Effect Neuroticism to Subjective Well-being

in Faculty of Psychology Student

Heliany Kiswantomo

and Theofanny

Department of Psychology, Jl. Surya Sumantri 65, Maranatha Christian University, Bandung, Indonesia

Keywords: Neuroticism, Subjective Well-being, Students.

Abstract: Students of the Faculty of Psychologists are important to have subjective well-being because after they

graduate, they must serve people. One of the factors that influence the subjective well-being is personality

traits. One of the personality traits according to the Big Five Personality Trait is neuroticism. Respondents in

this study was 467 students of the Faculty of Psychology, selected by Simple Random Sampling technique.

This research used Big Five Inventory – 10 (BFI-10), to measure neuroticism, while subjective well-being

was measured by Satisfaction with Life Scale and Scale of Positive and Negative Experience (SPANE). Data

were analyzed by Linear Regression. The result indicated that neuroticism had a positive correlation and

significant effect with positive affect and life satisfaction, but had no effect on negative affect. The summary

was neuroticism only affected two subjective well-being components. Neuroticism possibly had an indirect

effect on negative affect. Impact of this study is that very important of Faculty of Psychology to design

intervention for student with high and moderate neuroticism.

1 INTRODUCTION

Psychology today is growing rapidly, in line with the

increasing needs in the society for psychology

services. In Indonesia, the number of universities that

hold the Psychology Study Program currently has

increased too. College student of the Faculty of

Psychology will become a psychological scientist.

As a psychological scientist, some services that

they can provide are a psychological testing, scoring,

give a training, give non clinical counselling, and

make a research for development psychology that can

improve people’s welfare. As student, they are

prepared to be ready to give psychological services

when they graduate. They have to learn through

practicum or data collection. They need to ask

people’s consent to be their subject of the

psychological testing, so they can practice through

test, scoring, observation and interview. They also

need to find people who give their consent to be the

counselling subject, which they practice their

counselling skills, and of course under the

supervision. Other things, they need consent of the

people that willing to be the subject, to be given the

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5364-4059

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2938-0997

training from modules that they make in the college.

Even, they also need people’s consent when they

learn to construct research measurement and learn

about psychometric properties. Thus, since college,

psychology student had a lot of contact with people.

Psychology student need to prioritize the well-being

of the people they give services, as regulated in the

Psychological Code of Ethics. They need to learn not

to put their personal interest when dealing with

people who will be their subject of assessment or

respondent of their research. Learning to treat others

according to the guidelines of the Code of Ethics is

very important for a psychology student, who one day

will graduate and enter the field of community

service.

Prioritize the well-being of the individual they

served, or so called as a client, is an important point

in giving psychological services, in order to avoid bad

effects as the result of abuse in its services given. To

be able to prioritize well-being of the client, then the

one who serves also need to live well, or refer to as

subjective well-being. Brammer and MacDonald

(2003) say, people who give this service must have

fulfilling lives, and have a high self-awareness about

380

Kiswantomo, H. and Theofanny, .

Effect Neuroticism to Subjective Well-being in Faculty of Psychology Student.

DOI: 10.5220/0010752500003112

In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Emerging Issues in Humanity Studies and Social Sciences (ICE-HUMS 2021), pages 380-387

ISBN: 978-989-758-604-0

their needs, their life values, or they will tend to use

the helping relationship too much for satisfaction of

their unmet needs. If this condition occurs, then it is

not the client's welfare that takes precedence, but

more self-welfare takes precedence. Therefore, it is

important for Psychology Faculty students to have

well-being before they really plunge as a

professional.

Subjective well-being is how individual evaluate

or appraise their own lives (Diener et al., 2017). This

evaluation can be a cognitive and an affective

reflection. Cognitive means the individual reflective

appraisals of his/ her life satisfaction in the area of

his/her life, for example work, school, family.

Affective reflection includes positive and negative

affect. Positive affect is feelings like joy, excitement;

while negative affect is feelings such as worry,

sadness, anger. Individuals are said to have high

subjective well-being if they feel satisfied with their

life, feel more positive affect, and feel a little negative

affect. Students at Psychology Faculty need to live

themselves as prosperous, which means they have life

satisfaction and more positive affect, so they do not

have too much desire to find the satisfaction of their

own needs, rather they can focus on the well-being of

their clients. If they satisfy with their lives, so they

won’t seek fulfilment from people that they give

services. If they have more positive affects, so they

will treat people in a positive way too. Thus, its

important for psychological students to have

subjective well-being in high degrees.

The importance of subjective well-being has

been researched a lot. High subjective well-being is

positively correlated with the individual health

(Diener et al., 2017), namely with the system of

cardiovascular, immune system, and glands. Life

satisfaction, as a cognitive component of subjective

well-being, is said to contribute related perceptions of

quality of life health (Munoz et al., 2016). Steptoe,

Deaton & Stone (2015) also found that subjective

well-being is related to the ability to survive

(survival). In addition, positive affect, which is a

component of affective subjective well-being, also

develop the quality of social relationship (Moore,

Diener & Tan, 2018). Research results show that it

reinforces the importance of the students at The

Faculty of Psychology has a high subjective well-

being.

Besides the needs to have subjective well-being,

Brammer and Mac Donald (2003) as well reveal, that

personality trait is an essential element for the person

to provide psychological services (referred to as

helper), because the helper's personality is the main

means in the helping process. Personality traits will

influence perspective and how to respond to people,

so it will also affect when someone gives

psychological services. One theory that is suggesting

the personality trait is the big five personality (Costa

& Mc Crae, 2012). Personality trait is a dimension of

individual differences which tends to show a

consistent pattern of thoughts, feelings and actions

(Costa & Mc Crae, 2003).

Big five personality looks at human personality as

traits arranged in five personality domains, namely

Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness to experience,

Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness. Neuroticism

represents the individual's propensity to experience

unpleasant emotions and annoying emotions and have

a disturbance in thought and action (Vestre, in Costa

& Mc Crae, 2003). Extraversion refers to the

differences in preferences in interacting in social and

daily life. Openness refers to acceptance of an idea,

new approaches, and experiences. Agreeableness

appears in concern for others, trust, and generosity.

Conscientiousness refers to caution, obedience, self-

discipline, ambition and hard work (Costa & Mc

Crae, 2003).

Several studies have linked personality traits and

subjective well-being. From research conducted by

Albuquerque et al (2012), openness to experience,

agreeableness and conscientiousness have no positive

direct effect to life satisfaction and reduce negative

affects. Extraversion directly increase positive affect.

Only Neuroticism that reduces life satisfaction,

positive affect, and increase negative affect, either

directly, or through a mediator. It means that

neuroticism decrease subjective well-being.

Other research conducted by Soto (2015), who

found the same results, said that high subjective well-

being is related to Extraversion, Agreeableness, and

high conscientiousness, however high subjective

well-being is related with low Neuroticism. Melendez

et al (2019) found that neuroticism is related with low

life satisfaction scores and positively correlated with

negative affect. Allan et al (2018) even concluded that

neuroticism has been found to be a predictor of

several negative life outcomes. From those studies,

Neuroticism trait has to get special attention, because

it has a negative effect to subjective well-being.

The results of several studies that have been

conducted by the researchers at the Faculty of

Psychology at several universities in Indonesia,

indirectly provide an overview as follows: Utami

(2016) found that on 100 student respondents from

one of the faculties Psychology in Indonesia, trait

tendencies of neuroticism which is at a high level are

17%, moderate 62%, low 21%. That means that most

of the student respondents have trait neuroticism at a

Effect Neuroticism to Subjective Well-being in Faculty of Psychology Student

381

moderate level. In the Faculty of Psychology of

another university in Indonesia, Prabowo (2016)

obtains a description of the personality types of 100

students as follows: 35 students have neuroticism-

type, 15 students have the extraversion-type, 7

students have the Openness to new experience-type,

18 students have the agreeableness-type and 25

students have the conscientiousness type, which

means a large portion of students have neuroticism-

type.

Furthermore, through this pre-liminary study

about trait of neuroticism in 200 students at the

Faculty of Psychology in University "X", obtain the

result that 51.5% of students have a trait of the high

neuroticism, and 48.5% have a trait of the low

neuroticism. From some of the research results

mentioned above, obtained that many students have

traits of the neuroticism in a moderate or high degree.

In fact, which has been explained in several research

before, the high degree of the neuroticism trait is

associated with the lower subjective well-being.

Based on several previous research and pre-

liminary study on students at the Faculty of

Psychology in "X" University, so research on

neuroticism and subjective well-being of the students

at Psychology Faculty become very important.

Roberts et all (2017) and Allan et al (2018) give

hope that from their research, neuroticism traits can

change through intervention and it will show a large

effect of changes after intervention. That is, if in this

research, neuroticism trait is also proven to have a

negative effect on subjective well-being, then an early

intervention can be carried out on students who have

moderate or high degrees of neuroticism trait. Based

on this, the researcher is interested in examining

effect of neuroticism trait on the components of the

subjective well-being of the students at the Faculty of

Psychology in “X” University.

2 METHODS

2.1 Instrument

This study uses a quantitative approach and

correlational methods (Graziano & Raulin, 2014).

The variables in this study are subjective well-being

and neuroticism trait. To measure neuroticism trait,

the measuring instrument used in this study is the Big

Five Inventory - 10 questionnaires (BFI-10),

consisting of 10 items, which is adapted from

Rammstedt, B. & John, O. P. (2007). The initial

statement of the BFI item is "I see myself as someone

who ...". Then the respondent is given a number of

items describing the personality trait, for example “...

is outgoing, sociable”; or "... is relaxes, handles stress

well". Respondents are asked to rate themselves on a

5-grade scale from "disagree strongly, disagree a

little, neither agree nor disagree, agree a little and

agree strongly". Meanwhile, to measure subjective

well-being, on the cognitive component, the

researcher used the Satisfaction with Life Scale,

which consists of 5 items, with 7 scales, namely

"strongly agree, agree, slightly agree, neither agree

nor disagree, slightly disagree, disagree, and strongly

disagree". Respondents are asked to rate themselves

in statements such as: "In most ways, my life is close

to my ideal."

While the Scale of Positive and Negative

Experience (SPANE) is used to measure the affective

component (Diener, 2009), consisting of 6 items that

measure positive affect, and 6 items measure negative

affect. In SPANE, respondents are asked to think

about how often positive or negative feelings

occurred (for example: “happy”, “sad). The choice

consists of 5 scales, namely "very rarely or never,

rarely, sometimes, often, very often or always". The

reliability of the questionnaire is tested using

Cronbach's Alpha, while the validity of the

questionnaire is measured using the construct

validity, which is calculated using Pearson's product-

moment.

The results of the BFI-10 validity test for

neuroticism amounted to 0.834-0.848, with a degree

of correlation coefficient of < 0.001, at a significance

level of 0.01. The results of the neuroticism

reliability-test are 0.586; this means that the

measuring instrument is valid and reliable. For the

Satisfaction with Life-Scale measurement tool, the

validity coefficient ranges from 0.714-0.851 and the

reliability coefficient is 0.862, meaning that the

SWLS measuring instrument is valid and reliable.

Whereas for the positive affection, the validity

coefficient ranges from 0.644-0.859, and the

reliability is 0.859. For negative affection, the validity

coefficient ranges from 0.700-0.779, and the

reliability is 0.826. All of these results have a

significance degree of < 0.001 at the 0.01 significance

level. The test results indicate that the positive and

negative affection measurement tools are valid and

reliable.

2.2 Sample and Sampling Technique

The population of this study is 668 students at the

Faculty of Psychology in “X” University in Bandung

(odd semester 2019/2020 data). Samples are collected

using the Simple Random Sampling technique and

ICE-HUMS 2021 - International Conference on Emerging Issues in Humanity Studies and Social Sciences

382

obtained 467 students. The research procedure is

carried out by distributing questionnaires directly to

students, by first asking the students' willingness to

fill out the informed consent. Only students who had

filled in the informed consent and were willing to be

participants filled out the distributed questionnaires.

2.3 Data Analysis

The data obtained is processed using the Linear

Regression technique (Field, 2017), to measure the

contribution of neuroticism trait to each component

of subjective well-being. To do a test for Linear

Regression statistics, the classical assumption test

procedure is first carried out, which includes data

normality test, multicollinearity test,

heteroscedasticity test, and autocorrelation test. From

the results of the classical assumption test, the data

has met the requirements, so it is continued with the

Linear Regression test.

3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

From the results of demographic data processing, the

following descriptions of respondents are obtained.

Table 1: The Gender of The Respondents.

Gender Frequencies Percentage

Men 71 15.2%

Women 396 84.8%

Total 467 100.0%

In table 1, it can be seen that most of the

respondents are female (84.8%), the rest are male

(15.2%). Then, the contribution of neuroticism to life

satisfaction components will be tested. Before testing

regression of neuroticism on life satisfaction, the

correlation between variables was tested and

presented in table 2.

Table 2: Correlation Between Neuroticism and Life

Satisfaction.

Life

Satisfaction

Neuroticism

Pearson’

correlation

Life

satisfaction

1.000 -0.213

Neuroticism -0.213

Sign

(1 tailed)

Life

satisfaction

0.000

Neuroticism 0.000

N 467 467

In table 2, it can be seen that neuroticism has a

negative correlation with life satisfaction, which

means that the higher the degree of neuroticism, the

lower the degree of life satisfaction is.

In table 3, it revealed that neuroticism contributed

significantly (sign 0.000 <0.001) to life satisfaction

by 4.3%, and the rest is determined by other factors.

Furthermore, before testing the regression of

neuroticism on positive affect components, the

correlation between variables was tested and

represented in table 4

Table 4: The Correlation Between Neuroticism and Positive

Affect.

Positive

Affect

Neuroticism

Pearson’

correlation

Positive

Affect

1.000 -0.297

Neuroticism -0.297

Sign

(1 tailed)

Positive

Affect

0.000

Neuroticism 0.000

N 467 467

Based on the results in table 4, it can be seen that

neuroticism has a negative correlation with positive

affect, which means that the higher the degree of

neuroticism, the lower the degree of positive affect is.

Table 3: The Contribution of Neuroticism to Life Satisfaction.

Model R

Square

Adjusted

R Square

Std. Error of

the Estimate

R Square

Change

df1 df2

Sig. F

Change

1 .213

.046 .043 5.01409 .046 22.181 1 465 .000

Effect Neuroticism to Subjective Well-being in Faculty of Psychology Student

383

Table 5: The Contribution of Neuroticism to Positive Affect.

Model

Square

Adjusted

R Square

Std. Error of

the estimate

R Square

Change

df1 df2

Sig. F

Change

1 .297

.088 .086 3.62603 .088 44.932 1 465 .000

In table 5, it appears that neuroticism contributed

significantly to positive affect by 8.6%, the rest is

determined by other factors. Before testing the

neuroticism regression on negative affect

components, the correlation between variables was

tested and represented in table 6.

Based on the results in table 6, it can be seen that

neuroticism is not significantly correlated with

negative affect, which means that the higher the

degree of neuroticism, not always the higher the

negative affect is.

Table 6: The Correlation Between Neuroticism and

Negative Affect.

Negative

Affect

Neuroticism

Pearson’

correlation

Negative

Affect

1.000 -0.050

Neuroticism -0.050

Sign

(1 tailed) *

Negative

Affect

0.141

Neuroticism 0.141

N 467 467

In table 7, it appears that Neuroticism does not

significantly contribute to negative affect.

Based on the results of data processing, it appears

that neuroticism contributes to two components of

subjective well-being, namely life satisfaction and

positive affect. Neuroticism contributed the most to

positive affect, amounting to 8.6%, and if it is seen

from the direction of the correlation, it is negative.

That is, neuroticism has the opposite effect on

positive affect. A high degree of neuroticism can

cause a decrease in positive affect (happiness, joy,

optimism). Conversely, a low degree of neuroticism

can lead to an increase in positive affect. These results

are consistent with the results of research obtained by

Albuquerque et al (2012), revealed that neuroticism

directly or through mediators can reduce positive

affect. Individuals with high neuroticism, tend to

worry easily, feel guilty, fearful, angry, shy (Costa &

Mc Crae, 2003).

With these characteristics, when facing obstacles,

students who have high neuroticism traits feel

worried that they cannot overcome obstacles, are

hesitant to act, are pessimistic about the results, so

that they do not appreciate the emergence of positive

affect.

Neuroticism contributed 4.3% negatively to life

satisfaction, which means that neuroticism has the

opposite effect on life satisfaction. High degrees of

neuroticism can lead to decrease the life satisfaction.

Conversely, a lower degree of neuroticism can lead to

an increase in life satisfaction. This is in line with

previous research from Albuquerque et al (2012),

which states that neuroticism can reduce life

satisfaction, both directly and through mediators. The

results of other studies that are in line with the results

of this study are from Melendez et al (2019), that

neuroticism is associated with a low life satisfaction

score, meaning that the higher the neuroticism, the

lower one's life satisfaction. Jansi & Anbazhagan

(2017) suggest similar research results, namely

neuroticism is a predictor of life satisfaction.

Individuals who have a high degree of neuroticism,

when faced with problems, tend to be worried,

pessimistic, and too focused on their own problems,

so they hesitate to take steps, for the fear of making

mistakes. The opportunity to be able to cope with the

problems they face is also small, and the opportunities

to achieve their goals are also small. If they fail to

achieve their goals, they tend to feel guilty and

become increasingly pessimistic. When evaluating

their life, this condition causes students to feel

dissatisfied with their life.

The contribution of neuroticism in negative affect

is not significant. This means that for students at the

Faculty of Psychology, an increase in the degree of

neuroticism does not necessarily lead to an increase

in negative affect. This result is not in line with the

results of previous studies. Albuquerque et al (2012)

stated that neuroticism has an effect on increasing

negative affect. Balgiu (2018) and Melendez et al

(2019) also found that neuroticism is positively

correlated with negative affect.

Different conditions can be seen in several studies

in Indonesia, obtained by Nanrimansyah (2019),

which states that there is no relationship between

ICE-HUMS 2021 - International Conference on Emerging Issues in Humanity Studies and Social Sciences

384

Table 7: The Contribution of Neuroticism to Negative Affect.

Model

Square

Adjusted

R Square

Std. Error of

the estimate

R Square

Change

df1 df2

Sig. F

Change

1 .050

.002 .000 3.94811 .002 1.157 1 465 .283

neuroticism and subjective well-being. Julian (2019)

also found the same research results as Nanrimansyah

(2019). The research of Nanrimansyah (2019) and

Julian (2019) is in line with the results of this study,

that there is no significant contribution to neuroticism

and negative affect.

For the student respondents at the Faculty of

Psychology in this study, not significantly

contribution of neuroticism with negative affect can

be explained by the research held by Wang & Shi

(2009). Research by Wang & Shi (2009) states that

the relationship between personality and affect is not

a simple direct relationship, but can be mediated by a

mediator. This means that neuroticism has an indirect

effect on negative affect. According to Wang & Shi

(2009), neuroticism contributes to negative affect

through emotional regulation (reappraisal), an

important psychological process. The results of

research held by MacIntyre et al (2018) prove that

difficulties in regulating emotions are related to the

intensity and lability of negative affect. Individuals

who are difficult to regulate their emotions, tend to

have a high intensity of negative affect. Conversely,

individuals who are able to regulate their emotions

have a low intensity of negative affect.

For students at the Faculty of Psychology, there is

no significant contribution of neuroticism with

negative affect, possibly related to the role of the

mediator. Students at the Faculty of Psychology who

have high or low neuroticism, if they are able to

regulate emotions (for example: reappraisal) to

stimuli that generate negative emotions (for example,

anxiety, fear, pessimism), the reappraisal process

makes them reassess these stimuli objectively and

process them, so that it does not necessarily lead to

negative affect. Likewise, students with high or low

neuroticism traits if they are less able to regulate their

emotions (less able to reappraise or reassess the

situation objectively), then it is possible for negative

affect to emerge.

Based on the results, if a Psychology student has

a high degree of neuroticism, so it will have an impact

on their subjective well-being, especially on life

satisfaction and a decrease in positive effects. This

condition can have an impact on when they serve

others. Lack of life satisfaction and at least positive

affect can impact in the way Psychological students

treat the people they serve. Likewise, if they have a

low degree of neuroticism and life satisfaction will be

high, so they will have a positive affect, and that will

influence the way they serve others.

One limitation of this study is that it does not

measure the mediator between neuroticism trait and

affect. Neuroticism trait, as described in Albuquerque

et al (2012), can have an indirect effect on the

components of subjective well-being. The

implication of the results of this study for the

development of science is to provide broader insight

into the contribution of neuroticism to the

components of subjective well-being, especially for

students at the Faculty of Psychology, who are

expected to have high subjective well-being. Another

implication is that not significantly neuroticism's

contribution to negative affect is expected to be an

inspiration for further researchers to measure the

effect of neuroticism on negative affect through

emotional regulation mediators.

4 CONCLUSIONS

Based on the results of this study, it can be concluded

that in students at the Faculty of Psychology,

neuroticism influences the two components of

subjective well-being, life satisfaction and positive

affect. Neuroticism has correlation with life

satisfaction and positive affect, but has no correlation

with negative affect. The stronger influence is on

positive affect. Neuroticism has no effect on negative

affect. The implication of this research is to provide

broader insight into the development of knowledge

regarding neuroticism trait and subjective well-being,

especially for students at the Faculty of Psychology.

The limitation of this study is that it does not pay

attention to the possibility of a mediator between

neuroticism and negative affect. Therefore, for

further research it is recommended to measure the

role of emotional regulation as a mediator between

neuroticism and negative affect. If emotional

regulation is proven to be a mediator, then the

provision of emotional regulation skills interventions

Effect Neuroticism to Subjective Well-being in Faculty of Psychology Student

385

can be an alternative way to reduce the emergence of

negative affect.

Suggestions that can be given are for students who

have high neuroticism traits, can get intervention

through counselling, therapy, or coaching from

guardian lecturers or counsellors, considering that

this trait in a high degree can reduce the degree of life

satisfaction and positive affect of students. The

faculty can equip lecturers with adequate intervention

skills to handle students who have high neuroticism,

so as not to interfere with the effectiveness of learning

and their relationships.

REFERENCES

Albuquerque, I., de Lima, M.P., Matos, M., & Figueiredo,

C. (2012). The Interplay Among Levels of Personality:

The Mediator Effect of Personal Projects Between the

Big Five and Subjective Well-Being. J Happiness Stud.

January 2012. DOI: 10.1007/s10902-012-9326-6.

Allan, J., Leeson, P., De Fruyt, F. and Martin, S. (2018)

'Application of a 10 week coaching program designed

to facilitate volitional personality change: Overall

effects on personality and the impact of targeting',

International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and

Mentoring, 16 (1), pp.80-94. DOI: 10.24384/000470

(Accessed: 8 May 2020).

Balgiu, B. A. (2018). The psychometric properties of the

Big Five inventory-10 (BFI-10) including correlations

with subjective and psychological well-being. Global

Journal of Psychology Research: New Trends and

Issues. 8(2), 61–69.

Brammer, L. & Mc Donalds, G. (2003). The Helping

Relationship: Process and Skill. 8th ed. Boston:

University of Washington

Costa, P. T., & Mccrae, R. R. (2012). The Five-Factor

Model, Five-Factor Theory, and Interpersonal

Psychology. In Handbook of Interpersonal Psychology:

Theory, Research, Assessment, and Therapeutic

Interventions (91-104). John Wiley and Sons.

https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118001868.ch6

Diener, Ed. (2009). Social Indicators Research Series 37:

The science of Well-Being. Springer: Netherlands.

Diener, E., et al., (2017). If, Why, and When Subjective Well

– Being Influences Health, and Future Needed

Research. Applied Psychology: Health and Well –

Being / Volume 9, Issue 2. Diunduh dari

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/.aphw

.12090

Field, A. (2017). Discovering Statistics using SPSS. 5th

edition. New Delhi: Sage Publications India Pvt Ltd.

Graziano, A.M & Raulin, M.L. (2014). Research Methods:

A Process of Inquiry. 8th edition. Harlow: Pearson

Education Limited.

Jansi, Mary A. & Anbahazhagan, Dr.S. (2017). The

Relationship between Big 5 Personality Traits and Life

Satisfaction of Among NCC Women Students.

International Journal of Management (IJM), 8(2) : 106-

111.

Julian, A. (2019). Uji Pengaruh Trait Kepribadian Big Five,

Penyesuaian diri dan Gratitude terhadap Subjective

Well being Mahasiswa Perantau UIN Syarif

Hidayatullah Jakarta. Skripsi. Fakultas Psikologi,

Universitas Islam Negeri Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta.

MacIntyre, J.M., Ruscio, A.C., Brede, E. & Waters, A.J.

(2018). Emotion dysregulation and negative affect:

Laboratory and EMA investigations in smokers.

Addictive Behavior Reports, 7: 65-70.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.abrep.2018.01.001

McCrae, R.R & Costa, P.T, Jr. (2003). Personality in

Adulthood : A five-Factor Theory Perspective. 2nd Ed.

London : The Guilford Press.

Melendez, J.C., Satorres, E., Cujino, M.A. & Reyes, M.F.

(2019). Big Five and Psychological and subjective well

being in Columbian older adults. Archieves of

Gerontology and Geriatrics, 82: 88-93. DOI:

10.1016/j.archger.2019.01.016

Moore, S. M., Diener, E., & Tan, K. (2018). Using multiple

methods to more fully understand causal relations:

Positive affect enhances social relationships. In E.

Diener, S. Oishi, & L. Tay (Eds.),

Handbook of well-

being. Salt Lake City, UT: DEF Publishers. DOI:

nobascholar.com

Munoz, R.T., Hellman, C.M., Buster, B. et al. (2016). Life

Satisfaction, Hope, and Positive Emotions as

Antecedents of Health Related Quality of Life Among

Homeless Individuals. International Journal Applied

Positive Psychology, 1:69-89. https://doi.org/10.1007/

s41042-017-0005-z

Nanrimansyah, N.R. (2019) Hubungan Trait Kepribadian

dengan Subjective Well-Being pada Remaja yang

Orangtuanya Bercerai di kota Bandung. Skripsi.

Fakultas Psikologi, Universitas Kristen Maranatha.

Prabowo, A.A. (2016). Hubungan Antara Tipe Kepribadian

Big Five Dengan Intensi Berwirausaha Pada

Mahasiswa Psikologi Universitas Muhammadiyah

Surakarta. Skripsi. Fakultas Psikologi, Universitas

Muhammadiyah Surakarta.

Rammstedt, B. & John, O. P. (2007). Measuring personality

in one minute or less: A 10 item short version of the Big

Five Inventory in English and German. Journal of

Research in Personality,41,203‐212. Doi: 10.1016

/j.jrp.2006.02.001. Diunduh dari https://socialwork.

buffalo.edu/content/ dam/socialwork/home/self-care-

kit/brief-big-five-personality-inventory.pdf.

Roberts, B. W., Luo, J., Briley, D. A., Chow, P. I., Su, R.,

& Hill, P. L. (2017). A Systematic Review of

Personality Trait Change Through Intervention.

Psychological Bulletin. Advance online publication.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/bul0000088

Soto, Christopher. (2015). Is Happiness Good for Your

Personality? Concurrent and Prospective Relations of

the Big Five With Subjective Well‐Being. Journal of

personality. 83: 45-55. DOI: 10.1111/jopy.12081.

Steptoe, A., Deaton,A & Stone, A.A. (2015). Subjective

wellbeing, health and ageing. The Lancet, 385(9968):

ICE-HUMS 2021 - International Conference on Emerging Issues in Humanity Studies and Social Sciences

386

640-648. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-

6736(13)61489-0

Utami, W. (2016). Pengaruh Kecenderungan Neurotik Dan

Self - Efficacy Terhadap Psychological Well Being

Pada Mahasiswa Psikologi Universitas

Muhammadiyah Malang. Journal An-nafs, 1(2): 202-

226.

Wang, L.,&Shi.,Z. (2009). Neuroticism, extraversion,

emotion regulation, negative affect and positive affect:

the mediating roles of reappraisal and suppression.

Social behavior and personality, 37(2) : 193-194. DOI:

10.2224/sbp.2009.37.2.19.

Effect Neuroticism to Subjective Well-being in Faculty of Psychology Student

387