Trust

• High agreeableness and conscientiousness → greater initial trust; more likely to give benefit of the doubt. (Mayer, Davis & Schoorman, 1995)
• High neuroticism → lower trust, more suspicion and need for reassurance.
• High openness → more willing to trust novel interfaces if they appear competent.

Perceived Risk

• High neuroticism → amplifies perceived risk and sensitivity to negative outcomes.
• Low conscientiousness → may perceive higher risk from complex systems due to poor self-efficacy.
• High openness → lower perceived risk for innovative options, higher for unfamiliar harms.

Engagement & Motivation

• High extraversion → seek stimulating, social, gamified experiences; prefer active engagement.
• High openness → motivated by novelty, exploration, customization.
• High conscientiousness → motivated by goal completion, structure, clear progress indicators.
• High neuroticism → motivated by reassurance, simple wins, avoidance of stressful tasks.

Decision-Making & Information Processing

• High need for cognition / openness → analytical, deliberative processing; prefer detailed info and options.
• High extraversion → faster, heuristic decisions in social contexts.
• High neuroticism → biased toward negative information, risk-averse choices; may overthink.
• High conscientiousness → systematic, rule-based decision making; prefer clear instructions.

Error Tolerance & Frustration

• High neuroticism → low error tolerance, high frustration, quicker abandonment.
• High conscientiousness → higher tolerance if errors can be corrected and system supports recovery; frustrated by sloppy UI.
• High openness → greater tolerance for minor errors if system is inventive; frustrated by constraints on exploration.
• High extraversion → frustration reduced by social or gamified error-recovery cues.

Design implications (brief)

• Provide progressive disclosure for high/low need-for-cognition.
• Clear affordances, undo, and reassurance for high-neuroticism users.
• Social features and stimulation for extraverts; structured goals and feedback for conscientious users.
• Customization and novelty options for open users.

Sources: Big Five literature and HCI research on personality and UX (e.g., Costa & McCrae, 1992; Mayer et al., 1995; Kaptein et al., 2012).