ArticleFrontiers in psychology2025
Linking personality traits to psychological distress among early-career PhD faculty: a gender-based canonical analysis.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Early-career doctoral faculty face unique stressors that may impact their mental health, yet gender-specific personality-mental health patterns in this population remain underexplored, especially within Chinese higher education. Methods: Using simple random sampling, 329 newly appointed doctoral faculty members (<35 years, <1 year teaching experience) were recruited from three comprehensive universities in Chengdu, Southwest China. Personality traits were measured with the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire (16PF), and mental health was assessed using the Symptom Checklist-90 (SCL-90). Descriptive, comparative, and canonical correlation analyses (CCA) were conducted, with interpretation based on effect sizes (Rc Results: About 16.7% of participants screened positive for psychological distress, with obsessive-compulsive symptoms and interpersonal sensitivity being most frequent. Female faculty reported higher anxiety than males. Gender differences also emerged in personality profiles, with men scoring higher in dominance, privateness, and self-reliance, and women higher in warmth and abstractedness. CCA revealed moderate, theoretically consistent associations between personality and mental-health dimensions (men: Rc = 0.57, Rc Conclusion: Personality configurations are moderately associated with mental-health outcomes among early-career doctoral faculty, with stronger multivariate coupling in men. Findings highlight the need for gender-sensitive, person-environment-fit interventions-such as supportive mentoring, balanced workloads, and accessible counseling-to promote sustainable well-being in academic settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.