Wikipedia has your answer right there in the critique section of your own link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits#Critique https://en.w

Wikipedia has your answer right there in the critique section of your own link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits#Critique https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits#Cr... This peer-reviewed journal article elaborates on it more: >In other words, the Big Five was developed based on research that used subjective selection of lexical descriptors, and self- and peer assessment of correspondence between (only these) descriptors and observable behavior. And that is what the Big Five represents: a consistent model of how humans reflect individuality using language, no more. There were no considerations of findings in neuroanatomy, neurochemistry, experimental psychology, observations of behavior of people or animals in real situations – none of this was used at the research stage leading to the development of the Big Five. In this sense we can say that the Big Five does not represent the structure of temperament or the structure of biologically based traits, even though lexical perception reflects some elements of it. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3903487/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3903487/ Basically Damore cherry picked a Big5 study to support his hypothesis that it is biological cause, not bias, being the differentiating factor in gender underrepresentation, but the data doesn't scientifically support that.