Personality differences between doctors and their patients could cause miscommunications

Publicly released:
Australia; VIC; QLD
Image by Max from Pixabay
Image by Max from Pixabay

Doctors as a whole are more likely to have certain personality traits than the general public which could influence how they communicate with their patients, according to Australian research. The team compared two surveys where Aussie participants were asked to self-report their personality traits; first a study of the general public and second a study of GPs and specialist doctors. The researchers say doctors were more likely to be extroverted, agreeable, and conscientious, but also more neurotic and less open than their patients. The researchers say this could mean doctors may consider a treatment regime to be easier to follow than it would be for their patient, or may see their patients as more confrontational than they are. They say understanding likely personality differences could help doctors communicate better with their patients.

Media release

From: The BMJ

BMJ OPEN

Externally peer reviewed? Yes
Evidence type: Observational; survey data
Subjects: People

Doctors more extroverted, but also more neurotic and less open than patients: study

Character trait differences might have clinical implications for doctor-patient relationships

Doctors are more extroverted, agreeable, and conscientious, but also more neurotic and less open than their patients, finds an analysis of responses to two nationally representative Australian surveys, published online in the open access journal BMJ Open.

These character trait differences might have clinical implications for the doctor-patient relationship, suggest the researchers. 

The selection and training of doctors may accentuate personality characteristics that differ from their patients, say the researchers, adding that, in turn, these differences may create a mismatch between how doctors deliver information and how patients receive it.

The available body of research on doctors’ personality is dominated by convenience samples, low sample sizes and response rates, and limited by a focus on specific types of doctors, medical schools, or geographic areas, point out the researchers.

To avoid these issues, the researchers drew on two nationally representative Australian surveys, in which respondents were asked to assess their own personality traits.

The Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) survey of 25,358 members of the general public aged 20-85 included 18,705 patients, 1261 highly educated people, and 5814 professional carers.

The Medicine in Australia: Balancing Employment and Life (MABEL) survey of 19,351 doctors included 5844 general practitioners, 1776 patient-oriented specialists, and 3245 ‘technique-oriented’ specialists.

The researchers wanted to find out if there were personality trait differences between doctors and all the other groups, and if there might be equivalent differences between the two groups of medical specialists.

They focused on the ‘big 5’ personality traits of conscientiousness, agreeableness, extroversion, neuroticism, and openness as well as locus of control—belief in personal agency (internal) rather than external forces, such as fate, a higher power, or powerful others (external). 

Agreeableness encapsulates empathy, kindness, cooperation, and warmth; conscientious includes the descriptors orderly, systematic, efficient, careful, and organised; extroverts are talkative, confident, loud, bold and lively; neurotics describe themselves as envious, moody, touchy, jealous, temperamental and fretful; while the descriptors philosophical, creative, intellectual, complex, and imaginative apply to openness.

Not unexpectedly, doctors were more agreeable and extroverted than all the other groups, but they were also more neurotic. And both doctors and caring professionals were more agreeable than patients. But doctors were significantly more agreeable than caring professionals.

Somewhat unexpectedly, doctors more strongly believed themselves subject to external forces beyond their control than the general public. Although significant, this difference was relatively small, and there were no significant differences between doctors and patients, caring professionals, or the highly educated, caution the researchers.

Finally, differences among doctors across medical specialties were, overall, smaller than those between doctors and patients and the public, with family doctors (GPs) standing out for their higher level of agreeableness.

Women doctors seemed to differ more strongly from the other groups relative to men, the survey responses suggested. This was particularly noticeable for neuroticism, with women doctors scoring significantly higher on this trait than female members of the general public.

The researchers acknowledge certain limitations to their findings. Although based on well known and validated instruments, the scales used to assess personality traits were self-rated. And the ‘big 5’ descriptors differed slightly between the two surveys. 

Nevertheless, the researchers suggest that these personality differences might have implications for the doctor-patient relationship and ultimately the success of treatment.

“For example, being more conscientious has implications for treatment adherence as conscientious doctors may overestimate their patients’ ability to follow recommendations. Higher doctor neuroticism, which is related to stress, could lead doctors to see stress as a normal part of life, and, thus, underestimate the impact of [it] on patient wellbeing,” they write. 

“Doctor agreeableness and conscientiousness increase patient satisfaction with care, but could potentially lead doctors to view patients—in contrast to themselves—as more confrontational and less conscientious than patients actually are, causing an asymmetry in doctor and patient judgements of one another, which could impact outcomes,” they add.

“By taking into account these differences, doctors can better calibrate their judgments of patients and gain insight into factors that influence their patient interactions,” they suggest. 

And a range of different personalities is also likely to be better for clinical team performance, they add. “The lack of personality difference we found between doctor specialties suggests that adding more doctors to a team will not increase diversity of personality-base perspectives. However, the differences found between doctors and those in other caring professions suggest that including non-doctor caring professionals in clinical teams will increase personality diversity and, thus, team performance.” 

Attachments

Note: Not all attachments are visible to the general public. Research URLs will go live after the embargo ends.

Research The BMJ, Web page The URL will go live after the embargo ends
Journal/
conference:
BMJ Open
Research:Paper
Organisation/s: The University of Queensland, The University of Melbourne
Funder: No funding was directly required nor obtained by the research team for this study. HILDA is funded by the Australian Government, currently through its Department of Social Services (DSS) and managed by the Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research. Funding for MABEL has been provided by the National Health and Medical Research Council (2007 to 2016: 454799 and 1019605); the Australian Department of Health and Ageing (2008); Health Workforce Australia (2013); in 2017 The University of Melbourne, Medibank Better Health Foundation, the NSW Ministry of Health, and the Victorian Department of Health and Human Services, and in 2018 the Australian Government Department of Health, the Australian Digital Health Agency, and the Victorian Department of Health and Human Services. The funders of the HILDA and MABEL surveys had no role in study design, interpretation of the data or preparation of the manuscript.
Media Contact/s
Contact details are only visible to registered journalists.