Given the high number of resulting correlations, p -values could be misleading because of the multiple testing. Accordingly, we identified relevant personality traits for CPS using (i) The Bonferonni-correction of p -values and (ii) an effect sizes cut-off of r > 0.25.

In a second step, we explored, which facets of the BIP contributed to the associations with CPS performance in order to get a more fine-grained picture of possible effects.

In sum, we sought to identify the strongest predictors of CPS performance using 3 multivariate regression models with the 9 clinical traits, controlling for gender in the 2nd model and additional game experience in the 3rd model.

Table 1 lists the experience with urban planning simulation games in the current sample. About 50% of the patients rated the game as “easy” or “rather easy,” 37.5% rated it as “not easy but also not difficult” and 12.6% responded that the game was “difficult” or “very difficult.”

Table 1. Experience of the sample ( N = 242, N = 210 valid answers).

Correlation analyses show that CPS performance was negatively related to schizotypal ( r = −0.46), histrionic ( r = −0.44), and depressive ( r = −0.46) personality accentuations. The higher the expression in any of these areas, the higher the probability of failing in CPS. Effect sizes (: = r ) were > 0.40 for each of these traits (compare Table 2 ). Furthermore, CPS-performance was negatively correlated with the dependent ( r = −0.29) and paranoid ( r = −0.25) personality traits, but coefficients were much lower and therefore of less practical relevance as for schizotypical, histrionic, and depressive traits. Schizoid ( r = 0.04), borderline ( r = 0.17), anankastic ( r = −0.05), and anti-social ( r = −0.04) traits were not significantly associated with the CPS (see Table 3 ).

Table 2. Correlations of CPS and personality disorders with work-related personality manifestations as assessed with the BIP.

Table 3. Correlations between personality traits and CPS performance.

Regarding the work-related manifestations of the personality traits, CPS-performance was positively associated with the overall BIP dimensions of work orientation ( r = 0.27), professional orientation ( r = 0.34), and psychological constitution ( r = 0.25), but negatively with the overall BIP dimension social competencies ( r = −0.25). In order to explore these associations further, CPS performance and personality disorders were related to the sub-facet scores of the BIP (see Table 2 ).

Professional orientation was also negatively correlated with depressive traits ( r = −0.40), the psychological constitution was negatively correlated with borderline traits (−0.38), dependent traits (−0.31), and with depressive traits (−0.26).

The results demonstrate that particularly the facets resilience, action orientation, and motivation for creation were positively correlated with successful problem-solving, while sociability and CPS were significantly negatively correlated. The higher the resilience, action orientation and motivation for creation and the lower the sociability, the better was the CPS performance. When we take Bonferroni correction into account, also conscientiousness and motivation for leadership (italic in the table) were negatively correlated with the CPS performance.

Interestingly, the associations between personality disorders and work-related personality expressions were moderate. The strongest associations arose for resilience, which was negatively associated with several personality disorders, particularly, borderline, histrionic, and dependent traits. Focusing on the traits that showed the strongest impairment in CPS, schizotypal traits were associated with high sociability ( r = 0.36) and to a lesser extent with low-action orientation ( r = −0.22), which in turn related to low-CPS performance. Histrionic traits were related to low resilience ( r = −0.28), which in turn related to low-CPS performance. Depressive traits were related to low motivation for creation ( r = −0.25), and also low-leadership motivation ( r = −0.34) and to a lesser extent low-achievement motivation ( r = −0.21), low-action orientation ( r = −0.20), and low resilience ( r = −0.24), which in turn is related to low-CPS performance.

In a combined model with all 9 personality traits (adjusted R 2 = 36.7%), we confirmed that histrionic traits have the biggest negative impact on CPS performance (β = −0.351), followed by schizotypical (β = −0.312) and depressive traits (β = −0.303). Also, in the multiple regression model, dependent and paranoid traits are negatively related to CPS performance. If gender is the part of the model and held constant in a model containing the 9 traits, histrionic traits still have a significant and practical relevant impact of β′ = −0.325. (Condition Index = 24). The same holds true when also taking game experience into account (β″ = −0.319) see Table 4 .

Table 4. Combined regression model, β′: controlling for gender, β″ controlling for gender and game experience.

(Condition Index checking for possible multicollinearity is moderate with CI = 22, 36, so multicollinearity is moderately given, βs are, therefore, interpretable, p -values can be slightly biased, βs with 0.3 and higher found in this model for the 3 traits have for certain a significant and practically relevant impact).

The present study examined the influences of personality traits on the CPS performance in a clinical sample of individuals with a range of different psychiatric diagnoses. The aim of this empirical analysis was to extend previous research on individual differences in CPS to extreme personality traits as observed in personality disorders, and also their manifestation in work-related situations. We explored, which personality dimensions were most strongly associated with impairments in the CPS.

With regards to the clinical personality dimensions (i.e., dimensionally defined personality disorders), statistical analyses revealed that schizotypal, histrionic, dependent, and depressive personality traits were associated negatively with the participants’ performances in the given CPS task (consistent with, e.g., McMurran et al., 2007 ). Previous findings on these relationships were, therefore, further confirmed, specifically in showing that subjects with high levels of depressiveness and anxiety seemed to have more difficulties in finding and executing effective solutions to the given complex problems (e.g., see Marx et al., 1992 ; Lyubomirsky et al., 1999 ).

Unsurprisingly, no single clinical personality structure was associated with better problem-solving performances (as compared with the non-clinical trait levels). As personality disorders are generally linked with increased levels of neuroticism, which subsequently was consistently found to negatively influence problem-solving (e.g., McMurran et al., 2001 ; D’Zurilla et al., 2011 ), this result is also consistent with the general clinical intuition. But, contrary to the previous findings ( D’Zurilla et al., 2011 ), conscientiousness had no significant impact on CPS performance in this sample.

Further analyses gave deeper insights into relationships that were found in the first part of the data analyses. They are especially allowed to draw conclusions for the clinical patients. It was found that higher levels of resilience (consistent with, e.g., Garcia-Dia et al., 2013 ; Williamson et al., 2013 ; Crowther et al., 2016 , as cited in Li and Yang, 2009 ; Pinar et al., 2018 , as cited in Li et al., 2013 ), action orientation, and motivation for creation (e.g., see Eseryel et al., 2014 ) positively influenced the problem-solving performance as additional behavioral characteristics . This indicates that, even for high levels of usually negative personality traits, a person’s ability to successfully solve problems will not be impaired automatically if the person is also very resilient to the effects of negative events and highly action-oriented and motivated when facing problems. Hence, this interpretation is consistent with the conclusions of a study by Güss et al. (2017) , who found that more approach-oriented individuals outperformed avoidance-oriented participants in the complex problems. In this way, these positive traits act against the negative impact of otherwise impairing personality traits or even disorders. Interestingly, sociability was found to have a negative influence on the participants’ performances, while no significant influences on social skills, team orientation, or self-confidence were found. Therefore, it seems to be more comprehensible why some of us deal easily with complex problems and can manage things forward-looking while others do not succeed in making good decisions.

Data availability statement

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.

Ethics statement

Ethical review and approval was not required for the study on human participants in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. The patients/participants provided their written informed consent to participate in this study.

Author contributions

UK was the main author, did all calculations, research to and wrote the article. SB did the programming of the microworlds and all technical support. MW did the review on the introduction and discussion part. WA and GS served as a consultant. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.

Acknowledgments

We thank Martina Mathur and Belinda Pletzer for proofreading and translating.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Arslan, C. (2016). Interpersonal problem solving, self-compassion and personality traits in university students. Educ. Res. Rev. 11, 474–481. doi: 10.5897/ERR2015.2605

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Betsch, T., Funke, J., and PLessner, H. (2011). Denken - urteilen, entscheiden, problemlösen . Berlin: Springer.

Google Scholar

Brehmer, B., and Dörner, D. (1993). Experiments with computer-simulated microworlds: Escaping both the narrow straits of the laboratory and the deep blue sea of the field study. Comput. Hum. Behav. 9, 171–184. doi: 10.1016/0747-5632(93)90005-D

Butcher, J. N., Dahlstrom, W. G., Graham, J. R., Tellegen, A., and Kaemmer, B. (2000). Minnesota multiphasic personality inventory ® -2. Bern: Huber.

Costa, P. T., and McCrae, R. R. (1986). Personality stability and its implications for clincal psychology. Clin. Psychol. Rev. 6, 407–423. doi: 10.1016/0272-7358(86)90029-2

Crowther, S., Hunter, B., McAra-Couper, J., Warren, L., Gilkison, A., Hunter, M., et al. (2016). Sustainability and resilience in midwifery: A discussion paper. Midwifery 40, 40–48. doi: 10.1016/j.midw.2016.06.005

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Dörner, D. (1980). On the difficulties people have in dealing with complexity. Simul. Games 11, 87–106.

Dörner, D. (1986). Diagnostik der operativen intelligenz. Diagnostica 32, 290–308.

D’Zurilla, T. J., Maydeu-Olivares, A., and Gallardo-Pujol, D. (2011). Predicting social problem solving using personality traits. Pers. Individ. Differ. 50, 142–147. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2010.09.015

D’Zurilla, T. J., Nezu, A. M., and Maydeu-Olivares, A. (2002). The Social Problem-Solving Inventory-Revised (SPSI-R): Technical Manual. North Tonawanda, NY: Multi-Health Systems, Inc.

Danner, D., Hagemann, D., Holt, D. V., Hager, M., Schankin, A., Wüstenberg, S., et al. (2011a). Measuring performance in dynamic decision making. J. Individ. Differ. 32, 225–233. doi: 10.1027/1614-0001/a000055

Danner, D., Hagemann, D., Schankin, A., Hager, M., and Funke, J. (2011b). Beyond IQ: A latent state-trait analysis of general intelligence, dynamic decision making, and implicit learning. Intelligence 39, 323–334. doi: 10.1016/j.intell.2011.06.004

de Kooter, S. (2015). Cities Skylines Guide: Beginner Tips and Tricks Guide. Available Online at: https://www.gameplayinside.com/strategy/cities-skylines/cities-skylines-guide-beginner-tips-and-tricks-guide/ .

Dörner, D., and Funke, J. (2017). Complex problem solving: What it is and what it is not. Front. Psychol. 8:1153. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01153

Dörner, D., Kreuzig, H. W., Reither, F., and Stäudel, T. (1983). Lohhausen: Vom Umgang mit Unbestimmtheit und Komplexität. Soziologische Rev. 8:93.

Eseryel, D., Law, V., Ifenthaler, D., Ge, X., and Miller, R. (2014). An investigation of the interrelationships between motivation, engagement, and complex problem solving in game-based learning. Educ. Technol. Soc. 17, 42–53.

First, M., Williams, J., Smith, B., and Spitzer, R. (2019). SCID-5-PD. Göttingen: Hogrefe.

Fletcher, D., and Sarkar, M. (2013). A review of psychological resilience. Eur. Psychol. 18, 12–23. doi: 10.1027/1016-9040/a000124

Funke, J. (2001). Dynamic systems as tools for analysing human judgement. Think. Reason. 7, 69–89. doi: 10.1080/13546780042000046

Funke, J. (2003). Problemlösendes Denken. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.

Funke, J. (2012). “Complex Problem Solving,” in Encyclopedia of the Sciences of Learning , ed. N. M. Seel (Boston, MA: Springer US), 682–685. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4419-1428-6_685

Garcia-Dia, M. J., DiNapoli, J. M., Garcia-Ona, L., Jakubowski, R., and O’Flaherty, D. (2013). Concept analysis: Resilience. Arch. Psychiatr. Nurs. 27, 264–270. doi: 10.1016/j.apnu.2013.07.003

Güss, C. D., Burger, M. L., and Dörner, D. (2017). The role of motivation in complex problem solving. Front. Psychol. 8:851. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00851

Hossiep, R., and Paschen, M. (2019). Bochumer Inventar zur berufsbezogenen Persönlichkeitsbeschreibung . Göttingern: Hogrefe.

Hussy, W. (1998). Denken und Problemlösen. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.

Kipman, U. (2020). Komplexes problemlösen . Wiesbaden: Springer.

Kuhl, J., and Kazen, M. (2009). Persönlichkeits-Stil-und Störungs-Inventar . Göttingen: Hogrefe.

Lee, H. H., and Cranford, J. A. (2008). Does resilience moderate the associations between parental problem drinking and adolescents’ internalizing and externalizing behaviors?: A study of Korean adolescents. Drug Alcohol Depend. 96, 213–221. doi: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2008.03.007

Li, M. H., and Yang, Y. (2009). Determinants of problem solving, social support-seeking, and avoidance: A path analytic model. Int. J. Stress Manag. 16, 155–176. doi: 10.1037/a0016844

Li, M. H., Eschenauer, R., and Yang, Y. (2013). Influence of efficacy and resilience on problem solving in the United States, Taiwan, and China. Multicult. Couns. Dev. 41, 144–157. doi: 10.1002/j.2161-1912.2013.00033.x

Lyubomirsky, S., Tucker, K. L., and Caldwell, N. D. (1999). Why ruminators are poor problem solvers: Clues from the phenomenology of dysphoric rumination. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 77, 1041–1060. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.77.5.1041

Marx, E. M., Williams, J. M., and Claridge, G. C. (1992). Depression and social problem solving. J. Abnorm. Psychol. 101, 78–86. doi: 10.1037/0021-843X.101.1.78

McMurran, M., Duggan, C., Christopher, G., and Huband, N. (2007). The relationships between personality disorders and social problem solving in adults. Pers. Individ. Differ. 42, 145–155. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2006.07.002

McMurran, M., Egan, V., Blair, M., and Richardson, C. (2001). The relationship between social problem-solving and personality in mentally disordered offenders. Pers. Individ. Differ. 30, 517–524. doi: 10.1016/S0191-8869(00)00050-7

Paradox Interactive (2015a). Cities: Skylines. Stockholm, SE: Paradox Interactive.

Paradox Interactive (2015b). Cities: Skylines: User Manual. Stockholm, SE: Paradox Interactive.

Pinar, S. E., Yildirim, G., and Sayin, N. (2018). Investigating the psychological resilience, self-confidence and problemsolving skills of midwife candidates. Nurse Educ. Today 64, 144–149. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2018.02.014

Rudolph, J. W., and Repenning, N. P. (2002). Disaster dynamics: Understanding the role of quantity in organizational collapse. Adm. Sci. Q. 47, 1–30. doi: 10.2307/3094889

Rudolph, J. W., Morrison, J. B., and Carroll, J. S. (2009). The dynamics of action-oriented problem solving: Linking interpretation and choice. Acad. Manag. Rev. 34, 733–756. doi: 10.5465/AMR.2009.44886170

Schiepek, G. (2009). Complexity and nonlinear dynamics in psychotherapy. Eur. Rev. 17, 331–356. doi: 10.1017/S1062798709000763

Schiepek, G., Stöger-Schmidinger, B., Aichhorn, W., Schöller, H., and Aas, B. (2016a). Systemic case formulation, individualized process monitoring, and state dynamics in a case of dissociative identity disorder. Front. Psychol. Clin. Settings 7:1545. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01545

Wagnild, G. M., and Young, H. M. (1993). Development and psychometric evaluation of the resilience scale. J. Nurs. Meas. 1, 165–178.

Williamson, G. R., Health, V., and Proctor-Childs, T. (2013). Vocation, friendship and resilience: A study exploring nursing student and staff views on retention and attrition. Open J. Nurs. 7, 149–156. doi: 10.2174/1874434601307010149

Wittmann, W. W., and Hattrup, K. (2004). The relationship between performance in dynamic systems and intelligence. Syst. Res. Behav. Sci. 21, 393–409. doi: 10.1002/sres.653

Keywords : complex problem solving (CPS), personality disorders, behavioral characteristics, personality traits, problem solving

Citation: Kipman U, Bartholdy S, Weiss M, Aichhorn W and Schiepek G (2022) Personality traits and complex problem solving: Personality disorders and their effects on complex problem-solving ability. Front. Psychol. 13:788402. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.788402

Received: 21 October 2021; Accepted: 08 July 2022; Published: 03 August 2022.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2022 Kipman, Bartholdy, Weiss, Aichhorn and Schiepek. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Ulrike Kipman, [email protected]

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

• Bipolar Disorder
• Therapy Center
• When To See a Therapist
• Types of Therapy
• Best Online Therapy
• Best Couples Therapy
• Best Family Therapy
• Managing Stress
• Sleep and Dreaming
• Understanding Emotions
• Self-Improvement
• Healthy Relationships
• Student Resources
• Personality Types
• Guided Meditations
• Verywell Mind Insights
• 2024 Verywell Mind 25
• Mental Health in the Classroom
• Editorial Process
• Meet Our Review Board
• Crisis Support

What Is Resilience?

Characteristics of Resilient People

Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

Rachel Goldman, PhD FTOS, is a licensed psychologist, clinical assistant professor, speaker, wellness expert specializing in eating behaviors, stress management, and health behavior change.

Sean is a fact-checker and researcher with experience in sociology, field research, and data analytics.

Hinterhaus Productions / Digital Vision / Getty Images

• Resilient Meaning
• Characteristics

How to Ask for Help

Frequently asked questions.

Resilience involves the ability to recover and rebound from challenges and setbacks. Being resilient can be important for helping people deal with a variety of problems and bounce back from trauma.

What makes a person resilient? There are many factors that contribute to resilient behavior, including personality traits, upbringing, genetics, environmental factors, and social support.

If you want to become more resilient, learn about the characteristics of resilient people and when and how to ask for help building resilience.

What Does Resilience Mean?

Being resilient means facing difficulties head-on instead of falling into despair or using unhealthy coping strategies. Resilience is often defined as the mental reservoir of strength that helps people handle stress and hardship.

Resilient people are able to draw upon this strength to cope and recover from challenges. That's true even when they face significant traumas, such as job loss, financial problems, serious illness, relationship challenges, or the death of a loved one.

Resilience also means understanding that life is full of challenges. While we cannot avoid many of these problems, we can remain open, flexible, and willing to adapt to change.

Characteristics of Resilience

Some of the main characteristics of a person who has resilience are awareness, self-control, problem-solving skills, and social support. Resilient people are aware of situations, their emotional reactions, and the behavior of those around them.

By remaining aware, they can maintain control of a situation and think of new ways to tackle problems. In many cases, resilient people emerge stronger after such difficulties.

While people vary dramatically in the coping skills they use when confronting a crisis , researchers have identified some key characteristics of resilience. Many of these skills can be developed and strengthened, which can improve your ability to deal with life's setbacks.

The five basic characteristics of resilience are:

• Problem-solving skills
• Strong social connections
• Survivor mentality
• Emotional regulation
• Self-compassion

Sense of Control

Do you perceive yourself as having control over your own life? Or do you blame outside sources for failures and problems?

Generally, resilient people tend to have what psychologists call an internal locus of control . They believe that the actions they take will affect the outcome of an event.

Of course, some factors are simply outside of our personal control, such as natural disasters. While we may be able to put some blame on external causes, it is important to feel as if we have the power to make choices that will affect our situation, our ability to cope, and our future.

Problem-Solving Skills

Problem-solving skills are essential for resilience. When a crisis emerges, resilient people are able to spot the solution that will lead to a safe outcome. In dangerous situations, less resilient people sometimes develop tunnel vision. They fail to note important details or take advantage of opportunities.

Resilient individuals are able to calmly and rationally look at a problem and envision a successful solution.

Strong Social Connections

Whenever you're dealing with a problem, it is important to have people who can offer support . Talking about the challenges you are facing can be an excellent way to gain perspective, look for new solutions, or simply express your emotions. People who possess a great deal of resilience have a network of friends, family members, co-workers, and online support groups to keep them socially connected.

Survivor Mentality

When dealing with any potential crisis, it is essential to view yourself as a survivor. Resilient people avoid thinking like a victim of circumstance and instead look for ways to resolve the problem. While the situation may be unavoidable, they stay focused on a positive outcome.

Emotional Regulation

Resilience is also characterized by an ability to regulate emotions effectively. The ability to recognize that they are having an emotional response and to understand what is causing the response can help them better handle emotions and cope with the situation at hand.

Self-Compassion

Resilient people are also compassionate toward themselves. They tend to notice when they need to take a break and can accept their emotions , which is important for resilience. Self-compassion can help boost overall health and resilience and ensure you're ready to face life's challenges.

Examples of Resilience

So what does resilience look like in action? Some examples of resilient behaviors and ways that you can show resilience include:

• Trying to take a positive perspective on situations
• Viewing challenges as learning opportunities
• Regulating emotions and expressing feelings in appropriate ways
• Focusing on the things you can control instead of dwelling on what you cannot change
• Recognizing that cognitive distortions are false
• Reframing negative thoughts to be more realistic and positive

For example, imagine that you get stuck in traffic on the way to work. For a non-reilient person, they might get angry, stressed out, and worried about how being late will reflect on them at work.

If you are resilient, however, you might choose to focus on what you can learn from the situation (leaving the house earlier for work), control your emotional response (using stress relief strategies to calm your mind and body), and avoid negative thinking (by reminding yourself that you are always on time and your employer will understand).

While being resourceful is an important part of resilience, it is also essential to know when to ask for help. During a crisis, everyone can benefit from the help of psychologists and counselors specially trained to deal with crisis situations. Other potential sources of assistance include:

• Books : Reading about people who have experienced and overcome a similar problem can be motivating and suggest ideas on how to cope.
• Online message boards : Online communities can provide continual support and a place to talk about issues with people who have been in a similar situation.
• Psychotherapy : If you are having trouble coping with a crisis situation, consulting a qualified mental health professional can help you confront the problem, identify your strengths, and develop new coping skills.
• Support groups : Attending support group meetings is a great way to talk about the challenges you're facing and to find a network of people who can provide compassion and support.

Resilience is important for mental health and well-being, and luckily, everyone can learn to be resilient. While some people may be naturally more resilient , it's a skill that you can strengthen.

Start by practicing some of the common characteristics of resilient people and focusing on your existing strengths. Don't get discouraged; becoming more resilient may take time, but the investment will have big payoffs on your health and well-being.

They are competence, confidence, connection, character, contribution, coping, and control. Pediatrician Ken Ginsberg, MD, created the 7 Cs of resilience model to help children and adolescence build resilience. However, these skills can be developed at any age.

Being non-resilient, or lacking resilience, often involves becoming overwhelmed by difficult or stressful situations, dwelling on problems, or using unhealthy coping mechanisms to cope with the challenges of life.

People who are stress-resilient have better coping strategies for handling stress . They can recover more quickly from the major and minor stressors that occur day to day.

While resilience is often portrayed as a character trait that people either have or don't have, it is actually an ability that people can improve. According to one study, resilience can fluctuate over time and may depend on the situation and circumstances that a person is facing. This means that with practice, you can learn to strengthen your resilience.

Reid R.  Psychological resilience .  Med Leg J.  2016;84(4):172-184. doi:10.1177/0025817216638781

Walker FR, Pfingst K, Carnevali L, Sgoifo A, Nalivaiko E.  In the search for integrative biomarker of resilience to psychological stress .  Neurosci Biobehav Rev.  2017;74(Pt B):310-320. doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2016.05.003

Hornor G. Resilience . J Pediatr Health Care . 2017;31(3):384-390. doi:10.1016/j.pedhc.2016.09.005

Munoz, RT, Brady, S, Brown, V. The psychology of resilience: A model of the relationship of locus of control to hope among survivors of intimate partner violence . Traumatology . 2017;23(1):102-111. doi:10.1037/trm0000102

Ertekin Pinar S, Yildirim G, Sayin N. Investigating the psychological resilience, self-confidence and problem-solving skills of midwife candidates . Nurse Educ Today . 2018;64:144-149. doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2018.02.014

Somasundaram RO, Devamani KA. A comparative study on resilience, perceived social support and hopelessness among cancer patients treated with curative and palliative care . Indian J Palliat Care . 2016;22(2):135-40. doi:10.4103/0973-1075.179606

Hutnik N, Smith P, Koch T. Using cognitive behaviour therapy to explore resilience in the life-stories of 16 UK centenarians .  Nurs Open . 2016;3(2):110–118. doi:10.1002/nop2.44

Ginsburg KR, Jablow MM.  Building Resilience in Children and Teens: Giving Kids Roots and Wings . 2nd ed. American Academy of Pediatrics; 2011.

Flynn PJ, Bliese PD, Korsgaard MA, Cannon C. Tracking the process of resilience: how emotional stability and experience influence exhaustion and commitment trajectories . Group & Organization Management . 2021;46(4):692-736. doi:10.1177/10596011211027676

By Kendra Cherry, MSEd Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

• Resultant Careers

Five Characteristics of Fearless Problem Solvers Heading into 2024

Updated August 29, 2023

By: Louonna Kachur 

Fearless problem solving is one of our core values at Resultant. In fact, our ability to tackle big problems is the reason clients seek our help.

Over the years as we have gained exceptional talent on our teams, we’ve found that fearless problem solvers tend to exhibit five key characteristics: They’re undaunted, optimistic, driven, smart, and empathetic. The combination of these attributes results in unique and tailored solutions to our clients’ most challenging problems.

We wouldn’t have it any other way. 

1. Undaunted 

Fearless problem solvers believe every challenge has a solution. They have confidence in themselves and their abilities to find the one that fits the client best. 

Real-world example: After nine years and several contractors, Resultant was asked to step in and perform project rescue of a complex, enterprise-wide application development project. Faced with work that was years behind schedule and experiencing multiple failures , we completely re-architected the team, the solution, and the process, delivering an innovative approach that launched the system just nine months later. Undaunted, indeed.

2. Optimistic 

Fearless problem solvers believe in the availability of an exceptional solution for every challenge and work toward it with optimism and enthusiasm. 

Real-world example: After a malicious cyberattack wiped out nearly all of a company’s data and technology infrastructure, the company contacted Resultant, desperate to recover their business. Our team worked diligently and assured the company that despite the bleak outlook, we would find a way to get them back in operation. With great effort and skill—not to mention some really late nights—the team recovered 90 percent of the client’s information while simultaneously improving their systems and launching better security . That business is still going strong today. 

Fearless problem solvers are change agents. They take ideas and make them reality, translate discussion into action, and deliver results every time, regardless of the circumstances. In short, they make things happen. 

Real-world example: Resultant was engaged to provide an assessment of an Indianapolis organization’s technology stance. The assessment revealed a staggering number of problems and tremendous internal resistance to choosing a way forward. By providing a future state roadmap and patiently but consistently leading the organization to improve and adopt change , we successfully delivered over 50 separate technology projects in just under a year. Building and delivering such a change and helping leadership and employees align with this vision for the future demands drive and persistence. 

Fearless problem solvers use experience, breadth of knowledge, empathy, and raw intelligence to understand complexity and sort order from chaos. They have healthy curiosity and respect for the details because they know details make or break a solution. 

Real-world example: The Resultant team tackled an enterprise social services problem of great social and financial importance with incredibly high complexity. Our team collaborated with the client to solve a number of hard problems, from being the first to combine large-scale datasets across disparate repositories , to inventing new high-speed and secure data matching algorithms, to advanced analysis of human factors and non-human factors impacting outcomes. In the end, the teams sorted through a massive amount of information to find the three essential factors out of dozens of possibilities upon which to target actions that would solve this important problem. 

5. Empathetic 

The best solutions start with a deep understanding of individual people and the deep-seated needs they have. Fearless problem solvers are great at first working to truly understand the people at the center of the challenge and their challenges, then innovating great solutions that holistically combine people, process, and technology.

Real-world example: Working alongside a new startup to effectively launch its product, Resultant first had to take the time to fully understand the organization’s needs and the needs of the target audience. Getting to the root of the needs of the audience helped our team understand what would make the product and the startup successful. The team worked side-by-side with the client and various stakeholders to build a product for the customer that met this goal with excellence. 

Conclusion 

At Resultant, we work to support our clients in achieving their goals. Through our team’s ability to remain undaunted, optimistic, driven, smart, and empathetic, we accomplish this mission each and every day. 

If fearlessly solving problems excites you, explore our  open positi ons . 

More on This Topic

Meet Our People: Mike Baur, Senior Director of Education Strategy and Development

Data Science Manager Alexa Myers Recognized with Tech 25 Award

Meet Our People: Jeff Nadler, Director, Criminal Justice

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in STEM: An Employee-Driven Commitment

 Meet Anna Muñoz, senior associate consultant at Resultant.

Meet Our People: Preston Howell

Find out how our team can help you achieve great outcomes.

Talk to Our Team

Insights delivered to your inbox

• أحاديث نفسية ..الدكتورة أسماء
• الفالدوكسان
• عقار البريستيك
• Clinical Tips
• PSYCHIATRIC Movie reviews
• Psychiatric Cases and Discussion
• C++ Constructors vs destructors
• C++ REading &Writing text files
• MFC binary, structs and pointers tutorial
• C++ modify and delete record
• C++, listbox tutorial
• NetWorking Tutorial
• Packman like Game part(2)
• Packman like game part (3)continued
• Psychiatry Illustrated:
• Medical Psychology
• Quick Guide to Clinical Psychiatry
• Full Photography course:
• Self Development
• الصد عن سبيل الله
• في فضل سور القرآن
• مثل العنكبوت

The Ten Characteristics of Effective Problem Solvers

Why is it that some people seem to be natural born problem solvers? Look closer, and you’ll discover that problem solving is much more of a skill than an art. You, too, can become an effective problem solver for your real estate business and your family if you learn to develop these proven techniques.

1. They have a “can do” attitude!

Simply expressed, effective problem solvers see problems as opportunities, a chance to learn something new, to grow, to succeed where others have failed, or to prove that “it can be done”. Underlying this attitude is a deeply held conviction that, with adequate preparation, the right answer will emerge.

2. They re-define the problem . Problem solving is a primary consulting skill. Seasoned consultants know that the initial definition of the problem very often is incorrect or incomplete. They learn to dig deeper and follow their own instincts. In describing the problem, they strenuously avoid making premature judgments or ruling out possibilities.

3. They have a system .

Problem solving is a process. Perhaps the most common model is Describe, Analyze, Conclude, and Recommend/Solve (DACR/S). As with many structured approaches, its usefulness stems from the step-by-step approach it represents. Effective problem solvers take the steps in order and apply them literally.

4. They consider every position as though it were their own .

For effective problem solvers, standing in the other person’s shoes is more than a cute saying, it’s a fundamental way of looking at the problem. This ability to shift perspectives quickly and easily is a key characteristic of effective problem solvers. As one especially capable consultant put it, “I take the other fellow’s position, and then I expand upon it until I understand it better than he does”. Most Realtors would be much more effective if they took the time to build relationships with the client and see things from their vantage point.

5. They avoid the experience trap .

The world is becoming increasingly non- linear. Things happen in pairs and groups and often don’t follow traditional lines from past to present and cause to effect. In such an environment, past experience must be taken with a grain of salt. Seasoned problem solvers know the pitfalls of relying on what worked in the past as a guide to what will work in the future. They learn to expect the unexpected, illogical, and non- linear.

6. They recognize conflict as often a prerequisite to solution .

When the stakes are high in a problem situation, the parties are often reluctant to show their hands and cautious about giving away too much. In such instances, effective problem solvers can effectively use their skills to manage conflict and flush out the “real” facts.

7. They listen to their intuition .

Somewhere during the latter stages of the fact-finding process, effective problem solvers experience what can be best called, “inklings” or gut-level feelings about the situation. When this happens, they listen, hypothesize, test and re-test. While intuition may be partially innate, directing and focusing their intuition can prove an effective problem solving skill that can be developed.

8. They invariably go beyond “solving the problem” .

On a time scale, just solving the problem at hand brings you to the present, to a point you might call, ground-zero. Truly effective problem solvers push farther. They go beyond simply solving the problem to discover the underlying opportunities that often lie concealed within the intricacies of the situation. Implicit in this approach is the premise that every problem is an opportunity in disguise.

9. They seek permanent solutions .

Permanent, as opposed to Band-Aid solutions, have two characteristics: (1) they address all aspects of the problem, and (2) they are win/win in that they offer acceptable benefits to all parties involved. Symptomatic problem solving, like bad surgery or dentistry, leaves part of the decay untouched, with the result that, over time, it festers and often comes back to bite you.

10. They gain commitment from all parties involved .

In the rush to find “the answer” it is easy to fail to gain agreement and commitment on the part of everyone involved. For effective problem solvers, just “going along” via tacit agreement isn’t enough. There must be explicit statements from all parties that they concur and are willing to commit to the solution

Previous Article

Next article, you might also like.

• Psychiatry And AI: will continue or disappear? April 24, 2024 - 7:49 AM

• Mounjaro: miracle or curse? April 21, 2024 - 12:38 PM

Treating Depression in Patients With Diabetes : Quick Hints

Like on facebook قابلنا ع الفيسبوك, recent posts.

• The Story of ECT May 23, 2024 - 10:35 AM
• The story of discovery of aripiprazole molecule? May 12, 2024 - 10:00 PM

• What is the default brain network? April 26, 2024 - 4:03 PM
• هل تعلم April 26, 2024 - 1:04 PM
• Secrets of Brain Neurons: April 26, 2024 - 12:58 PM

Listen on SoundCloud استمع الينا

WhatsApp us

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

Positive Qualities in a Person: 100+ Character Traits and Strengths

Categories Self-Improvement

Positive qualities in a person are the sort of traits and characteristics that give people an advantage in life. These are the kinds of attributes that make people strong, skilled, successful, and appealing to others. 

Learn more about different types of positive qualities in a person. Figure out if you already have these qualities, plus what you can do to acquire some of these character strengths and attributes.

Table of Contents

What Are Positive Qualities in a Person?

Positive qualities in a person encompass an entire spectrum of attributes that reflect their inherent goodness, strengths, and virtues. These qualities are the building blocks of a person’s character and are often intertwined with their personality traits . 

While personality traits denote enduring patterns of behavior, thoughts, and emotions, positive qualities highlight those aspects that contribute positively to one’s life and interactions with others. They encompass traits like kindness, empathy, resilience, integrity, optimism, and compassion , among others. 

Positive qualities not only shape how individuals perceive and navigate the world but also influence their relationships, achievements, and overall well-being. They serve as pillars of personal growth, fostering a sense of fulfillment and contributing to a meaningful existence.

Research suggests that having positive qualities is connected to better social well-being and life satisfaction. The four characteristics that have beeen identified as qualities of a “good personality” are integrity, altruism, amiability, and magnanimity.

Also Known As:

Synonyms for positive qualities in a person include virtues, strengths, merits, assets, attributes, admirable traits, commendable characteristics, good qualities, positive attributes, and noble qualities.

Examples of Positive Qualities in a Person

Positive qualities in a person can run the gamut to social skills to athletic talents to emotional abilities. A few examples of positive qualities you might appreciate about a person include:

• Consideration
• Dependability
• Relaxed attitude
• Organization

It’s also important to remember that many of these qualities are considered positive because they exist in a state of balance. Many people have them to some degree, but some are able to display them in ways that are ideally suited to the situation.

For example, organization is a great quality that people often appreciate. But if a person is so concerned with organization that it begins to interfere with their ability to function and creates problems in interpersonal relationships, as it might for someone with a Type A personality , then that quality would be considered less of a positive trait and more of a negative.

Lists of Positive Qualities in a Person

Consider some of the lists below of different positive qualities in a person that others tend to appreciate. Consider how some of these might apply to your own life.

Emotional Qualities

2. Compassion

3. Kindness

4. Patience

5. Optimism

6. Resilience

7. Emotional intelligence

8. Generosity

9. Forgiveness

10. Gratitude

Intellectual Qualities

1. Curiosity

2. Creativity

3. Critical thinking

4. Open-mindedness

5. Intelligence

6. Problem-solving skills

7. Analytical skills

8. Adaptability

9. Perseverance

Social Qualities

1. Friendliness

2. Sociability

3. Cooperation

4. Communication skills

5. Leadership

6. Teamwork

7. Diplomacy

8. Charisma

9. Supportiveness

10. Collaboration

Professional Qualities

1. Reliability

2. Accountability

3. Diligence

4. Integrity

5. Professionalism

6. Initiative

7. Time management

9. Resourcefulness

10. Commitment

Relationship Qualities

1. Trustworthiness

4. Respectfulness

5. Understanding

6. Affectionate

7. Dependability

8. Thoughtfulness

9. Tolerance

10. Consistency

Challenging Situations

1. Resilience

2. Perseverance

4. Determination

5. Adaptability

7. Optimism

8. Creativity

9. Patience

10. Self-control

Community and Society

1. Altruism

2. Prosocial behavior

3. Advocacy

4. Civic-mindedness

5. Environmental consciousness

6. Social responsibility

7. Philanthropy

8. Cultural awareness

9. Global citizenship

10. Community engagement

These lists cover a broad range of positive qualities that individuals can possess across various aspects of life and situations. The importance of these qualities can sometimes depend on the context. For example, the qualities that are most important in a romantic relationship aren’t always the same as what a person might value in a professional relationship.

List of Positive Character Traits

Positive character traits encompass qualities such as integrity, kindness, and resilience, reflecting an individual’s moral and ethical fiber. These traits are important as they not only shape one’s interactions with others but also contribute to personal growth, meaningful relationships, and the establishment of a cohesive and compassionate society.

1. Integrity

4. Humility

6. Authenticity

7. Resilience

11. Open-mindedness

12. Optimism

13. Loyalty

14. Forgiveness

15. Patience

16. Accountability

17. Diligence

18. Kindness

19. Perseverance

20. Tolerance

24 Character Strengths According to Psychologists

Positive psychologists have identified 24 key character strengths that can help promote emotional well-being and resilience. These 24 traits are classified into six main virtues: wisdom, courage, humanity, justice, temperance, and transcendence.

Wisdom and Knowledge

• Open-mindedness
• Love of learning
• Perspective
• Persistence
• Social intelligence
• Citizenship
• Forgiveness
• Self-regulation

Transcendence

• Appreciation of beauty and excellence
• Spirituality

Positive Qualities in a Person at Work

In the workplace, positive characteristics can significantly affect individual success and overall team performance. Some positive qualities in a person that are often particularly important in the workplace include:

• Reliability : Consistently delivering on commitments and being accountable for tasks.
• Team player : Collaborating effectively with colleagues and contributing to the success of the team.
• Leadership : Inspiring and guiding others toward common goals while demonstrating integrity and vision.
• Adaptability : Quickly adjusting to changing circumstances and embracing new challenges.
• Communication skills : Clearly conveying ideas, actively listening, and fostering open dialogue.
• Problem-solving skills : Approaching challenges with creativity and finding practical solutions.
• Positive attitude : Maintaining optimism and resilience, even in the face of adversity.
• Initiative : Taking proactive steps to identify opportunities for improvement and drive positive change.
• Flexibility : Willingness to adapt to different roles, responsibilities, and work styles as needed.
• Professionalism : Conducting oneself with integrity, respect, and professionalism in all interactions.

Together, these positive traits form the foundation of a productive and harmonious workplace, where individuals thrive and organizations flourish. Of course, different types of work require different skills, so it is important to tailor your own personal development goals to your unique situation and experience.

How Do Develop More Positive Qualities in a Person

Developing positive character traits is essential for personal growth and fostering healthy relationships. Here are some practical tips to help you cultivate these qualities:

• Set clear intentions : Define which traits you want to develop and why they are important to you.
• Practice self-reflection : Take time to assess your actions and behaviors, identifying areas for improvement.
• Seek role models : Surround yourself with individuals who embody the traits you admire, and learn from their example.
• Practice empathy : Put yourself in others’ shoes and strive to understand their perspectives and experiences.
• Start small : Focus on cultivating one trait at a time, gradually incorporating it into your daily life.
• Be mindful : Stay present in the moment and consciously choose to act in alignment with your desired traits.
• Challenge yourself : Step out of your comfort zone and take on tasks that require the traits you’re aiming to develop.
• Celebrate progress : Acknowledge and celebrate your successes, no matter how small, to reinforce positive habits.
• Seek feedback : Ask for feedback from trusted friends or mentors to gain insight into how others perceive your progress.
• Practice gratitude : Cultivate a mindset of appreciation for the positive aspects of your life, fostering a sense of contentment and well-being.

By incorporating these strategies into your daily routine, you can actively develop and strengthen positive character traits, ultimately leading to personal fulfillment and enriching relationships.

How to Discover Your Own Positive Qualities

Discovering your own positive qualities can be an enlightening journey of self-awareness and personal growth. Here are some tips to help you uncover and embrace your inherent strengths:

Spend Time in Self-Reflection

Set aside time for introspection and self-reflection. Consider your past experiences, successes, and challenges to identify patterns of behavior and qualities that have contributed to your achievements.

Ask Others for Feedback

Seek feedback from trusted friends, family members, colleagues, or mentors. Ask them to share their observations about your strengths and positive attributes, as they may offer valuable insights that you haven’t considered.

Keep a Journal

Start a journal to record moments when you felt proud of yourself or received compliments from others. Reflect on these instances to identify recurring themes or qualities that are important to you.

Try Personality Assessments and Quizzes

Take personality assessments such as the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) , StrengthsFinder, or Enneagram test. These tools can provide valuable insights into your personality traits and strengths, helping you better understand yourself.

Pursue Your Passions

Engage in activities that you enjoy and feel passionate about. Pay attention to the tasks or roles that come naturally to you and where you excel. These areas often highlight your innate talents and positive qualities.

Try New Things

Step out of your comfort zone and try new things. Exploring unfamiliar territories can help you discover hidden talents and strengths that you may not have been aware of before.

Consider People You Admire

Think about individuals whom you admire or look up to. Consider what qualities or traits you admire in them and how you can cultivate similar attributes within yourself.

Practice Mindfulness

Cultivate mindfulness through practices such as meditation or mindfulness exercises. Being present in the moment can help you become more aware of your thoughts, feelings, and behaviors, allowing you to recognize your positive qualities more easily.

Celebrate Your Wins

Take time to celebrate your accomplishments, no matter how small. Recognizing your successes can boost your confidence and reinforce positive behaviors and qualities.

Keep an Open Mind

Approach the process of self-discovery with an open mind and a willingness to embrace both your strengths and areas for growth. Remember that self-discovery is an ongoing journey, and it’s okay to evolve and change over time.

More Articles Related to Positive Qualities in a Person:

• 85 Unique Talents You Can Develop
• 40+ Positive Affirmations for Gratitude
• 50 Affirmations for Self-Esteem
• List of Positive Attitudes
• 35 Affirmations for Anxiety
• 50+ Great Emotional Intelligence Quotes

Harzer, C., & Ruch, W. (2015). The relationships of character strengths with coping, work-related stress, and job satisfaction .  Frontiers in Psychology ,  6 , 165. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00165

Xu, X., Liu, Y., Jiao, L., Wang, Y., Yu, M., Lai, Y., Zhang, Y., & Xu, Y. (2023). Good personality and social well-being: The roles of orientation to happiness .  Frontiers in Public Health , 11, 1105187. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2023.1105187

Scroll to Section:

Joachim Funke is Professor of Theoretical and Cognitive Psychology at Heidelberg University. Among his main research interests are issues within the field of problem-solving and thinking, in particular, measurement aspects. He is one of the promoters of the European approach to Complex Problem Solving that uses computer-simulated micro-worlds for the assessment of problem-solving competencies. From 2010 to 2014, he was Chair of the international PISA Problem Solving Expert Group. He is also co-founder of ‘Heidelberg University Publishing’ and was editor-in-chief of Psychologische Rundschau. Moreover, he is on different editorial boards and is co-founder and co-editor of the open access Journal of Dynamic Decision Making. In 2015, he received an honorary doctorate from Szeged University, Hungary.

Institution

Heidelberg University (Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg)

Original publication, complex problem solving: what it is and what it is not, complex problem solving, reading recommendations, the nature of problem solving: using research to inspire 21st century learning., the logic of failure. recognizing and avoiding error in complex situations, complex problem solving: the european perspective, competencies for complexity: problem solving in the twenty-first century.

Joachim Funke, Latest Thinking, Which Character Traits Are Important for Good Decision-Making?, https://doi.org/10.21036/LTPUB10567, 2017

Suggested Videos

Do Exclusivity Rebates Cause Psychological Switching Costs in Consumers?

Which Cognitive Process Is Used to Adapt Decision Making to Different Contexts?

Which Neural Mechanisms Are Taking Place During Social Interaction of Individuals?

Does Logically Incoherent Decision-Making Really Have Negative Consequences?

Is Rational Choice Theory Sufficient to Explain the Coming About of Social Order?

Is Language Development in the Child’s Brain Visible on a Molecular Level?

Personality & Character Traits: The Good, the Bad, the Ugly

The world we live in is different from what it was 10, five, or even one year ago. Thanks to social media, easy-to-use communication tools, and globalization, the pool of possibilities and available information are constantly expanding.

Without a clear idea of one’s own preferences, making the right choice can be extremely difficult and confusing. Everyone’s personality is unique, and knowing what makes us who we are, can lead to more life satisfaction, better life choices, and overall success in both personal and professional spheres.

Before you continue, we thought you might like to download our three Strengths Exercises for free . These detailed, science-based exercises will help you or your clients realize your unique potential and create a life that feels energized and authentic.

This Article Contains:

Character and personality traits defined, character trait theories.

• The Big Five or OCEAN Model

The PEN Model

Examples of positive and negative characteristics, character traits worksheets for kids and adults (pdfs), the character traits anchor chart and other graphic organizers, a take-home message.

While character and personality are both used to describe someone’s behaviors, the two examine different aspects of that individual. One’s personality is more visible, while one’s  character is revealed over time, through varying situations.

In more concrete terms:

“Personality is easy to read, and we’re all experts at it. We judge people [as] funny, extroverted, energetic, optimistic , confident—as well as overly serious, lazy, negative, and shy—if not upon first meeting them, then shortly thereafter. And though we may need more than one interaction to confirm the presence of these sorts of traits, by the time we decide they are, in fact, present, we’ve usually amassed enough data to justify our conclusions. “Character, on the other hand, takes far longer to puzzle out. It includes traits that reveal themselves only in specific—and often uncommon—circumstances, traits like honesty, virtue, and kindliness .” Lickerman, 2011

While personality is easier to spot, it’s largely static and slow to evolve. Character, on the other hand, takes longer to discern but is easier to change. That’s because character is shaped by beliefs, and with enough effort and motivation, changing one’s perspective and view of the world can lead to a shift in one’s character.

The malleability of character makes sense when you look at human evolution. In order for our ancestors to survive, they had to adapt to new environments and change with the times—and this remains true in the modern era.

If an individual deems a change in their surroundings to be significant, then their beliefs will transform to accommodate the change.

For instance, an individual who might have a shy personality can learn to switch their attitude toward public speaking when stepping into the role of a teacher. The new social and external demands lead to an internal shift that changes their demeanor.

In this way, even if an individual’s inborn preference is to shy away from the public, the beliefs and values that shape their behavior can evolve to reflect the values of their immediate groups and communities. Such awareness and adaptability help with survival (Kurtus, 2011).

The bottom line is, despite the significance of our inborn personality traits, we can overcome them as required by personal or cultural demands.

TED Talk: Who Are You, Really? The Puzzle of Personality by Brian Little

In this talk, personality expert Brian Little explains the phenomenon of overcoming one’s inborn traits and explores how our character is modified by the core projects we work on.

Tools for identifying personality traits have never been more plentiful. “ In the U.S. alone, there are about 2,500 personality tests ” to choose from (Ash, 2012). Yet, quantity does not imply quality.

Due to immense variations in personality, it is difficult to divide people neatly into different classifications. Instead, assessing individuals by the most common personality traits can empower us to deduce a person’s behavior by looking at the average of their choices (Pappas, 2017).

Below are two of the most widely used personality tools that can identify your personality traits. Some pros and cons of each are also highlighted.

A quick note is that we have reviewed only scale-based personality assessments, rather than profile-based assessments. The difference is that scale-based assessments treat personality traits as existing on a continuum, whereas profile-based assessments classify individuals according to binary categories (e.g., an introvert or an extrovert).

Common profile-based assessments that you may be familiar with include the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) and the Enneagram. While these tools can be a fun way to gain some self-insight, they are often critiqued by scientists (Grant, 2013).

A key criticism is that the results of profile-based assessments pigeonhole individuals into particular categories (e.g., labeling someone as an extrovert or introvert; a thinker or a feeler), but few things in life are so black and white. In reality, it is believed that our personality traits exist on scales with opposite poles, and all of us will fall somewhere between either end of that continuum (e.g., the introversion-extroversion scale).

Put differently, “ if the MBTI measured height, you would be classified as either tall or short, even though the majority of people are within a band of medium height ” (Krznaric, 2013). Hence, we’ve limited this review to only scale-based assessments, which are more scientifically backed.

Download 3 Free Strengths Exercises (PDF)

These detailed, science-based exercises will equip you or your clients with tools to discover and harness their unique strengths.

Download 3 Free Strengths Tools Pack (PDF)

By filling out your name and email address below.

The Big Five, or OCEAN Model

Perhaps the most comprehensive and science-backed, personality test available is the Big Five .

Unlike the popular (but disputed) Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), this assessment does not divide people into personality profiles but rather analyzes an individual based on the most common traits found within the global community. The traits are easy to remember, as they spell out the acronym OCEAN.

OCEAN stands for:

• Openness : This describes an individual’s love for novelty experiences. Those with high scores tend to be more creative . Individuals with lower scores tend to be more conservative and prefer routines.
• Conscientiousness : This shows someone’s tendency for organization. Those with high scores are seen as motivated, disciplined, and trustworthy. Lower scores indicate someone less responsible and more likely to get distracted.
• Extroversion : This factor indicates how cheerful and communicative a person can be. If someone scores highly in extroversion, they tend to be social and likely to accomplish their goals . Low scores indicate someone who is introverted and more submissive to authority.
• Agreeableness : This trait describes how someone interacts with those around them. High scores indicate that someone is warm and friendly. Those who tend to be more egocentric and suspicious (or even shy) tend to score lower.
• Neuroticism : Emotional stability can reveal a lot about the likelihood of someone developing moodiness and anxiety. High scores on neuroticism indicate someone who is less-assured, and low scores describe a person who is calm and confident (Westerhoff, 2008).

These categories serve as an umbrella that influences other personality areas, such as:

• Openness: imagination, feelings, actions, ideas, values, adventurousness, artistic interests, etc.
• Conscientiousness: order, self-discipline, competence, achievement striving, etc.
• Extroversion: warmth, friendliness, assertiveness, activity level, positive emotions, etc.
• Agreeableness: trust, compliance, modesty, altruism, sympathy, cooperation, etc.
• Neuroticism : hostility, depression, impulsiveness, anger, vulnerability, self-consciousness, etc. (ETS, 2012)

Take the test

Those wishing to know their OCEAN results can take any of the following quizzes:

• The Big Five Personality Test
• (Another) Big Five Personality Test
• Personality Test at 123test.com
• Ten Item Personality Measure (available in different languages)

Again, we’ll explore the benefits and drawbacks of the OCEAN model.

Unlike the MBTI, which tries to categorize people into one of 16 personality profiles, the Big Five understands that individuals possess certain traits, which need to be measured on a continuum. It is rare to be only on one or the other side of the spectrum.

For instance, saying that extroverts absorb energy when interacting with others and that introverts expend energy when interacting with the outside world is false, as both get energy from their interpersonal relations (Grant, 2015).

“The Big Five structure captures, at a broad level of abstraction, the commonalities among most of the existing systems of personality description, and provides an integrative descriptive model for personality research” (John & Srivastava, 1999).

Thanks to its results that provide scales of different traits rather than profiling the individual, this personality assessment tool can provide a degree of flexibility and versatility, which has enabled researchers to use the assessment to examine the influence of these traits on different areas of life, like  mental health , finances, and relationships.

And for the most part, these traits have been shown to be relatively stable. Specifically, in a nine-year study, there was “moderate to high [stability], ranging from 0.73 to 0.97 in men and from 0.65 to 0.95 in women. The highest gender-equal stability was found for openness to experience and the lowest for conscientiousness” (Rantanen, Metsäpelto, Feldt, Pulkkinen, & Kokko, 2007).

More specifically, men showed more stability in traits like neuroticism and extroversion, while women showed more stability in traits like openness to experience, agreeableness, and conscientiousness.

Despite its stability and usefulness, the tool does have its flaws.

Here are a few:

1. Too big to fail

As mentioned earlier, the beauty of this tool is its big-picture view of personality traits, but it’s also a limitation. A good analogy to explain this is the categorization of living organisms into plants or animals. While it’s helpful for certain distinctions, it is not helpful for “value predicting specific behaviors of a particular individual” (John, Naumann, & Soto, 2008).

2. Not so universal

While there has been evidence-based research to support the validity of the tool in more than 50 countries, flaws in translation and applicability to non-English-speaking cultures can be found. This results in skewed scores, as was demonstrated by research conducted with a small South American tribe (Dingfelder, 2013).

Developed by Hans and Sybil Eysenck in 1975, this model looks at the biological factors that trigger or influence personality. The three focal traits examined by this model are psychoticism, extroversion, and neuroticism (Waude, 2017).

The origins of this model date back to the 1960s, but it didn’t originally measure psychoticism (which relates to measures of  compassion , morality, as well as creativity). The older model used the Eysenck Personality Inventory to gather and analyze results.

With the addition of psychoticism, the questions were updated and the tool for gathering these results was renamed the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire.

Each of the trait categories explores the following human behaviors:

• Psychoticism : People who score high in this measure often participate in hostile, reckless, inconsiderate, nonconforming, tough-minded, and impulsive behaviors. Higher levels of testosterone are associated with higher scores in this area.
• Extroversion : Individuals with a high level of extroversion are more outgoing and talkative, and they desire external stimuli. Higher stimulation usually occurs as a result of increased cortical arousal and can be measured through skin conductance, brain waves, or sweating.
• Neuroticism : Those with a high level of neuroticism are more prone to depression and anxiety. The trait is activated by the sympathetic nervous system, which is also responsible for the fight-or-flight response. This can be measured through heart rate, blood pressure, cold hands, sweating, and muscular tension.

Based on these measures, there are four possible quadrants that individuals can fall into:

• Stable extroverts: recognized by their talkative, easygoing, lively, and carefree natures and their  leadership qualities
• Unstable extroverts: seen as touchy, restless, impulsive, and irresponsible
• Stable introverts: recognized by their calm, reliable, peaceful, thoughtful, and passive traits
• Unstable introverts: seen as reserved, pessimistic, rigid, anxious, and moody

Those interested in taking the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire can do so here .

Once more, we’ll explore the pros and cons of this personality model.

The model looks at both descriptive and causal effects. It examines three specific dimensions, making it easy to understand. And it has demonstrated test–retest reliability.

In fact, when specifically examining the pattern of moods, this assessment is able to predict certain outcomes. For instance, the questionnaire can predict significant associations with anxiety, according to a 2012 study.

“Focusing on the item of ‘Does your mood often go up and down?’ showed a statistically significant association with melancholia and anxiety for patients with a positive score on this item.” Bech, Lunde, & Moller, 2012

Through twin studies, researchers have also found that some of the personality traits measured with the PEN model “exhibit significant genetic variance” (Heath, Jardine, Eaves & Martin, 1988). For traits related to extroversion, researchers “found both additive gene action and dominance,” while “neuroticism items appeared to show purely additive genetic inheritance” (Heath, Jardine, Eaves & Martin, 1988).

Some factors, though, were shown to be influenced by the subjects’ environments, including the psychoticism scale, though for psychoticism the “environmental effects appeared to be largely restricted to males” (Heath, Jardine, Eaves & Martin, 1988).

Like most personality trait assessments, the PEN model is unable to predict future behaviors of individuals, even using the model allows for a better understanding of individuals’ personalities.

And there are certain limits to the model. In a study of both imprisoned and non-imprisoned people, researchers found that the samples often studied in research using the PEN model could create misleading results.

While past studies had shown high rates of extroversion, neuroticism, and psychoticism in criminals, researchers Rebolla, Herrera, and Collom found that this correlation might be linked as much to a person’s environment as inherited traits. They argue that extroverts “are less prone to conditioning. And this tendency increases with high [neuroticism] scores” (Rebollo, Herrera, & Colom, 2002).

The researchers argue that in order to build a conscience, conditioning is required (something that neurotic and extroverted people resist), which may lead to greater degrees of antisocial personalities among people who are highly extroverted and neurotic but don’t have social support while growing up (Rebollo, Herrera, & Colom, 2002).

The findings demonstrate that since personality traits are influenced by heredity, it is mainly through character and conditioning that a change can be developed in an individual. For instance, those who are more prone to fear and shyness can be taught coping techniques that are more congruent with social norms, allowing for better communication and integration into society.

Having explored the differences between personality and character, we can dive deeper and examine the broader characteristics associated with positive and negative traits.

The collective research on personality has helped clarify the behaviors that are more conducive to wellbeing , with a majority of those behaviors helping to cultivate resilience toward external stimuli.

Another way to interpret this is with the concept of mental strength. This ability is acquired by focusing on things under personal command, which reinforces the internal locus of control.

The behaviors that lead to mental strength are identified below (Morin, 2013):

• Mentally strong people don’t feel sorry for themselves; instead, they take responsibility for their own life.
• They don’t give away their power to others and thus maintain control over their emotions.
• Individuals with mental toughness embrace change and are open to being flexible.
• Control is placed on things under the person’s influence, such as their attitude.
• Pleasing everyone is not a priority. While being kind and fair is important, making everyone happy is not.
• There is a motivation for making calculated risks.
• Mentally strong people focus on the present and make plans for the future.
• Mentally strong people try to make better decisions in the future and try not to repeat previous missteps.
• They demonstrate an ability to appreciate and celebrate the success of other people.
• They don’t give up after a failure; instead, they keep trying until they get it right.
• Mentally strong people tolerate being alone and staying in silence.
• They don’t feel that the world owes them something; instead, they create opportunities for themselves by utilizing their own talents and merits.
• Real change takes time, and mentally strong individuals understand this, so they’re patient.

These behaviors are positively supported by characteristics such as:

• Tenacity: not giving up when things get tough or when problems arise
• Confidence : belief in personal ability to find solutions to challenges
• Optimism: the perception that the odds are in one’s favor
• Adaptability: openness to new inputs and ideas
• Self-Awareness : the ability to shift perspective
• Reliability: following through with promises and goals
• Responsibility: owning up to personal mistakes and errors
• Wellbeing: making personal mental and physical health a priority

These and other characteristics help contribute to strong mental health (Half, 2016).

This supports the idea that openness, agreeableness, and conscientiousness provide the foundation on which changes and challenges are welcomed, not shunned. In turn, this helps open doors to new possibilities and opportunities.

Specifically,

“Those whose personality tendencies tend toward empathy, cooperation, trust, and modesty (Costa & Widiger, 2002) are found to be more intrinsically motivated and find enjoyment through efforts they exert in the completion of tasks or in problem-solving. Possessing a proclivity toward mastery-approach orientation, these individuals will not shy away from challenging situations, and their desire to tackle challenges is greater than their fear of appearing unknowledgeable in front of others. In other words, they approach challenges with the full intent of mastering them.” Watson, 2012

The opposite of open-minded, calm, conscientious, and agreeable characteristics are those defined by judgment, neuroticism, and an external locus of control. Some behaviors that fall into this category are:

• Inability to accept setbacks
• Lack of clarity and decision-making
• Low capacity for critical thinking
• Failing to build strong interpersonal relations
• Always staying in the comfort zone
• Helplessness and absence of persistence
• Tendency to lean toward pessimism
• Weak imagination and an inability to visualize desired outcomes (Cardone, 2011)

Individuals with high scores in neuroticism often display narcissism, have inflated egos, and are emotionally distant, angry, hostile, and inflexible. These people tend to display the behaviors above.

Yet one key preventer of such negative traits, according to some studies, is self-control. “The more conscientious or prudent people are–no matter their other characteristics–the less likely they’ll be drawn toward harmful or illegal activities” (Chamorro-Premuzic, 2016).

Therefore, by increasing one’s self-awareness, individuals can spot their shortcomings and adopt habits to help balance out their personality traits. In turn, this helps them thrive.

Cultivating positive character traits can lead to greater success.

This is explained well by this excerpt from an article differentiating between character and personality:

“There is a direct link between positive character traits and a happy and successful life. Negative character traits that have been ‘strongly and long’ ingrained usually do cause strife at some point. But a focus on positive change can and does work.” Bell, 2010

Understanding one’s character traits and cultivating a strong desire and motivation for change can lead to better outcomes.

Here are some worksheets that can help get you and the people in your life started on this process.

There are plenty of tools for explaining character traits to kids. Here are some options for students ranging from first-graders to eighth-graders.

Fill in the Blank Worksheet

Perfect for kids in grades two through five,  this worksheet can be utilized during lessons on English, vocabulary, and writing.

Character Trait Analysis and Development

Here are 12 different worksheets designed for students in first through eighth grade. The worksheets introduce the idea of character traits and help students analyze and develop their character traits.

Lesson Plan on Character Traits

Those who teach third grade can utilize this entire lesson plan (which includes worksheets) to introduce character traits to the young students.

For Adults:

While it’s especially helpful to learn about character traits at a young age, adults can benefit from becoming more familiar with their positive and negative character traits.

Positive Traits Worksheet

At times, adults may be unable to recognize good qualities in themselves, which can prevent them from developing self-compassion and self-esteem. This worksheet describes 58 positive traits. You can the positive traits that describe yourself, which strengthens your belief in yourself and can lead to transformative conversations.

Visual of Character Traits

Sometimes a picture is worth a thousand words. Clients who are unable to verbalize their feelings or thoughts can use these handy infographics that display the opposite pairs of various character traits.

Positive and Negative Traits Quiz

Taking a test can sometimes be very enlightening. Those wishing to fill out a questionnaire rather than identify their own positive and negative character traits can respond to these 25 questions and determine their individual traits.

17 Exercises To Discover & Unlock Strengths

Use these 17 Strength-Finding Exercises [PDF] to help others discover and leverage their unique strengths in life, promoting enhanced performance and flourishing.

Created by Experts. 100% Science-based.

Introducing the concept of character to a younger audience can be difficult. But, utilizing easy-to-understand vocabulary and an interactive, visual, and fun process can assist in bringing the message home.

Teachers wishing to use the process in the classroom can take advantage of these freely available resources:

Character Traits Anchor Chart

Explaining the difference between internal and external character traits to children can be tough. By utilizing an “outside” and “inside” chart, students can begin to categorize their physical and personal traits. This technique can also be utilized to identify the differences between emotions (how a character feels) and traits (describes the personality).

Building Character in the Classroom

A rowdy classroom often leads to many impatient and distracted kids. In addition, students, especially those who live in lower-income areas, can carry a lot of emotional baggage, making it hard to stay motivated and concentrated on the subject at hand. For such situations, this is a great resource that suggests several ways for creating an inviting and an education-focused classroom.

The above research suggests that while personality traits are often hereditary and beyond our control, the things we value and believe in can reshape our character.

Expanding self-awareness is likely the first step in gaining control over one’s life. So it’s no wonder that “the most successful people are the most self-aware people” (Rosenfeld, 2016).

Awareness of others’ personalities can also be helpful, especially in situations like hiring someone for your company. And while there are many personality assessment tools to choose from, some are more consistent than others.

Cultivating an open, agreeable, and conscientious environment, whether in the office or at home, can help create values that are more conducive and supportive of growth and success. Using visualization tools to inspire, motivate, and spark interest in change is vital when aiming to align individuals and corporations toward a specific goal or mission.

Here is a great TED Talk by Dan Gilbert that summarizes this message:

Like Gilbert highlights in the video, it’s true that our personality traits are hereditary, but we still have the power to change. Our beliefs and values, which influence character, are not black or white—they adapt to our experiences and are heavily influenced by the different interactions and situations we engage in.

We are not static creatures, and just like nature, we are constantly changing. It is up to us to decide who we want to grow into. The best way to do that is to take note of where we currently are and then imagine where we want to go.

If change is the only constant, then the most successful people are those who control their own transformations.

We’d love to know your thoughts about personality and character. Have you ever taken a personality assessment, and if so, how accurate do you think it was? Do you think people can change their character? Let us know in the comments section.

We hope you enjoyed reading this article. Don’t forget to download our three Strengths Exercises for free .

• Ash, L. (2012, July 6). Can personality tests identify the real you? Retrieved from http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-18723950
• Bech, P., Lunde, M., & Moller, S. (2012, September 4). Eysenck’s Two Big Personality Factors and Their Relationship to Depression in Patients with Chronic Idiopathic Pain Disorder: A Clinimetric Validation Analysis . Retrieved from https://www.hindawi.com/journals/isrn/2012/140458/
• Bell, J. (2010, March 26). Is There a Difference Between Character and Personality? Retrieved from https://insights.inneractiveconsulting.com/is-there-a-difference-between-character-and-personality/
• Cardone, G. (2010, September 18). The 10 Traits of Failure . Retrieved from https://www.huffingtonpost.com/grant-cardone/the-10-traits-of-failure_b_722036.html
• Chamorro-Premuzic, T. (2016, July 19). Entrepreneurs? Four Worst Personality Traits And The One That Can Redeem Them . Retrieved from https://www.fastcompany.com/3061922/entrepreneurs-four-worst-personality-traits-and-the-one-that-can-redeem-them
• Costa, P. T., Jr., & Widiger, T. A. (2002). Introduction: Personality disorders and the five-factor model of personality. In P. T. Costa, Jr. & T. A. Widiger (Eds.), Personality disorders and the five-factor model of personality (p. 3–14). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
• Dingfelder, S. (2013, March). New study throws into doubt the universality of the Big Five.  Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/monitor/2013/03/big-five.aspx
• ETS. (2017) Retrieved from https://www.ets.org/s/workforce_readiness/pdf/21332_big_5.pdf
• Grant, A. (2013, September 18). Goodbye to MBTI, the Fad That Won’t Die . Retrieved from https://www.huffingtonpost.com/adam-grant/goodbye-to-mbti-the-fad-t_b_3947014.html
• Grant, A. (2015, November 17). MBTI, If You Want Me Back, You Need to Change Too. Adam Grant. Medium. Retrieved from https://medium.com/@AdamMGrant/mbti-if-you-want-me-back-you-need-to-change-too-c7f1a7b6970
• Half, R. (2016, March 4). 30 Character Traits of Mentally Strong People . Retrieved from https://www.roberthalf.com/blog/management-tips/30-character-traits-of-mentally-strong-people
• Heath, A., Jardine, R., Eaves, L., & Martin, N. (1988, June 13). The Genetic Structure of Personality -II . Retrieved from https://genepi.qimr.edu.au/contents/p/staff/CV080.pdf
• John, O., Naumann, L., & Soto, C. (n.d.). Paradigm Shift to the Integrative Big Five Trait Taxonomy . Retrieved from https://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/%7Ejohnlab/pdfs/2008chapter.pdf
• John, O., & Srivastava, S. (1999, March 5). The Big-Five Trait Taxonomy . Retrieved from John, O., & Srivastava, S. (1999, March 5). Retrieved from http://moityca.com.br/pdfs/bigfive_John.pdf
• Krznaric, R. (2013, May 15). Have we all been duped by the Myers-Briggs test? Retrieved from http://fortune.com/2013/05/15/have-we-all-been-duped-by-the-myers-briggs-test/
• Kurtus, R. (n.d.). Character versus Personality by Ron Kurtus – Understanding Character: School for Champions . Retrieved from http://www.school-for-champions.com/character/character_versus_personality.htm#.Wh2ivaOZNPO
• Lickerman, A. (2011, April 3). Personality vs. Character . Retrieved from https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/happiness-in-world/201104/personality-vs-character
• Morin, A. (2013, December 9). 13 Things Mentally Strong People Don’t Do | Amy Morin, LCSW. Retrieved from https://amymorinlcsw.com/mentally-strong-people/
• Pappas, S. (2017, November 16). Personality Traits & Personality Types: What is Personality? Retrieved from https://www.livescience.com/41313-personality-traits.html
• Rantanen, J., Metsäpelto, R. L., Feldt, T., Pulkkinen, L. E. A., & Kokko, K. (2007). Long‐term stability in the Big Five personality traits in adulthood. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 48(6) , 511-518.
• Rebollo, I., Herrero, O., & Colom, R. (2002, March 15). Personality in imprisoned and non-imprisoned people: evidence from the EPQ-R . Retrieved from http://www.psicothema.es/pdf/762.pdf
• Rosenfeld, J. (2016, August 26). Human nature is way too complex to be pinned down by personality tests . Retrieved from https://qz.com/766993/the-best-result-you-can-get-on-a-personality-test-is-one-that-you-dont-like/
• Watson, J. (2012). Educating the Disagreeable Extravert: Narcissism, the Big Five Personality Traits, and Achievement Goal Orientation . Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ977189.pdf
• Waude, A. (2017, June 14). Hans Eysenck’s PEN Model of Personality . Retrieved from https://www.psychologistworld.com/personality/pen-model-personality-eysenck
• Westerhoff, N. (2008, December 17). The “Big Five” Personality Traits . Retrieved from https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-big-five/

Share this article:

Article feedback

What our readers think.

I’m 65 years old. Female. I just had a huge aha moment. I’m easily annoyed. That trait destroyed my career as a public school teacher, I’m pretty sure of that. Two people I care about are becoming increasingly hard to deal with. My roommate is in constant pain and does nothing but complain about his life. My sister is in early stages of cognitive decline. It has become work to talk to her. I want to switch my knee jerk reaction of annoyance to one of compassion. Any ideas?

Thank you for your vulnerable comment! I realize it’s a complex and brave thing to admit that you want to change how you respond to others.

Of course, I cannot give you an exact course of action, but I believe that taking the step to make this comment shows that you are committed to learning how to respond compassionately. While we offer several tools that aid in fostering self-compassion and positive communication, you might want to look into other resources that can help promote compassion-centered communication. You might want to look into The Compassionate Mind Foundation or these free Mindfulness & Compassion resources.

I hope this helps and good luck!

Kind regards, -Caroline | Community Manager

Interesting, sounds spot on to me, similar to Myers Briggs test results

Truly enjoyable. Covers the broad-spectrum. Well researched and informative. Thank you Johan de Wet

It’s interesting to note that we can be more joyful in the future by developing our character in a positive manner. It follows that our personality will be happier as well. Like bees to honey, we attract people we strive to be. Virtues, such as humility, honesty, peace, and gratitude are much better than vices, such as pride, greed, dishonesty, sloth, etc. Virtues give us hope for our future and are our greatest assets.

Fantastic information! This is very useful. Thank you!

Let us know your thoughts Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Related articles

Jungian Psychology: Unraveling the Unconscious Mind

Alongside Sigmund Freud, the Swiss psychiatrist and psychoanalyst Carl Gustav Jung (1875–1961) is one of the most important innovators in the field of modern depth [...]

12 Jungian Archetypes: The Foundation of Personality

In the vast tapestry of human existence, woven with the threads of individual experiences and collective consciousness, lies a profound understanding of the human psyche. [...]

Personality Assessments: 10 Best Inventories, Tests, & Methods

Do you coach or manage a group of vastly different people? Perhaps they respond differently to news, or react differently to your feedback. They voice [...]

Read other articles by their category

• Body & Brain (49)
• Coaching & Application (58)
• Compassion (25)
• Counseling (51)
• Emotional Intelligence (23)
• Gratitude (18)
• Grief & Bereavement (21)
• Happiness & SWB (40)
• Meaning & Values (26)
• Meditation (20)
• Mindfulness (44)
• Motivation & Goals (45)
• Optimism & Mindset (34)
• Positive CBT (30)
• Positive Communication (21)
• Positive Education (47)
• Positive Emotions (32)
• Positive Leadership (19)
• Positive Parenting (16)
• Positive Psychology (34)
• Positive Workplace (37)
• Productivity (18)
• Relationships (44)
• Resilience & Coping (38)
• Self Awareness (21)
• Self Esteem (38)
• Strengths & Virtues (32)
• Stress & Burnout Prevention (34)
• Theory & Books (46)
• Therapy Exercises (37)
• Types of Therapy (64)

Trending Post : Books Made Into Movies

15 Picture Books to Teach Positive Character Traits

This post may contain affiliate links.

One way to teach children positive character traits is through reading picture books with characters who exemplify attributes that we see as important, such as perseverance, resiliency, curiosity, creativity, and kindness .

What are character traits? By definition, character traits are the building blocks of a person’s personality. We teachers, parents, and caregivers can emphasize positive traits that can help children blossom.

Here is a list of the positive character traits you’ll find in the picture books below:

bravery confidence curiosity empathy honesty integrity kindness resilience perseverance self-respect

Positive character traits are more than personality traits; they’re positive characteristics of someone’s personality that we all can work toward growing, developing, and building. We show this through example (modeling) and explicit instruction including in mentor children’s books like these.

Before, during, and after reading, ask students about what each character trait looks like. What is the main character doing that show this positive trait? What is the opposite of this positive trait? (the negative?) What does that look like?

Other positive character traits include: creativity fairness loyalty optimism patience respect

Teaching Positive Character Traits Through Picture Books

Here is a character trait book list for preschoolers and up that can illustrate these eleven essential characteristics.

Character Traits: Bravery, Resilience, and Perseverance

In Jabari Tries , he has many positive character traits including resiliency, problem-solving, and determination to make his invention fly even when it is hard and he is frustrated. But with some flexible thinking and help from an unlikely source (his little sister), he can make it soar after all!

Character Traits: Honesty and Integrity

Character Trait: Curiosity

Character Traits:   Kindness, Empathy, Acceptance

Character Traits: Confidence and Self-Respect

KEEP READING

Books about Kindness

Books about Courage

Growth Mindset Picture Books

Best Villians in Children’s Books

Meredith is a licensed teacher with almost twenty years of experience in education. Her specialties are holistic learning, early literacy, and social-emotional development. She is also a reading specialist, artist, and mom of two. She loves all things bookish, magical, and cozy. Find her at Story Adventures With Meredith https://storyadventureswithmeredith.com/.

Similar Posts

New Middle-Grade Nonfiction Winter 2019

Why Kids Need to Learn About the Wild World

Story Games For Kids and Families

New in Chapter Books

How to Have Fun With Geography: Play Scrambled States Game

21 Children’s Books That Encourage Cooperation

Leave a reply cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

I am currently working on a 40 Book Review Project for a college course and over half of the books I chose teach a positive character trait. I want to teach PREK, so I chose to use this project to find some of the best books in this category. I will have to use one of the books you suggested in the project. Thank you!

you’re welcome!

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Front Psychol

Personality traits and complex problem solving: Personality disorders and their effects on complex problem-solving ability

Ulrike kipman.

1 College of Education, Institute of Educational Sciences and Research, Salzburg, Austria

Stephan Bartholdy

2 Department of Psychology, University of Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany

Marie Weiss

3 Department of Psychology, University of Graz, Graz, Austria

Wolfgang Aichhorn

4 Department of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, Paracelsus Medical Private University, Salzburg, Austria

Günter Schiepek

5 Institute of Synergetics and Psychotherapy Research, Paracelsus Medical Private University, Salzburg, Austria

Associated Data

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.

Complex problem solving (CPS) can be interpreted as the number of psychological mechanisms that allow us to reach our targets in difficult situations, that can be classified as complex, dynamic, non-transparent, interconnected, and multilayered, and also polytelic. The previous results demonstrated associations between the personality dimensions neuroticism, conscientiousness, and extraversion and problem-solving performance. However, there are no studies dealing with personality disorders in connection with CPS skills. Therefore, the current study examines a clinical sample consisting of people with personality and/or depressive disorders. As we have data for all the potential personality disorders and also data from each patient regarding to potential depression, we meet the whole range from healthy to impaired for each personality disorder and for depression. We make use of a unique operationalization: CPS was surveyed in a simulation game, making use of the microworld approach. This study was designed to investigate the hypothesis that personality traits are related to CPS performance. Results show that schizotypal, histrionic, dependent, and depressive persons are less likely to successfully solve problems, while persons having the additional behavioral characteristics of resilience, action orientation, and motivation for creation are more likely to successfully solve complex problems.

Introduction

A problem arises when a person is unable to reach the desired goal. Problem-solving refers to the cognitive activities aimed at removing the obstacle separating the present situation from the target situation ( Betsch et al., 2011 ). In our daily lives, we are constantly confronted with new challenges and a plethora of possibilities to address them. Accordingly, problem-solving requires the ability to identify these possibilities and select the best option in the unfamiliar situations. It is, therefore, an important competence to deal with new conditions, adapt to changing circumstances, and react flexibly to new challenges ( Kipman, 2020 ).

Even tasks for which the sequence of choices to be taken is relatively straight-forward, such as in the process of navigating to a certain destination in a foreign city or cooperative decision-making during psychotherapy, appear as a highly diversified process, when considered in detail ( Schiepek, 2009 ; Schiepek et al., 2016a ). However, most problems we face in everyday life are not as well defined and do not necessarily have an unambiguous solution. The ability to deal with such sophisticated problems, i.e., complex problem solving (CPS) , is of particular relevance in everyday settings.

Funke (2001 , 2003 , 2012) and Dörner and Funke (2017) , identified five dimensions along which complex problems can be characterized: (i) The complexity of the problem arises from the number of variables contributing to the problem, which in turn affect the number of possible solutions. (ii) The connectivity of the problem arises from the number of interconnections between these variables. (iii) The dynamics of the problem arise from changes in the problem variables or their interconnections over time. These changes can be a result of the person’s actions or are inherent to the problem, i.e., characteristics of the variables themselves or a result of interactions between the variables. (iv) The non-transparency of a problem refers to the extent to which the target situation, the variables involved, their interactions and dynamics cannot be ascertained. (v) Finally, complex problems are usually polytelic , i.e., they have more than one target situation.

Accordingly, CPS requires the ability to model the problem space, i.e., understand which variables are involved and how they are interconnected, the ability to handle a large number of variables at the same time, judge the relevance and success probability of possibilities, identify the interconnections between variables and the inherent dynamics thereof, judge the consequences of one’s own actions with regards to the problem space, and collect relevant knowledge to deal with non-transparency.

Tasks to measure this complex set of abilities were developed by Dörner (1980 , 1986) , who criticized that the measurement of general intelligence tended to use simple tasks that are not comparable with the level of complexity of real-world problems. He proposed measuring intelligent behavior in computerized environments specifically adapted to simulate the properties of sophisticated problems in everyday settings ( Danner et al., 2011b ). cf. Dörner et al. (1983) in research used settings referred to as Microworlds to assess the way participants acted under heterogeneous, dynamic, and non-transparent conditions. Participants were instructed to administrate a tiny German village by the name of Lohhausen by creating the ideal conditions for the village and its inhabitants ( Hussy, 1998 , p. 140–141). This microworld comprised more than 2,000 variables, guaranteeing an elevated level of complexity, which also required a high-level operationalization of CPS. However, the general validity of the performance at Lohhausen turned out to be a questionable issue, since the performance was operationalized as a factor composed of 6 main criteria, some of which were subjective assessments. Accordingly, the parameter definition for CPS performance was rather ambiguous. The reason for this ambiguity is that the vague description of the objective, i.e., to establish a respectable standard of well-being among the inhabitants—gave room for subjective interpretation (cf. Hussy, 1998 , p. 146–150). Since then, the psychometric validity of the CPS performance in complex microworlds has been demonstrated by several researchers (e.g., Wittmann and Hattrup, 2004 ; Danner et al., 2011a ).

Because of the high-translational relevance of the topic, the question arises how and which individual differences contribute to more or less efficient solving of the complex problems, such as Microworlds. Individual differences in problem-solving have been described along a cognitive dimension, i.e., the problem-solving style , and an emotional–motivational dimension, i.e., the problem orientation ( D’Zurilla et al., 2011 ). Cognitively, problems can be solved in a rational style , i.e., systematically and deliberate, in an impulsive style , i.e., careless, hurried, and often incomplete, or in an avoidance style via passivity and inaction leading to procrastination ( D’Zurilla et al., 2002 , as cited in D’Zurilla et al., 2011 ). Emotionally, people with a positive problem orientation , see problems as an opportunity for success, i.e., a “challenge” and are confident that the problem is solvable, and that they will be able to solve it. People with a negative problem orientation view problems as an opportunity for failure, i.e., a “threat” and doubt their ability to solve the problem ( D’Zurilla et al., 2011 ).

Some studies have already related basic personality traits, such as the BIG-5, to the way a person tackles complex problems. For example, it has been demonstrated that individuals who score high in conscientiousness, openness for experience, and extraversion also have higher problem-solving abilities. In contrast, individuals with higher scores in neuroticism show poor problem-solving abilities ( D’Zurilla et al., 2011 ). McMurran et al. (2001) demonstrate that this is a result of the way in which neurotic individuals approach problems. Neuroticisms was significantly associated with an impulsive or avoidant problem-solving style, and a negative problem orientation. Vice versa, Arslan (2016) identified a positive relationship between constructive problem-solving and being extrovert, receptive, and open to new learning experiences, and also high in tolerability and accountability.

The present study seeks to extend these findings to individuals with “extreme” levels of personality traits, i.e., individuals with personality disorders, taking into consideration the way in which personality characteristics manifest in everyday situations, such as work–place situations. Following the most current diagnostic approach to personality disorders as outlined in the ICD-11, the individual accentuations of 9 disorder-relevant personality traits were taken into account, including:

• (i) Paranoid traits , i.e., the extent of mistrust toward others.
• (ii) Schizoid traits , i.e., the inability to express feelings and experience pleasure, resulting in fierce separation from affective contacts and also friends and social gatherings with an excessive preference for the magical worlds.
• (iii) Antisocial traits , i.e., the extent of disregard for social obligations and callous lack of involvement in feelings for others, resulting in aggressive behavior.
• (iv) Borderline traits , i.e., the tendency to act out impulses without regard to consequences, associated with unpredictable and erratic moods.
• (v) Histrionic traits , i.e., the tendency to overdramatize and show a theatrical, exaggerated expression of feelings, suggestibility, egocentricity, hedonism, and a constant desire for recognition, external stimuli, and attention.
• (vi) Dependent traits , i.e., excessive and inappropriate agreeableness ( Costa and McCrae, 1986 ) resulting in major anxiety about separation, feelings of helplessness, and a tendency to subordinate oneself to the desires of others.
• (vii) Schizotypal traits , i.e., extreme levels of introversion, resulting in social disengagement.
• (viii) Obsessive-compulsive (anankastic) traits , i.e., excessive conscientiousness, involving feelings of doubt, perfectionism, and inflexibility.
• (ix) Depressive traits , i.e., the tendency toward persistent feelings of sadness and loss of interest.

Few studies have assessed problem-solving, much less CPS, in patients with personality disorders. Previous research shows, that patients with histrionic and narcissistic personality types show an impulsive problem-solving style, whereas avoidant and dependent individuals show a negative problem orientation ( McMurran et al., 2007 ). In addition, people who are in a depressive mood ( Lyubomirsky et al., 1999 ), or even clinically depressed and anxious have difficulties generating effective solutions to problems ( Marx et al., 1992 ). Accordingly, we hypothesize a negative association between high accentuations of disorder-related personality traits and CPS. The aim of the present study was to explore, which disorders were most severely affected and whether this association also manifested in work-related situations.

Action-orientated problem-solving is particularly required in areas where people are under a lot of stress, for example, in entrepreneurship, team leading in the clinical settings, or firefighting. Especially when a work-related crisis appears, action-oriented problem-solving is important, because it unites handling both novel and routine demands ( Rudolph and Repenning, 2002 , as cited in Rudolph et al., 2009 ). Rudolph et al. (2009) found that only by taking action, information cues become available. Accordingly, both CPS and everyday situations in the work-place require the ability to cope with stressful events and protect oneself from the negative effects of stress, i.e., resilience ( Lee and Cranford, 2008 , as cited in Wagnild and Young, 1993 ; Fletcher and Sarkar, 2013 ). Indeed, individuals with a high trait resilience are more willing to take action in problem-solving ( Li and Yang, 2009 , as cited in Li et al., 2013 ). This is consistent with previous research demonstrating that effective problem-solving abilities go along with high-psychological resilience ( Garcia-Dia et al., 2013 ; Williamson et al., 2013 ; Crowther et al., 2016 , as cited in Pinar et al., 2018 ). Pinar et al. (2018) even found that problem-solving competencies can be increased by increasing psychological resilience and self-confidence levels. Accordingly, identifying which personality disorders are most severely affected in these areas may also provide hints for psychotherapy.

Materials and methods

Participants.

The present study included data from N = 242 adults (49.1% male) with personality disorders and/or depressive disorders, with ages ranging from 17 to 48 years (mean: 26.5 years). The participants were given five assessment batteries and a set of demographic variables, which included game experience. They were also given a commercial complex problem-solving (CPS) game known as Cities: Skylines involving the construction and managing of a city like a mayor would with the goal of growing the city while not running out of money. Participants were patients from psychiatric and psychosomatic hospitals, who got follow-up treatment directly after leaving the hospital. The treatment took place in a panel practice for aftercare where the CPS experiment was done (see Figure 1 ).

Exemplary model of some (not all) factors that influence the number of inhabitants and the general happiness of the population in Cities: Skylines (CSL). The number of related variables illustrates the complexity, connectivity, and polytely in the simulated environment.

Personality questionnaires

In order to obtain a comprehensive diagnosis and measure disordered personality traits in a continuous fashion, three personality questionnaires were used, including the PSSI, SCID-5-PD, and MMPI-II. While the PSSI scores were used in the statistical analysis, SCID-5-PD scores and MMPI-II scores were used to confirm the PSSI diagnosis. Furthermore, in order to assess the manifestation of disordered personality traits in work-related situations, we used the BIP.

The Persönlichkeits-Stil und Störungs-Inventar (PSSI; Kuhl and Kazen, 2009 ) is a self-report instrument that measures the comparative manifestation of the character traits. These are designed as non-pathological analogs of the personality disorders described in the psychiatric diagnostic manuals DSM-IV and ICD-10. The PSSI comprises 140 items assigned to 14 scales: PN (willful-paranoid), SZ (independent-schizoid), ST (intuitive-schizotypal), BL (impulsive-borderline), HI (agreeable-histrionic), NA (ambitious-narcissistic), SU (self-critical-avoidant), AB (loyal-dependent), ZW (conscientious-compulsive—anankastic), NT (critical-negativistic), DP (calm-depressive), SL (helpful-selfless), RH (optimistic-rhapsodic), and AS (self-assertive-antisocial). Patients rate each item on a 4-point Likert scale (from 0 to 3) and continuous scale values are calculated as the sum of the 10 item ratings belonging to a scale. Accordingly, a maximum value of 30 can be achieved for each scale. In this study, we focused on the nine traits PN, SZ, ST, BL, HI, AB, ZW, DP, and AS, as the other measured traits are not listed as personality disorders in the ICD-10 or DSM-V.

The Strukturiertes Klinisches Interview für DSM-5—Persönlichkeitsstörungen (SCID-5-PD; First et al., 2019 ) is a semi-structured diagnostic questionnaire that can be used to evaluate the 10 personality disorders included in the DSM-5 in clusters A, B, and C, as well as disorders in the category “not otherwise specified personality disorder.” Each DSM-5 criterion is assigned corresponding interview questions to assist the interviewer in assessing the criterion. It is possible to utilize the SCID-5-PD to categorically diagnose personality disorders (present or absent) ( First et al., 2019 ). In addition, regulations are also included which can be used to create dimensional ratings.

The MMPI ® –2 ( Butcher et al., 2000 ) is a revised and completely re-normed version of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI). With the help of the MMPI ® –2, a relatively complete picture of the personality structure can be obtained in an economical way.

The Bochumer Inventar zur berufsbezogenen Persönlichkeitsbeschreibung (BIP; Hossiep and Paschen, 2019 ) measures personality traits in a work-related context. A total of 210 items are assigned to 4 global dimensions including 14 subscales. These include work orientation (diligence, agility, and focus), professional approach ( performance-, creativity-, and management motivation), social competencies (sensitivity, social skills, sociability, teamwork, and assertiveness), and mental constitution (emotional stability, resilience, and self-confidence) on a continuous scale. Patients respond to each item on a 6-point Likert scale.

Game experience

As possible previous experience with the CPS game may affect the level of problem-solving efficiency during the test, participants were asked to rate their previous engagement with simulation-based urban development games on a 4-point Likert scale with response options running from “none” to “very much.” The same poll also featured a listing of 20 symbols from Cities: Skylines, in combination with their meanings (e.g., “no electricity”) for participants to make use of during their quest. At the end, participants were asked to rate their experience based on a 5-point scaling reaching from 1 (extremely simple) to 5 (super challenging). At last, the researcher also marked on each poll sheet, whether (a) the individual patient was able to accomplish the mission (Success, Failure, or Patient Breakup), and (b) the exact time frame of the testing session (morning, afternoon, or evening).

Cities: Skylines (CSL)

The computer-based simulation game Cities: Skylines ( Paradox Interactive, 2015a ), which can be downloaded from Steam for about 30 dollars, explores the construction and management of a city and was implemented in the current study as a Microworld scenario. Much like in the successful microworld Lohhausen ( Dörner et al., 1983 ), gamers in Cities: Skylines basically act in lieu of the city’s mayor, taking over all of his authority and duties. As promised in the user manual, it “offers endless sandbox play in a city that keeps offering new areas, resources, and technologies to explore, continually presenting the player with new challenges to overcome” ( Paradox Interactive, 2015b , p. 4). The game fulfills the parameters of Brehmer and Dörner’s (1993) microworlds and meets the standards of complex problems according to Funke ’s ( 2001; 2012 ). The examples below illustrate the way in which these features are relevant for Cities: Skylines (see Figure 2 ; see also de Kooter, 2015 ; Paradox Interactive, 2015b ):

Procedure of the study.

• (i) Complexity is fulfilled because the system is made up of a variety of components including a vast series of different constructions (areas, basic resources, roads, constructions, electricity, water supplies, etc.), options (fiscal matters, budgeting, credit, traffic management, security, healthcare, and education), and parameters (population density, inhabitant satisfaction, environmental issues, and delinquency). As an example, while purchasing a wind turbine, the participant may weigh related costs, budgeted funds for the week, potential noise pollution, the way the turbine blends into the landscape vs. the rate of efficiency, along with the hardware required to connect the device to the town’s existing network, etc.
• (ii) Connectivity is fulfilled because the parameters in the model are heavily interconnected. Each component is related to at least one other element (see Figure 2 ) implementing a network of correlations and interdependencies. As an example, residential zones should not be located in proximity to wind turbines, as the amount of noise pollution caused by their operation might affect the quality of life in that zone, which again might make the area less attractive and lower the property values.
• (iii) Dynamics are fulfilled because the demands of the population are subject to autonomous change, while other variables, e.g., zoning requirements also depend in part on the actions of the participants. While the dynamics of the game cause the population and the territory of the city to grow, the whole infrastructure becomes inadequate over time and needs to be adapted. Water and electricity infrastructures, the number of schools, clinics, municipal cemeteries, etc., that used to suffice for the population then need to be expanded. Moreover, depending on its frequentation, each building or road has a certain life span until it is left abandoned and will have to be replaced.
• (iv) Non-transparency is not featured as an essential part of the Cities: Skylines gameplay, but is instead primarily caused by its connectivity and intricacy. While playing the game, the number of variables and their interconnections make active exploration essential. Independent of the player’s actions; however, there are also very non-transparent features, such as random death waves or an (unexpectedly) higher incidence of fires in the area following the first construction of a firefighter center by the player.
• (v) Polytely arises since the objective to increase the population of the city requires the simultaneous achievement of a large number of minor tasks, which may be conflicting (e.g., strategic allocation of bus stops for both students and employees). The situation is further complicated by unforeseen complications (e.g., water pollution causing disease spread), which force the player to abandon his/her ongoing task and give full attention to the new issue. The source of the problem must be evaluated while new strategies for potential solutions are weighed against proven approaches. For the current research, each patient was provided with identical settings, including a sizeable, completely functional city with a number of 2,600 residents, 50,000 game money points, and a general population satisfaction level of 90%. Their subsequent task was to boost the population of the cities to 5,000 residents while making sure that the residents were not poorly (as measured by an average satisfaction level of at least 75%) and the bank balance remained positive. On the contrary, the task was left unaccomplished if (a) the population of the urban areas dropped to 1,000, (b) the balance of the account dropped to 0, or (c) the maximum game time of 120 min had elapsed. Patients received the tip, that it was necessary to set priorities and focus on the mission.

Based on the task of raising the number of inhabitants of the city, a parameter of CPS performance was calculated as the average growth of the population relative to the target size of 5,000:

Gamers were instructed not to modify the time settings during the game, to allow for comparable measurements across participants.

Given that the participants were patients from psychiatric and psychosomatic hospitals, many of them lacked game experience. To increase test fairness between patients with different levels of game experience, all the participants were provided with a brief introduction on how to handle a list of fundamental game features:

• • placement of streets, buildings, water pumps, and wind turbines;
• • positioning of roads, structures, water pipes, and turbines;
• • division of zones (housing, businesses, and industries/offices zones) and the mode of bulldozing;
• • structural survey of power, water lines, and waste collection;
• • search for the info stats to view the requirements of the residents;

Statistical analysis

For all the statistical analyses, SPSS version 26.0 (2020) was used.

On the basis of the ICD-11 definition, the personality traits were not analyzed categorically (as before), but dimensionally. To relate the expression of currently recognized personality disorders to performance in CPS, we used correlation analyses between CPS performance and the 9 scale scores of the PSSI (verified by the SCID and MMPI-2) and also the 4 overall dimensions of the BIP. Given the high number of resulting correlations, p -values could be misleading because of the multiple testing. Accordingly, we identified relevant personality traits for CPS using (i) The Bonferonni-correction of p -values and (ii) an effect sizes cut-off of r > 0.25.

In a second step, we explored, which facets of the BIP contributed to the associations with CPS performance in order to get a more fine-grained picture of possible effects.

In sum, we sought to identify the strongest predictors of CPS performance using 3 multivariate regression models with the 9 clinical traits, controlling for gender in the 2nd model and additional game experience in the 3rd model.

Table 1 lists the experience with urban planning simulation games in the current sample. About 50% of the patients rated the game as “easy” or “rather easy,” 37.5% rated it as “not easy but also not difficult” and 12.6% responded that the game was “difficult” or “very difficult.”

Experience of the sample ( N = 242, N = 210 valid answers).

Correlation analyses show that CPS performance was negatively related to schizotypal ( r = −0.46), histrionic ( r = −0.44), and depressive ( r = −0.46) personality accentuations. The higher the expression in any of these areas, the higher the probability of failing in CPS. Effect sizes (: = r ) were > 0.40 for each of these traits (compare Table 2 ). Furthermore, CPS-performance was negatively correlated with the dependent ( r = −0.29) and paranoid ( r = −0.25) personality traits, but coefficients were much lower and therefore of less practical relevance as for schizotypical, histrionic, and depressive traits. Schizoid ( r = 0.04), borderline ( r = 0.17), anankastic ( r = −0.05), and anti-social ( r = −0.04) traits were not significantly associated with the CPS (see Table 3 ).

Correlations of CPS and personality disorders with work-related personality manifestations as assessed with the BIP.

Correlations surpassing an effect size of r = 0.25 are highlighted in bold font, italic numbers have a lower effect size but are still significant when taking only the Bonferroni Correction into account, **p < 0.01, *p < 0.05.

Correlations between personality traits and CPS performance.

Correlations surpassing an effect size of r = 0.25 are highlighted in bold font, **p < 0.01, *p < 0.05 but not significant when taking the Bonferroni Correction into account.

Regarding the work-related manifestations of the personality traits, CPS-performance was positively associated with the overall BIP dimensions of work orientation ( r = 0.27), professional orientation ( r = 0.34), and psychological constitution ( r = 0.25), but negatively with the overall BIP dimension social competencies ( r = −0.25). In order to explore these associations further, CPS performance and personality disorders were related to the sub-facet scores of the BIP (see Table 2 ).

Professional orientation was also negatively correlated with depressive traits ( r = −0.40), the psychological constitution was negatively correlated with borderline traits (−0.38), dependent traits (−0.31), and with depressive traits (−0.26).

The results demonstrate that particularly the facets resilience, action orientation, and motivation for creation were positively correlated with successful problem-solving, while sociability and CPS were significantly negatively correlated. The higher the resilience, action orientation and motivation for creation and the lower the sociability, the better was the CPS performance. When we take Bonferroni correction into account, also conscientiousness and motivation for leadership (italic in the table) were negatively correlated with the CPS performance.

Interestingly, the associations between personality disorders and work-related personality expressions were moderate. The strongest associations arose for resilience, which was negatively associated with several personality disorders, particularly, borderline, histrionic, and dependent traits. Focusing on the traits that showed the strongest impairment in CPS, schizotypal traits were associated with high sociability ( r = 0.36) and to a lesser extent with low-action orientation ( r = −0.22), which in turn related to low-CPS performance. Histrionic traits were related to low resilience ( r = −0.28), which in turn related to low-CPS performance. Depressive traits were related to low motivation for creation ( r = −0.25), and also low-leadership motivation ( r = −0.34) and to a lesser extent low-achievement motivation ( r = −0.21), low-action orientation ( r = −0.20), and low resilience ( r = −0.24), which in turn is related to low-CPS performance.

In a combined model with all 9 personality traits (adjusted R 2 = 36.7%), we confirmed that histrionic traits have the biggest negative impact on CPS performance (β = −0.351), followed by schizotypical (β = −0.312) and depressive traits (β = −0.303). Also, in the multiple regression model, dependent and paranoid traits are negatively related to CPS performance. If gender is the part of the model and held constant in a model containing the 9 traits, histrionic traits still have a significant and practical relevant impact of β′ = −0.325. (Condition Index = 24). The same holds true when also taking game experience into account (β ′ ′ = −0.319) see Table 4 .

Combined regression model, β′: controlling for gender, β ′ ′ controlling for gender and game experience.

Correlations surpassing an effect size of r = 0.25 are highlighted in bold font, **p < 0.001.

(Condition Index checking for possible multicollinearity is moderate with CI = 22, 36, so multicollinearity is moderately given, βs are, therefore, interpretable, p -values can be slightly biased, βs with 0.3 and higher found in this model for the 3 traits have for certain a significant and practically relevant impact).

The present study examined the influences of personality traits on the CPS performance in a clinical sample of individuals with a range of different psychiatric diagnoses. The aim of this empirical analysis was to extend previous research on individual differences in CPS to extreme personality traits as observed in personality disorders, and also their manifestation in work-related situations. We explored, which personality dimensions were most strongly associated with impairments in the CPS.

With regards to the clinical personality dimensions (i.e., dimensionally defined personality disorders), statistical analyses revealed that schizotypal, histrionic, dependent, and depressive personality traits were associated negatively with the participants’ performances in the given CPS task (consistent with, e.g., McMurran et al., 2007 ). Previous findings on these relationships were, therefore, further confirmed, specifically in showing that subjects with high levels of depressiveness and anxiety seemed to have more difficulties in finding and executing effective solutions to the given complex problems (e.g., see Marx et al., 1992 ; Lyubomirsky et al., 1999 ).

Unsurprisingly, no single clinical personality structure was associated with better problem-solving performances (as compared with the non-clinical trait levels). As personality disorders are generally linked with increased levels of neuroticism, which subsequently was consistently found to negatively influence problem-solving (e.g., McMurran et al., 2001 ; D’Zurilla et al., 2011 ), this result is also consistent with the general clinical intuition. But, contrary to the previous findings ( D’Zurilla et al., 2011 ), conscientiousness had no significant impact on CPS performance in this sample.

Further analyses gave deeper insights into relationships that were found in the first part of the data analyses. They are especially allowed to draw conclusions for the clinical patients. It was found that higher levels of resilience (consistent with, e.g., Garcia-Dia et al., 2013 ; Williamson et al., 2013 ; Crowther et al., 2016 , as cited in Li and Yang, 2009 ; Pinar et al., 2018 , as cited in Li et al., 2013 ), action orientation, and motivation for creation (e.g., see Eseryel et al., 2014 ) positively influenced the problem-solving performance as additional behavioral characteristics . This indicates that, even for high levels of usually negative personality traits, a person’s ability to successfully solve problems will not be impaired automatically if the person is also very resilient to the effects of negative events and highly action-oriented and motivated when facing problems. Hence, this interpretation is consistent with the conclusions of a study by Güss et al. (2017) , who found that more approach-oriented individuals outperformed avoidance-oriented participants in the complex problems. In this way, these positive traits act against the negative impact of otherwise impairing personality traits or even disorders. Interestingly, sociability was found to have a negative influence on the participants’ performances, while no significant influences on social skills, team orientation, or self-confidence were found. Therefore, it seems to be more comprehensible why some of us deal easily with complex problems and can manage things forward-looking while others do not succeed in making good decisions.

Data availability statement

Ethics statement.

Ethical review and approval was not required for the study on human participants in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. The patients/participants provided their written informed consent to participate in this study.

Author contributions

UK was the main author, did all calculations, research to and wrote the article. SB did the programming of the microworlds and all technical support. MW did the review on the introduction and discussion part. WA and GS served as a consultant. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.

Acknowledgments

We thank Martina Mathur and Belinda Pletzer for proofreading and translating.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

• Arslan C. (2016). Interpersonal problem solving, self-compassion and personality traits in university students. Educ. Res. Rev. 11 474–481. 10.5897/ERR2015.2605 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Betsch T., Funke J., PLessner H. (2011). Denken - urteilen, entscheiden, problemlösen . Berlin: Springer. [ Google Scholar ]
• Brehmer B., Dörner D. (1993). Experiments with computer-simulated microworlds: Escaping both the narrow straits of the laboratory and the deep blue sea of the field study. Comput. Hum. Behav. 9 171–184. 10.1016/0747-5632(93)90005-D [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Butcher J. N., Dahlstrom W. G., Graham J. R., Tellegen A., Kaemmer B. (2000). Minnesota multiphasic personality inventory ® -2. Bern: Huber. [ Google Scholar ]
• Costa P. T., McCrae R. R. (1986). Personality stability and its implications for clincal psychology. Clin. Psychol. Rev. 6 407–423. 10.1016/0272-7358(86)90029-2 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Crowther S., Hunter B., McAra-Couper J., Warren L., Gilkison A., Hunter M., et al. (2016). Sustainability and resilience in midwifery: A discussion paper. Midwifery 40 40–48. 10.1016/j.midw.2016.06.005 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dörner D. (1980). On the difficulties people have in dealing with complexity . Simul. Games 11 , 87–106. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dörner D. (1986). Diagnostik der operativen intelligenz . Diagnostica 32 , 290–308. [ Google Scholar ]
• D’Zurilla T. J., Maydeu-Olivares A., Gallardo-Pujol D. (2011). Predicting social problem solving using personality traits. Pers. Individ. Differ. 50 142–147. 10.1016/j.paid.2010.09.015 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• D’Zurilla T. J., Nezu A. M., Maydeu-Olivares A. (2002). The Social Problem-Solving Inventory-Revised (SPSI-R): Technical Manual. North Tonawanda, NY: Multi-Health Systems, Inc. [ Google Scholar ]
• Danner D., Hagemann D., Holt D. V., Hager M., Schankin A., Wüstenberg S., et al. (2011a). Measuring performance in dynamic decision making. J. Individ. Differ. 32 225–233. 10.1027/1614-0001/a000055 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Danner D., Hagemann D., Schankin A., Hager M., Funke J. (2011b). Beyond IQ: A latent state-trait analysis of general intelligence, dynamic decision making, and implicit learning. Intelligence 39 323–334. 10.1016/j.intell.2011.06.004 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• de Kooter S. (2015). Cities Skylines Guide: Beginner Tips and Tricks Guide. Available Online at: https://www.gameplayinside.com/strategy/cities-skylines/cities-skylines-guide-beginner-tips-and-tricks-guide/ . [ Google Scholar ]
• Dörner D., Funke J. (2017). Complex problem solving: What it is and what it is not. Front. Psychol. 8 : 1153 . 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01153 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dörner D., Kreuzig H. W., Reither F., Stäudel T. (1983). Lohhausen: Vom Umgang mit Unbestimmtheit und Komplexität. Soziologische Rev. 8 : 93 . [ Google Scholar ]
• Eseryel D., Law V., Ifenthaler D., Ge X., Miller R. (2014). An investigation of the interrelationships between motivation, engagement, and complex problem solving in game-based learning. Educ. Technol. Soc. 17 42–53. [ Google Scholar ]
• First M., Williams J., Smith B., Spitzer R. (2019). SCID-5-PD. Göttingen: Hogrefe. [ Google Scholar ]
• Fletcher D., Sarkar M. (2013). A review of psychological resilience. Eur. Psychol. 18 12–23. 10.1027/1016-9040/a000124 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Funke J. (2001). Dynamic systems as tools for analysing human judgement. Think. Reason. 7 69–89. 10.1080/13546780042000046 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Funke J. (2003). Problemlösendes Denken. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer. [ Google Scholar ]
• Funke J. (2012). “ Complex Problem Solving ,” in Encyclopedia of the Sciences of Learning , ed. Seel N. M. (Boston, MA: Springer US; ), 682–685. 10.1007/978-1-4419-1428-6_685 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Garcia-Dia M. J., DiNapoli J. M., Garcia-Ona L., Jakubowski R., O’Flaherty D. (2013). Concept analysis: Resilience. Arch. Psychiatr. Nurs. 27 264–270. 10.1016/j.apnu.2013.07.003 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Güss C. D., Burger M. L., Dörner D. (2017). The role of motivation in complex problem solving. Front. Psychol. 8 : 851 . 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00851 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hossiep R., Paschen M. (2019). Bochumer Inventar zur berufsbezogenen Persönlichkeitsbeschreibung . Göttingern: Hogrefe. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hussy W. (1998). Denken und Problemlösen. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kipman U. (2020). Komplexes problemlösen . Wiesbaden: Springer. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kuhl J., Kazen M. (2009). Persönlichkeits-Stil-und Störungs-Inventar . Göttingen: Hogrefe. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lee H. H., Cranford J. A. (2008). Does resilience moderate the associations between parental problem drinking and adolescents’ internalizing and externalizing behaviors?: A study of Korean adolescents. Drug Alcohol Depend. 96 213–221. 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2008.03.007 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Li M. H., Yang Y. (2009). Determinants of problem solving, social support-seeking, and avoidance: A path analytic model. Int. J. Stress Manag. 16 155–176. 10.1037/a0016844 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Li M. H., Eschenauer R., Yang Y. (2013). Influence of efficacy and resilience on problem solving in the United States, Taiwan, and China. Multicult. Couns. Dev. 41 144–157. 10.1002/j.2161-1912.2013.00033.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lyubomirsky S., Tucker K. L., Caldwell N. D. (1999). Why ruminators are poor problem solvers: Clues from the phenomenology of dysphoric rumination. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 77 1041–1060. 10.1037/0022-3514.77.5.1041 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Marx E. M., Williams J. M., Claridge G. C. (1992). Depression and social problem solving. J. Abnorm. Psychol. 101 78–86. 10.1037/0021-843X.101.1.78 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• McMurran M., Duggan C., Christopher G., Huband N. (2007). The relationships between personality disorders and social problem solving in adults. Pers. Individ. Differ. 42 145–155. 10.1016/j.paid.2006.07.002 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• McMurran M., Egan V., Blair M., Richardson C. (2001). The relationship between social problem-solving and personality in mentally disordered offenders. Pers. Individ. Differ. 30 517–524. 10.1016/S0191-8869(00)00050-7 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Paradox Interactive (2015a). Cities: Skylines. Stockholm, SE: Paradox Interactive. [ Google Scholar ]
• Paradox Interactive (2015b). Cities: Skylines: User Manual. Stockholm, SE: Paradox Interactive. [ Google Scholar ]
• Pinar S. E., Yildirim G., Sayin N. (2018). Investigating the psychological resilience, self-confidence and problemsolving skills of midwife candidates. Nurse Educ. Today 64 144–149. 10.1016/j.nedt.2018.02.014 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rudolph J. W., Repenning N. P. (2002). Disaster dynamics: Understanding the role of quantity in organizational collapse. Adm. Sci. Q. 47 1–30. 10.2307/3094889 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rudolph J. W., Morrison J. B., Carroll J. S. (2009). The dynamics of action-oriented problem solving: Linking interpretation and choice. Acad. Manag. Rev. 34 733–756. 10.5465/AMR.2009.44886170 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Schiepek G. (2009). Complexity and nonlinear dynamics in psychotherapy. Eur. Rev. 17 331–356. 10.1017/S1062798709000763 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Schiepek G., Stöger-Schmidinger B., Aichhorn W., Schöller H., Aas B. (2016a). Systemic case formulation, individualized process monitoring, and state dynamics in a case of dissociative identity disorder. Front. Psychol. Clin. Settings 7 : 1545 . 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01545 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wagnild G. M., Young H. M. (1993). Development and psychometric evaluation of the resilience scale. J. Nurs. Meas. 1 165–178. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Williamson G. R., Health V., Proctor-Childs T. (2013). Vocation, friendship and resilience: A study exploring nursing student and staff views on retention and attrition. Open J. Nurs. 7 149–156. 10.2174/1874434601307010149 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wittmann W. W., Hattrup K. (2004). The relationship between performance in dynamic systems and intelligence. Syst. Res. Behav. Sci. 21 393–409. 10.1002/sres.653 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

Graduates entering workforce; skills and traits employers are looking for

FAIRBANKS, Alaska (KTVF) - Graduates, whether high school or college, are beginning to enter the workforce, and employers are looking for specific skill sets.

According to new data from ADP, there are certain traits valued by different kinds of employers. For example, the three most sought after skills for a small business are, “strong work ethic,” “problem solving,” and “detail oriented.”

As for mid-sized companies, “strong work ethic,” “ability to work on a team,” and “problem solving” are the most valued.

The larger employers that have over a thousand employees, are looking for “ability to work on a team,” “strong work ethic,” and “communication and interpersonal skills.”

The commonality between all three employers, atop all other traits, is “strong work ethic.”

If you are on the hunt for a job, consider these sought after traits

Copyright 2024 KTVF. All rights reserved.

Amazon to bring new last-mile facility to Fairbanks

Gov. Dunleavy reacts to Former President Trump’s guilty verdict

Announcer fired after vulgar comments toward women at girls’ soccer game caught on mic

An F-16 faced an in-flight emergency at Eielson AFB

City of Fairbanks cleans up nuisance property after community complaints

Latest news.

Bruhat Soma wins tie breaker in Scripps National Spelling Bee

Graduates entering workforce, skills and traits employers are looking for

Tonight on Investigate TV+