Traits and Metatraits?
Concepts such as ego level, ego strength, and ego control are intended
to describe the functioning of the ego in different individuals, but as en -
during characteristics they resemble traits much more than ego pro -
cesses. One way to distinguish them from more mundane traits is to
grant them the status of superordinate traits, or metatraits . These are the
enduring dispositions that govern the expression and integration ofother dispositions. Loevinger (1966) came close to this formulationwhen she called ego level the “master trait.”
But as we begin to examine the idea of metatraits closely , their dis -
tinctiveness begins to evaporate. Block’s description of ego resiliency
(1965; see also J. H. Block & J. Block, 1980) makes it sound very muchlike low Neuroticism, and a measure of ego resiliency based on MMPIitems showed a strong negative correlation with NEO-PI Neuroticism(r= –.70, N=274, p< .001) in the BLSA. Similarly , ego control seems to
represent low levels of Impulsiveness, Excitement Seeking, and Open-ness, and these hypotheses are also confirmed ( r’s = –.27, –.54, and
–.34, p< .001). Frank Barron’s ego-strength scale (1980) is known to
correlate with measures of maladjustment and Neuroticism. And Loe-vinger’s master trait of ego level (1966) is strongly related to intelligenceas well as to personality (McCrae & Costa, 1980). A study we con-ducted in Boston employed the sentence completions of 240 men toexamine ego levels using Loevinger’s own instrument, the WashingtonUniversity Sentence Completion Test. The scores we obtained were cor-related with our measures of personality and intelligence. We found, asshe has repeatedly done, that there is a marked correlation with IQ(about .50), showing that higher ego levels are more often found inmore intelligent people. But we also found that there was a significantcorrelation with Openness to Experience, even when we controlled forintelligence. More open people are rated as being more mature in theLoevinger system.
One interpretation of these conceptual and empirical correspon -
dences would suggest that traits and metatraits are not really distinct.
The same traits that are organized by the ego are responsible for the in -
dividual differences in the way the ego organizes them. Intelligence is a
trait, but it also modifies the ways other traits are expressed: Introvertsread books; intelligent introverts read difficult books. Again, anxiety is atrait, but the disposition to experience anxiety may disrupt the efficient148 PERSONALITY IN ADULTHOOD