This article was meant to be a practical introduction to CCA. However, it should be noted that our brief discussion is not meant as a detour around the needed quantitative foundations of human behavior research for full understanding of CCA and related analyses. Advanced quantitative coursework notwithstanding, it is our social cognitive theory position that learning requires some sense of self-efficacy in one’s ability to acquire and utilize new information. This self-efficacy is often best developed with mastery experiences occurring within reach of one’s already possessed skill set. Compartmentalized statistical education that does not seek to establish links and conceptual understanding among analyses is unfortunately not conducive to this goal. As such, we applaud the Journal of Personality Assessment’s creation of the “Statistical Developments and Applications” section in which methodological issues can be addressed from a practical and comprehensible manner for graduate students and applied researchers. As many readers know, other journals have created similar sections with outstanding results. It is hoped that this article demonstrates the utility of CCA for some personality research. Our example was drawn from a substantive study, but CCA’s flexibility in the GLM allow sit to be employed in a variety of applications such as, for example, multivariate, criterion-related validity studies. Furthermore, like all GLM analyses, the nature of CCA as a fundamentally correlational technique enhances its accessibility. Almost all of the previous discussion hinges on Pearson r or r2 type statistics; what changes from analysis to analysis are the variables being related and the language used to discuss it all.