Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42006738›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of personality2026

Big Five personality traits and voting: A systematic review, meta-analysis, and mega-analysis.

Alexander Georg Stahlmann, Christopher J Hopwood, Ulrich Orth, Luke David Smillie, Wiebke Bleidorn

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of personality, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Alexander Georg StahlmannDepartment of Psychology, University of Zurich, Zurich, Swizerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3694-7610
Christopher J HopwoodDepartment of Psychology, University of Zurich, Zurich, Swizerland.
Ulrich OrthDepartment of Psychology, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4795-515X
Luke David SmillieSchool of Psychological Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
Wiebke BleidornDepartment of Psychology, University of Zurich, Zurich, Swizerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Voting is an important civic behavior that contributes to the vitality of democratic societies. Previous research indicates that personality traits play an important role in voting intentions and behavior, though findings are mixed due to insufficient statistical power and variability in methods and measures. This study synthesizes evidence from a systematic review, leveraging both meta-analysis and mega-analysis to estimate the associations between the Big Five personality traits and voting intentions and behavior. We drew data from 65,036 participants across 17 studies (meta-analysis) and 44,206 participants across 13 studies (mega-analysis). We estimated zero-order correlations between the Big Five traits and voting, and explored moderating effects of personality and voting measures, nationality, gender, and age. We found modest but robust correlations between the Big Five and voting, with effect sizes ranging from .05 to .10. People with stronger intentions to vote were less neurotic and more extraverted, open, agreeable, and conscientious. Low neuroticism was the only trait that predicted voting behavior. Results were somewhat more pronounced in non-U.S. samples. Together, these findings suggest that the Big Five, though modest in effect, are consistent predictors of voting. We discuss implications for future research and applications in fostering voting behavior.

Indexed as

Big Fivepersonalitypoliticalturnoutvoting

Identifiers

PMID42006738
PMCPMC13089860

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.