framework for interpreting the significant events in the lives of their
subjects (see Winter & Carlson, 1988).
It is possible to gather personality ratings on historical or literary
characters from panels of experts using standard questionnaires such asthe NEO-PI. These ratings provide a more objective alternative to thesubjective interpretations usually offered by historians and literary crit -
ics. For example, Rubenzer, Faschingbauer, and Ones (2000) asked his -
torians to rate each U.S. President on the NEO-PI-R and averaged the
results to gain consensus judgments. They found evidence of agreementacross judges: George Washington was high in Conscientiousness;Abraham Lincoln, in Openness. On average, Presidents were closed, butthe Presidents considered greatest (e.g., Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt)were open. Richard Nixon was profoundly disagreeable (McCrae, Yang,et al., 2001), but he was high enough in Conscientiousness to be twiceelected President. (For an example of how personality research and lit-erary criticism can fruitfully interact, see McCrae’s [1994] analysis ofHerman Hesse’s Narcissus and Goldmund .)
Empirically oriented psychologists have often felt uncomfortable
with psychobiographies, and with good reason: Various explanationscan usually be offered for the same facts, and there is no conclusive wayto choose among them. Different historians have vastly different viewsof the character of Napoleon and make widely different hypothesesabout what he would have done after his return from Elba if the Duke ofWellington had left him any choice. But we cannot conduct an experi-ment, cannot go back in time and manipulate history so as to test thesetheories. And, according to most philosophers of science, what isuntestable is beyond the bounds of science.
However, as Birren and Hedlund (1987) pointed out, it is perfectly
reasonable to examine biographies as a source of testable hypotheses. Ifwe are interested in people in general, rather than in some particularhistorical figure, we can move from speculative biography to testablepsychology . We can also abandon the post hoc method of looking fortraits that underlie life choices and begin a systematic study of the ef -
fects of specified traits on individual lives. We are not all Napoleons,
but we all make choices: if and when and whom to marry; whether tohave children and how many; what career to pursue, when to change it,when to persist despite adversity; whether to move to another city andreestablish friends and routines. Curiously , the two most significant andmost thoroughly researched life choices—marriage and career—showquite different patterns.Influences of Personality on the Life Course 223