Abstract:We argue that it is useful to distinguish between three key goals of personality science—description, prediction and explanation—and that attaining them often requires different priorities and methodological approaches. We put forward specific recommendations such as publishing findings with minimum a priori aggregation and exploring the limits of predictive models without being constrained by parsimony and intuitiveness but instead maximizing out‐of‐sample predictive accuracy. We argue that naturally occurring variance in many decontextualized and multidetermined constructs that interest personality scientists may not have individual causes, at least as this term is generally understood and in ways that are human‐interpretable, never mind intervenable. If so, useful explanations are narratives that summarize many pieces of descriptive findings rather than models that target individual cause–effect associations. By meticulously studying specific and contextualized behaviours, thoughts, feelings and goals, however, individual causes of variance may ultimately be identifiable, although such causal explanations will likely be far more complex, phenomenon‐specific and person‐specific than anticipated thus far. Progress in all three areas—description, prediction and explanation—requires higher dimensional models than the currently dominant 'Big Few' and supplementing subjective trait‐ratings with alternative sources of information such as informant‐reports and behavioural measurements. Developing a new generation of psychometric tools thus provides many immediate research opportunities. © 2020 European Association of Personality Psychology

Six independent factors of personality variation: a response to Saucier

A Basic Bivariate Structure of Personality Attributes Evident Across Nine Languages

The factor structure of Chinese personality terms.

Running head: THE FACTOR STRUCTURE The Factor Structure of Chinese Personality Terms

Factors In The Natural Language Of Personality: Re-Analysis, Comparison, And Interpretation Of Six Major Studies

The five and seven factors personality models: differences and similitude between the TCI-R, NEO-FFI-R and ZKPQ-50-CC

Three or five personality dimensions? An analysis of natural language terms in two cultures

Validation of the five-factor model of personality across instruments and observers.

What Explains Personality Covariation? A Test of the Socioecological Complexity Hypothesis

Five Factor Model Personality Disorder Scales: An Introduction to a Special Section on Assessment of Maladaptive Variants of the Five Factor Model

Individual Differences in Selfishness as a Major Dimension of Personality: A Reinterpretation of the Sixth Personality Factor

Best news yet on the six-factor model of well-being

Structure of the Coolidge Axis II Inventory Personality Disorder Scales from the Five-Factor Model Perspective

Descriptive, Predictive and Explanatory Personality Research: Different Goals, Different Approaches, but a Shared Need to Move Beyond the Big Few Traits

The HEXACO Honesty-Humility, Agreeableness, and Emotionality Factors

Dimensions of Personality Pathology

Exploring Personality Structure of the Chinese

Brand personality: theory and dimensionality

Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the Three-Factor Structure of the Schizotypal Personality Questionnaire and Chapman Schizotypy Scales

Looking beyond the Big Five: A selective review of alternatives to the Big Five model of personality

Cross–cultural Generalizability of the Alternative Five–factor Model Using the Zuckerman–Kuhlman–Aluja Personality Questionnaire