The main claim of chapter 2, that prudent, conscientious individuals have longer longevity is not a surprising find to me. As the author puts it, being conscientiousness and prudent means one is persistent, thrifty, detail oriented, and responsible about his or her every thought and move, thus he or she more than likely would not venture to put his or her life or well-being in jeopardy.
I rated one of my closest friends and she came out between 30 and 35 (the range because some of the questions I was either or on). While not clinically diagnosed, she suffers from symptoms of what appear to be depression (though scantly). She at times feels anxious, and to offset these feelings she smokes marijuana (legally in her respective state). Thinking about the longevity study and my friend, though she falls within the middle range for conscientiousness, I cannot help but care for the longevity of my friend I have known since middle school. In chapter 3 it discusses sociability. My friend is a social butterfly of sorts, but since her family most recently moved, she has not made any new friends in the area and, as she explains to me, “is depressed because of it.” Given this personal reason and the information provided in the latter portion of chapter 3, I stand by the importance of social networks and social interactions because healthy interactions can aid in aging and longevity (transitioning into old age and beyond).
In regards to my own longevity, I was pleased to have scored a 40 on the conscientiousness scale myself, that is if I did all of the reverse scoring and calculating correctly. I hope that such a prediction is also relevant to the prospect of my marriage down the road (conscientious people having longer, healthier, happier marriages). Dating may seem hard now, but if these numbers and claims are worth anything to me, it appears I have nothing to worry about.