THREATS OF VIOLENCE AND AGREEABLENESS 625 spending was related to but not. Although we suggest that the relation between militarys endin Method 05 grossdomesticproteCGDP.cachconinyaocatedohemil ory.Howeve GDP and serves as an indicator of how the military is prioritized ositively related to threat.rather than safery and security firs n relat on to ot different natic 1979).Sc o eview of military spending and perceptions of security found tha East (three nations). (Ward Mahian.1984). d as military spending increase Results Study 2:Individual-Level Threats of Violence and Results revealed a significant betwe mil Agreeableness 54 1 Study 1 ableness also ir haetheebonbewenmi ha we fou that ther s muc evel ind nd c r54 ation bet oundtrong relation地物/e42 35.p To add s plausib ations (Diener,2000).Thus,to examine whether the relatior test whether the observed d whe mber of po respond to threats of violence with aggr es as les and ats Ho ople respond to th personality cl n38and.46.ps<.01 mselves as Discussion Method Study 1 demons trated a relation betw een threats of viole agreeableness at the national level.As military spending increase Procedur be completin e and ableness.However.the finding is in line with the nption that Big Five Inventory (John&Srivastava,1999)and later the Belief World (BDW mc198 of violence whowill attack ,“There are many dang because it should be somewhat independent of other types of threats (e.g., disease threats or natural disasters). Method To assess military spending we used figures from the CIA World Factbook (2007), which listed the percentage of national gross domestic product (GDP) each country allocated to the mil￾itary. This measure helps to control for national differences in GDP and serves as an indicator of how the military is prioritized in relation to other components of the national budget. To evaluate agreeableness at the national level, we used data reported from Schmitt et al. (2007), in which the Big Five inventory (John & Srivastava, 1999) was administered to 17,837 individuals in 56 different nations. Combining the data on military spending with the data on agreeableness left a total sample of 54 nations representing seven major geopolitical regions: Europe (24 nations), Asia (nine na￾tions), Africa (seven nations), South America (five nations), North America (three nations), Oceania (three nations), and the Middle East (three nations). Results Results revealed a significant, positive correlation between mil￾itary spending and agreeableness, r(54)
.43, p .001. As percent of GDP spent on the military increased, individuals’ agree￾ableness also increased. Exploring the relation between military spending and other Big Five dimensions, we found that there was also a significant, positive correlation between military spending and conscientiousness, r(54)
.35, p
.009, but that there was not a significant correlation between military spending and extro￾version, openness, or neuroticism (rs .10). To address plausible alternative explanations for the relation between military spending and agreeableness, we conducted a series of multiple regression analyses to test whether the observed relation held when statistically controlling for a number of poten￾tially confounding variables. The link between military spending and agreeableness remained significant after individually control￾ling for national GDP, GDP per person, population density, pov￾erty rate, economic disparity, disease prevalence, and other Big Five personality characteristics (s between .38 and .46, ps .01). The observed relation also remained significant when controlling for the same variables in a single regression (
.38, p
.04). Discussion Study 1 demonstrated a relation between threats of violence and agreeableness at the national level. As military spending increased, individuals’ reported being more agreeable. This finding may seem counterintuitive at first, because it is possible that nations that spend a lot on the military would be characterized as hostile and aggressive— characteristics typically associated with low agree￾ableness. However, the finding is in line with the assumption that increased agreeableness can promote affiliation and aggregation. Furthermore, the relation between military spending and agree￾ableness appears to be quite robust, as it survives controlling for a number of potential confounds. Study 1 also found that military spending was related to conscientiousness but not extroversion, openness to experience, or neuroticism. Although we suggest that the relation between military spending and increased agreeableness is indicative of a more fundamental link between threats of violence and increased agreeableness, it is possible that military spending is not actually related to threats of violence. Rather, military spending could be related to feelings of safety and security, as an increased military presence may reduce the perceived likelihood of attack from another country. However, there are several reasons to believe that military spending is positively related to threat, rather than safety and security. First, the empirical studies reviewed above indicate that military spend￾ing is associated with increases in actual interstate conflict and the perceived probability of conflict (Kriesberg & Klein, 1980; Nor￾dhaus et al., 2009; Wallace, 1979). Second, in our data set, the countries with the greatest percentage of GDP dedicated to mili￾tary spending are Jordan, Israel, and Turkey, countries that exist in a relatively unstable part of the globe and countries for which military conflict is of chronic concern. Finally, a longitudinal review of military spending and perceptions of security found that feelings of security decreased as military spending increased (Ward & Mahjan, 1984). Study 2: Individual-Level Threats of Violence and Agreeableness Study 1 suggested a positive relation between threats of violence and agreeableness at the national level. However, it is plausible that this relation is much different at the individual level within a country than at the national level. For example, studies of subjec￾tive well-being have found a strong relation between the wealth of nations and the well-being of citizens in those nations but a much weaker relation between individual wealth and well-being within nations (Diener, 2000). Thus, to examine whether the relation between threats of violence and agreeableness was similar at the national level and the individual level, Study 2 assessed the rela￾tion between individual differences in the perception of threat and agreeableness. Again, there are two possible outcomes. If people respond to threats of violence with aggression, individuals who perceive more threats of violence should see themselves as less agreeable than those who perceive fewer threats. However, if people respond to threats of violence by affiliating, individuals who perceive more threats of violence should see themselves as more agreeable than those who perceive fewer threats. Method Participants. Fifty-four participants (26 male, 28 female) were recruited from introductory psychology classes as partial fulfillment of their class requirement. Participants entered the lab in groups of three or fewer and were seated at individual computers. Procedure. Participants were told they would be completing a study regarding attitudes and decision making. As part of a larger study, participants completed several questionnaires including the Big Five Inventory (John & Srivastava, 1999) and later the Belief in a Dangerous World (BDW) scale (Altemeyer, 1988). The BDW scale consists of six items related to personal threats of violence (e.g., “There are many dangerous people in our society who will attack someone out of pure meanness, for no reason at THREATS OF VIOLENCE AND AGREEABLENESS 625 This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.