-PSS10: PS10 is a scale that can be used for secondary assessment (perceived control). It assesses the frequency with which life (or work) situations are perceived as “threatening, that is, unpredictable, uncontrollable and distressing.” As such, it does not address stress symptoms, specific events (which explains the very “open” wording of items), or stressors.

Three versions exist, the PSS14, which includes 14 items. The PSS10, which includes the items1 to 3, 6 to 11 and 14. The PSS4, which includes items 2, 6, 7 and 14 of version 14. Numerous translations (about twenty) including French [11]. The use of the PSS10 version is the most recommended because it has the most satisfactory psychometric qualities [12].

Method of administering

For each item, the subject estimates its frequency of occurrence over a recent period (the past month). Five-point frequency scale from “never” to “very often”.

Rating

For each item, it is assigned a score of 0 to 4. Items 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10 and 13 are inverted (4 becoming 0; 3: 1; 2: 2, 1: 3 and 0: 4); then the sum is calculated.

The big five inventory: short instrument measuring the prototypes of the five personality factors. In French, the BFI-Fr, as the authors called it, includes in its final version 45 items. The items of the five factors, of the final version are as follows: E (Extraversion, Energy, Enthusiasm): eight items, no 1, 6R, 11, 16, 21R, 26, 31R, 36; A (Agreeableness, Altruisme, Affection): ten items, no 2R, 7, 12R, 17, 22, 27R, 32, 37R, 42, 45R; C (consciousness, Control, Constraint): nine items, no. 3, 8R, 13, 18R, 23R, 28, 33, 38, 43R; N (Neurosis, Negative emotion): eight items, no. 4, 9R, 14, 19, 24R, 29, 34R, 39; O (Openness, Originality, open-mindedness): ten items, no. 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35R, 40, 41R, 44.

In addition, a questionnaire was developed to collect anthropometric, social and health information.

Statistical analysis

- Coding of questionnaire items;

- Statistical analysis of the data, which was carried out using the IBM SPSS Statistics 21 software, to calculate means and standard deviations and to make correlations between the various parameters, a correlation is considered significant if the p-value is less than 0.05.

Socio-demographic profile of subjects

Our study focused on 387 participants whose 55.8% (n=216) are male and 44.2% (n=171) are female. The average age of our participants was 32.75 9.79, with a minimum age of 22 and a maximum age of 65.

The BFI:

 The Agreeableness dimension

76.74% of our study subjects have a high score of the “Agreeableness” dimension; while for 23.26% of the sample have a low score.

The Consciousness dimension

 78.29% of our study subjects have a high Consciousness score, while 21.71% have a low one.

The Extraversion dimension:

For the Extraversion dimension, 59.69% of our sample has a high score, while 40.31% of participants have a low score.

The Neurosis dimension

A slight increase in the percentage that has a high score in neurosis compared to the one that has a low score with 51.94% that 48.06%.

The Openness dimension:

On the one hand, 79.84% of study participants have a high score of openness, on the other hand that only 20.16 have a low score.

The PSS10

5.43% of participants perceive a perpetual threat, 74.42% are moderately able to cope with stress and finally 20.16% manage their stress very well.

Bivariate Analyses

The table 1 shows that 04 traits correlate, moderately, negatively and very significantly with the Anxiety score, while the Neurosis trait correlates positively strongly and significantly.

The table 2 represents a multiple linear regression by considering the perceived stress as a dependent variable to be explained and the Big five as independent explanatory variables. We find that the two traits that have a significant causal relationship p<0.05, are Neurosis and Extraversion. This model explains 15.5% of the variance; p<0.01.

Figures & Tables

Discussion

Our study showed a positive relationship between the neurotic dimension and perceived stress. Neurosis represents a stress preacher among our participants; the study conducted by Vollrath in 2000 confirms this finding. It is significantly and positively associated with the discomfort and frequency of stressful events perceived by call center staff [13]. Another study conducted in 2015 with university students in France by Saleh et al found a correlation between perceived stress and three dimensions of the Big Five (Extraversion, Consciousness and Neurosis) [14].

The results found by [15] confirm our findings by stating that Neurosis and Extraversion are significantly associated with perceived stress in a population of full-time workers. In this sense, our results clearly show that these two personality traits, namely Extraversion and Neurosis, predict perceived stress.In two other studies, one conducted in 2011 [16] and the other in 2016 [17], the researchers found negative correlations between perceived stress and traits of consciousness, extraversion, agreeableness and openness, except that the association with this last trait was not significant, with Neurosis the relationship was significant and positive. These results confirm our previously presented results.

The study of Hemenover [18] has already spoke of the power to preach Extraversion and Neurosis on the appearance of stress. This corroborates what we found to be a significant prediction of perceived stress for both Extraversion and Neurosis traits. Positive for neurosis and negative for extraversion.Swickert and his collaborators[19]found,in 2002, that extroverts can actually moderate their perception of stress if they have a good perception of their social support, especially at work.

Studies have shown positive correlations between extraversion and positive life experiences [20], well-being and positive mental health [21], happiness [22] and resilience [23]. The researchers concluded that extroverts are happier, and that facets of extroverts such as sociability, warmth, social participation and activity contribute to greater life satisfaction.

The civil servants of this Region are subjected, like most workers, to enormous pressure from their hierarchies. This combined with the difficulties of the task and their personal resources, in this case their personality traits, makes everyone unique in their way of perceiving everyday stressful situations.

The vast majority of this sample, which represents our study population, is characterized by Openness, Consciousness and Agreeableness. The vast majority perceive moderate stress. Moreover, the Extraversion and Neurosis that constitute dominant poles in more than half of our sample remain preachers of high-perceived stress. Neurosis positively and Extraversion negatively.

We can conclude that those who are more emotionally stable, more responsible and more willing to help others have less perceived stress and therefore would perform their tasks more effectively.

Stress remains a huge psychosocial risk that requires the dissemination of information programs, especially to the various public administrations. This measure seems necessary to improve their knowledge in order to raise awareness. It is also important to take seriously the impact of stress on the individual and the company. In order to reduce self-medication and absenteeism, companies must seriously take into consideration, whether at the time of recruitment or after, differences in personality traits and the predisposition of individuals to manage their emotions and stress. In front of the latter, we are not all equal, our personality traits shape our way of perceiving things. This study provides a better understanding of this interaction, which could now be taken into account through a primary intervention aimed at eliminating or controlling the risk factors present in the workplace in order to reduce their negative impacts on the individual.

Acknowledgment

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

Conflict of Interest

Eliesse DRISSI:Conceptualization, writing-original draft

Azzaoui Fatima Zahra:Supervision, methodology

Ahami Ahmed:Data curation

Samira Boulbaroud:Writing-Review and editing

Hind Hami:Writing-Review and editing

1. Massoudi K. Le stress Professionnel: Une analyse des vulnérabilités individuelles et des facteurs de risque Environnementaux. 2009. Peter Lang.
2. Dolan SL, Arsenault A. Stress, estime de soi, santé et travail. 2009. PUQ.
3. Baldwin DR, Kennedy DL, Armata P. De‐stressing mommy: ameliorative association with dispositional optimism and resiliency. Stress and Health: Journal of the International Society for the Investigation of Stress, (2008); 24(5): 393-400.
4. Nicholson P. Occupational health in the European Union. Occupational medicine, (2002); 52(2): 80-84.
5. Allport G, Allport GW. In EG Boring & G. Lindzey. A history of psychology in autobiography, (1967); 5.
6. Fiske DW.Consistency of the factorial structures of personality ratings from different sources. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, (1949). 44(3): 329.
7. Norman WT. 2800 PERSONALITY TRAIT DESCRIPTORS–NORMATIVE OPERATING CHARACTERISTICS FOR A UNIVERSITY POPULATION, (1967).
8. Smith G.M. Usefulness of peer ratings of personality in educational research. Educational and Psychological measurement, (1967); 27(4): 967-984.
9. Goldberg LR. Language and individual differences: The search for universals in personality lexicons. Review of personality and social psychology, (1981); 2(1): 141-165.
10. McCrae RR, Costa PT. Validation of the five-factor model of personality across instruments and observers. Journal of personality and social psychology, (1987); 52(1): 81.
11. Quintard M, Whitaker S. Transport in ordered and disordered porous media II: Generalized volume averaging. Transport in porous media, (1994); 14: 179-206.
12. Ashton MC. The maladaptive personality traits of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) in relation to the HEXACO personality factors and schizotypy/dissociation. Journal of personality disorders, (2012); 26(5): 641-659.
13. Vollrath M, Torgersen S. Personality types and coping. Personality and individual differences, (2000); 29(2): 367-378.
14. Saleh Ardestani A, Afshar M. Relationship between Brand Personality, Attitude and Commitment to Brand Name (Case study: Dairy Industry of Iran). European Online Journal of Natural and Social Sciences: Proceedings, (2015); 4(1 (s)): 899-905.
15. Şahin F, Çetin F. The mediating role of general self-efficacy in the relationship between the big five personality traits and perceived stress: A weekly assessment study. Psychological Studies, (2017); 62(1): 35-46.
16. Ebstrup JF. Association between the Five Factor personality traits and perceived stress: is the effect mediated by general self-efficacy? Anxiety, Stress & Coping, (2011); 24(4): 407-419.
17. Mirhaghi M, Sarabian S. Relationship between perceived stress and personality traits in emergency medical personnel. Journal of Fundamentals of Mental Health, (2016); 18(5).
18. Hemenover SH, Dienstbier RA. Prediction of stress appraisals from mastery, extraversion, neuroticism, and general appraisal tendencies. Motivation and Emotion, (1996); 20: 299-317.
19. Swickert RJ. Extraversion, social support processes, and stress. Personality and Individual Differences, (2002); 32(5): 877-891.
20. Magnus K. Extraversion and neuroticism as predictors of objective life events: a longitudinal analysis. Journal of personality and social psychology, (1993); 65(5): 1046.
21. Lamers SM. Differential relationships in the association of the Big Five personality traits with positive mental health and psychopathology. Journal of Research in Personality, (2012); 46(5): 517-524.
22. DeNeve KM, Cooper H. The happy personality: a meta-analysis of 137 personality traits and subjective well-being. Psychological bulletin, (1998); 124(2): 197.
23. Caska CM, Renshaw KD. Personality traits as moderators of the associations between deployment experiences and PTSD symptoms in OEF/OIF service members. Anxiety, Stress & Coping, (2013); 26(1): 36-51.