The Authentic and Hubristic Pride scales do not validly assess the two-facet model of pride: Time to rewind and reboot with new measures.

The Authentic and Hubristic Pride scales (see record 2007-02840-009) have been used in hundreds of studies aiming to investigate the popular 2-facet model of pride (Tracy & Robins, 2004, 2007), and they continue to be the primary assessment tools used for that purpose. In 2014, in this journal, Holbrook et al. (2014a, 2014b) raised concerns about the validity of these scales' scores, such as arguing that the Hubristic Pride scale did not measure pride at all, whereupon Tracy and Robins (2014) responded to defend these scales' scores' validities. Marshaling extensive additional data collected in recent years, in the present paper we (a) corroborate some of the central concerns earlier raised by Holbrook et al., and (b) raise novel additional concerns about these scales, such as severe deficits in the Hubristic Pride scale's measurement precision. We conclude that the Authentic and Hubristic Pride scales are invalid for the purpose of operationalizing Tracy and Robins' 2-facet model of pride. We call upon the field to rewind existing research on the topic and reboot with new measures that can validly assess the still potentially groundbreaking 2-facet theory proposed by Tracy and Robins (2004, 2007). (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Authentic/hubristic pride controversies as a window on broader emotion measurement issues: Reply to Tracy et al. (2023).

Replies to Tracy, et al. (see record 2023-63008-002) on the current authors' comments (see record 2023-63008-001) to Tracy, et al.'s original article (see record 2007-02840-009). In our conceptual and empirical review of the Authentic Pride (AP) and Hubristic Pride (HP) scales, we concluded that they do not validly assess a two-facet model of the emotion of pride. For instance, we concluded that the HP scale is not a measure of pride at all and suffers from other deficits (e.g., zero-inflated scores and lack of measurement precision), which make it unsuitable for use in most research. Yet, Tracy et al. raised insightful questions and counterpoints that show some of our arguments to be less dispositive than we had perceived them to be. In addition, some of the issues raised in this exchange speak to important issues in emotion assessment generally, some of which have thus far been inadequately discussed in the field of emotion research. We (a) highlight a few of the main areas of disagreement between us and Tracy et al., and (b) describe how these disagreements point to important issues in emotion assessment more broadly. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Psychopathy facets, perceived power, and forms of aggression.

Despite research indicating that exerting dominance and control is characteristic of psychopathy, no research has examined the role that feelings of and desire for power plays in psychopathy-related aggression. Borrowing from various literatures and novel conceptualizations, we investigated the contributions of feeling powerful and/or desiring power and distinct psychopathy facets in explaining aggression manifested in different forms (i.e., physical, verbal, indirect) across 4 samples. Results from regression analyses within each sample and a meta-analysis across the samples indicated that the impulsive facet of psychopathy was generally related to multiple forms of aggression, and the unique variance in the affective facet was primarily related to physical aggression across samples. In contrast, the unique variance of the interpersonal facet showed a primary relationship with indirect aggression (e.g., relational, passive). Desiring power made unique contributions in relation to multiple forms of aggression, whereas feeling powerful was generally unrelated and/or negatively related to aggression. In sum, the unique variance in the psychopathy facets showed fairly specialized relationships with forms of aggression, and desire for power may be an independent explanatory construct for multiple forms of aggression proneness. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

The Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction and Frustration Scales probably do not validly measure need frustration.

In basic psychological needs theory (BPNT), the separable constructs of need satisfaction and need frustration are theorized as pivotally related to psychopathology and broader aspects of well-being. The Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction and Frustration Scales (BPNSFS; Chen et al., 2015) have rapidly emerged as the dominant self-report measure in the BPNT domain, with translated versions available in a wide range of languages and a plethora of versions adapted for specific populations and life contexts. Through (a) an extended conceptual discussion of the BPNSFS and (b) a collection of complementary data analyses in eight samples, we demonstrate that the BPNSFS probably does not validly measure need frustration. Most importantly, we conclude that the ostensible distinction between need frustration and need satisfaction in the BPNSFS is likely primarily a method artifact caused by different item keying directions, given the way the measure currently assesses the intended constructs. If so, then the use of the BPNSFS may be generating misleading conclusions, obstructing sound investigation of current BPNT. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

It looks like construct validity, but look again: Comment on Clutterbuck et al. (2021) and recommendations for test developers in the broad "empathy" domain.

Conceptual flaws can undermine even rigorous test development efforts, especially in the broad empathy and social cognition domains, which are characterized by measure proliferation and inconsistently used construct terms. We discuss these issues, focusing on a new instrument of "mentalizing" as a case study. Across several studies, Clutterbuck et al. (2021a) developed the Four-Item Mentalising Index (FIMI). They described it as the first self-report measure of mentalizing ability and suggested that it offers substantial advances for research and assessment. As we demonstrate with conceptual arguments and empirical data, the FIMI embodies several major problems that are common in this area of research. Using the FIMI as a case study, we underline the importance for test developers of attending to the nonnegotiable necessity of discriminant validity analyses, the challenge of choosing appropriate convergent validity measures, and the difficulties of navigating the jingle-jangle jungle of empathy and social cognition construct terms. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Extending the nomological network of sexual objectification to psychopathic and allied personality traits.

Although the causes and correlates of sexual objectification almost certainly comprise a heterogeneous array of individual difference variables, little is known about sexual objectification perpetration's nomological network. We hypothesized that the broad personality construct of psychopathy would afford a fruitful framework for understanding and statistically predicting sexual objectification and investigated the implications of a host of psychopathic and psychopathy-related traits, including empathy, narcissism, impulsivity, and sadism, for interpersonal sexual objectification perpetration (ISOP). We augmented an extant self-report instrument of behavioral sexual objectification, the Interpersonal Sexual Objectification Scale-Perpetrator Version (Gervais, DiLillo, & McChargue, 2014), with attitudinal items. Two Mechanical Turk samples (Study 1: N = 401, 53% female, Mage = 36; Study 2: N = 419, 48% female, Mage = 37) were administered the augmented Interpersonal Sexual Objectification Scale-Perpetrator Version and a battery of well validated self-report instruments describing psychopathic and psychopathy-related traits. Dark personality traits were strongly associated with sexual objectification; sadism, low affective empathy, narcissism, disinhibition, and meanness emerged as the largest correlates. Further, our hypothesis that psychopathic traits would moderate (potentiate) the relation between ISOP attitudes and ISOP behaviors found support in both samples. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Strengths and Weaknesses of Two Empathy Measures: A Comparison of the Measurement Precision, Construct Validity, and Incremental Validity of Two Multidimensional Indices.

The quality of empathy research, and clinical assessment, hinges on the validity and proper interpretation of the measures used to assess the construct. This study investigates, in an online sample of 401 adult community participants, the construct validity of the Affective and Cognitive Measure of Empathy (ACME) relative to that of the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI), the most widely used multidimensional empathy research measure. We investigated the factor structures of both measures, as well as their measurement precision across varying trait levels. We also examined them both in relation to convergent and discriminant criteria, including broadband personality dimensions, general emotionality, personality disorder features, and interpersonal malignancy. Our findings suggest that the ACME possesses incremental validity beyond the IRI for most constructs related to interpersonal malignancy. Our results further indicate that the IRI Personal Distress scale is severely deficient in construct validity, raising serious concerns regarding past findings that have included it when computing total empathy scores. Finally, our results indicate that both questionnaires display poor measurement precision at high trait levels, emphasizing the need for future researchers to develop indices that can reliably measure high levels of empathy.

Are self-report cognitive empathy ratings valid proxies for cognitive empathy ability? Negligible meta-analytic relations with behavioral task performance.

Empathy is widely regarded as relevant to a diverse range of psychopathological constructs, such as autism spectrum disorder, psychopathy, and borderline personality disorder. Cognitive empathy (CE) is the ability to accurately recognize or infer the thoughts and feelings of others. Although behavioral task paradigms are frequently used to assess such abilities, a large proportion of published studies reporting on CE use self-report questionnaires. For decades, however, a number of theorists have cautioned that individuals may not possess the metacognitive insight needed to validly gauge their own mindreading abilities. To investigate this possibility, we examined the aggregate relations between behavioral CE task performance and self-report CE scale scores, as well as with self-report affective empathy scale scores for comparison. Meta-analytic results, based on random effects models, from 85 studies (total N = 14,327) indicate that self-report CE scores account for only approximately 1% of the variance in behavioral cognitive empathy assessments and that, perhaps equally importantly, this relation is not significantly different from that demonstrated by affective empathy scores. Effect sizes were not moderated by self-report empathy domain, gender composition, unisensory versus multisensory behavioral stimuli presentation, child versus adult samples, or by normative versus clinical/forensic samples. Effect size estimates were not markedly affected by publication bias. These results raise serious concerns regarding the widespread use of self-report CE scores as proxies for CE ability, as well as the extensive theoretical conclusions that have been based on their use in past studies. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Sexual Assault in Ethiopian Contexts: Data From a Large Sample of Women and Girls Presenting at Two Hospital-Based, Limited-Resource Sexual Assault Treatment Clinics.

This study presents data from a large sample of clinic-evaluated sexual assault survivors ( N = 1,667) in Ethiopia between 2009 and 2015, one of the largest such samples ever analyzed in an African country. Statistical analyses revealed a disproportionate number of minors presenting to the clinics, an extremely high prevalence of special kidnapping cases, significant differences in access and assault characteristics between survivors from within the clinic cities and those from outside of them, and an unacceptable clinical focus on unreliable hymenal findings. In addition, a myriad of important findings regarding patient characteristics, as well as injury and medical outcomes, are reported.

Is empathic contagion helpful or harmful? Overlooked heterogeneity in the Empathy Index.

Some theorists have argued that empathy should be defined as feeling the same emotion that one thinks another person is feeling and that other-oriented sympathetic caring should be excluded from this construct. Jordan, Amir, and Bloom (2016) introduced the Empathy Index (EI) as a self-report questionnaire to measure the former circumscribed conceptualization of empathy. They reported that this scale (a) was only weakly associated with broader sympathetic caring and (b) was not robustly predictive of heightened prosociality in behavioral tasks. Using an online sample of adult community participants (N = 389), we demonstrate that the factor structure of the EI is substantively different from that proposed by Jordan and colleagues. In addition, we demonstrate that contagion for enjoyable emotions as measured by the EI is strongly correlated with sympathetic caring, interpersonal attachment, and psychological well-being, as well as substantially negatively correlated with meanness. In sharp contrast, contagion for aversive emotions, as measured by the EI, is not associated with sympathetic caring but is positively associated with emotional distress and personality disorder features. We conclude that empathic contagion should not be treated as a unidimensional construct, as enjoyable contagion and aversive contagion may be associated with markedly different nomological networks. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).

Psychopathy and interests: Implications of psychopathic personality traits for vocational and avocational preferences.

General personality traits and interests, both vocational and avocational, have long been considered intertwined constructs. Nevertheless, the linkages between personality disorder features, such as psychopathy, and interests are poorly understood. This study bridges this gap by examining how psychopathic traits relate to vocational and avocational interests, and to what extent these associations are distinctive to psychopathy as opposed to a broader pattern of general and abnormal personality traits. In a sample of 426 community participants, Psychopathic Personality Inventory-Revised Fearless Dominance features of psychopathy were associated with interest in a broad swath of vocational and avocational interests, whereas Self-Centered Impulsivity features were associated with realistic, artistic, enterprising, and conventional interests; most zero-order associations were in the small to medium range. Coldheartedness and the factors derived from the Levenson Self-Report Psychopathy Scale were largely unrelated to interests, although there were several notable exceptions. Narcissistic traits, as well as HEXACO (Honesty-Humility, Emotionality, Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, and Openness) Honesty-Humility, Extraversion, and Openness to Experience, were also related broadly to interests. The patterns of interests associated with personality disorder traits may ultimately bear practical implications for interventions as individuals seek out positions or hobbies that suit their traits. (PsycINFO Database Record