Exploring the structure of fearlessness using self-report measures.

OBJECTIVE: The present study examined the hierarchical structure of self-reported fearlessness and compared this structure to external criterion measures. BACKGROUND: Fearlessness is often discussed in relation to clinical and personality research. However, there is a paucity of research focusing on its empirical structure, in particular with self-report measures. METHOD: Using a preregistered analytical approach, we employed Goldberg's 2006 "bass-ackward" factor analysis on self-reported trait fear and fearlessness items to uncover the hierarchical structure of the construct. The final sample consisted of 619 participants and 562 informants. RESULTS: By assessing fit statistics and interpretability of the factors, we found a six-factor model fit the data best. The six-factor solution emerged as comprehensive and included components labeled Assertiveness, Low Anxiety, Sociability, Recklessness, Openness to Action, and Adventurousness. Criterion variables measuring boldness, fear, anxiety, psychopathy, basic personality traits, and impulsivity, were correlated with the factor scores at each factor level of the model. Conclusions The findings from this study elucidate how trait fearlessness unfolds at varying levels and how these factors relate to and diverge from various outcomes.

A comprehensive item-level examination of Conscientiousness' underlying structure across three large samples.

OBJECTIVE: The present study examined the hierarchical structure of Conscientiousness across three large samples using item-level analyses. BACKGROUND: Conscientiousness is among the strongest predictors of individual differences in major life outcomes. Yet decades of work understanding the optimal lower-order structure of Conscientiousness has not rectified the differences that remain among existing models and measures. To precisely measure its relations to major life outcomes, it is necessary to work toward a comprehensive, replicable conceptualization of the construct's structure. METHODS: The present pre-registered study used three samples (Ns = 446, 406, & 424) to explore the domain's latent structure with item-level "bass-ackward" factor analyses and evaluate the resulting structure's interpretability, parsimony, and replicability. Participants completed self-report measures of Conscientiousness and criteria in its nomological network (e.g., FFM traits, externalizing behavior, disinhibitory traits; informant reports were collected as well). RESULTS: The factor analyses identified five interpretable and replicable factors (i.e., deliberation, order, industriousness, self-discipline, and dependability) using predominant measures of general personality. An additional factor (i.e., traditionalism) was introduced in the six-factor solution when the item pool was expanded to include less widely used measures of general personality. CONCLUSION: The authors discuss the item composition of each factor, their relation to existing models and measures of the domain's structure, their association with relevant criteria, and the general implications of conceptualizing Conscientiousness using flexible, item-level factor analysis.

Incremental and interactive relations of triarchic psychopathy measure scales with antisocial and prosocial correlates: A preregistered replication of Gatner et al. (2016).

Meanness (i.e., callousness/unemotionality, antagonism) and disinhibition (e.g., impulsivity, antisocial behavior) are the consensus traits that undergird psychopathy. Significant debate exists regarding a proposed third dimension of boldness or fearless dominance, characterized by particularly high levels of both extraversion and emotional stability. The present study is a preregistered direct replication of the work of Gatner and colleagues (2016) regarding the importance of boldness in psychopathy. Specifically, in a large undergraduate sample (n = 1,015), which more than doubled the original study sample size, we examined whether boldness exhibited curvilinear relations to antisocial and prosocial outcomes, provided incremental predictive utility, and interacted with meanness and disinhibition. Consistent with Gatner and colleagues' findings, incremental, interactive, or curvilinear effects of boldness did not account for more than a small amount of variance in outcomes beyond the main effects of meanness and disinhibition. We discuss both process and results in the context of promoting a culture of reproducibility as well as transparent and open practices in clinical science. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Factor Structure of the FFM ATM: Antagonism, Emotional Stability, Impulsivity, and Agency.

The Dark Triad (DT) refers to three socially aversive personality constructs: psychopathy, narcissism, and Machiavellianism. In response to concerns with existing self-report questionnaires measuring these constructs, we created the Five Factor Model Antagonistic Triad Measure (FFM ATM), which uses 46 items to assess multidimensional, faceted versions of the three DT constructs. The current pre-registered study used two large samples (Ns = 600 and 1,247) to explore the structure of the FFM ATM using bass-ackward factor analyses. Participants completed the FFM ATM as well as measures of the five-factor model, aggression, antisocial behavior, and other criteria. A series of factor analyses identified four meaningful and replicable factors (i.e., Antagonism, Emotional Stability, Impulsivity, and Agency). The authors discuss the item composition of each of these factors, their relations to relevant criteria, and implications of conceptualizing the Antagonistic Triad as combinations of elemental traits (factors) as opposed to the multidimensional constructs of psychopathy, narcissism, and Machiavellianism.

Agreeableness explains the factor structure of the Self-Report Psychopathy Scale, Fourth Edition.

The five-factor model (FFM) is a general personality model that has been frequently studied in its relation to psychopathy (Lynam & Miller, 2015; Widiger & Lynam, 1998) with ample evidence that Antagonism (low Agreeableness) plays a core role in the conceptualization of psychopathy. The present study examined the relations between the Self-Report Psychopathy Scale, Fourth Edition (SRP-4; Paulhus et al., 2014), one of the most commonly used self-report measures of psychopathy and the FFM. Using a preregistered analytical approach, we found that all 4 subscales and the total score of the SRP-4 are positively correlated with all facets of Antagonism and that Antagonism accounts for the overlap between SRP-4 subscales, as introducing these facets to a hierarchical regression reduced the overlap between subscales by more than 50%. Adding Conscientious to the model did not account for further reduction in overlap between the factors. Finally, a structural equation model showed the latent correlation between Antagonism and psychopathy as captured by the SRP-4 to be effectively 1.0, again highlighting the role of Antagonism in the SRP-4's conceptualization of psychopathy. The results were consistent across 2 large samples (Ns of 627 and 628). This study suggests the SRP-4 is assessing Antagonism and showcases the primary role of Antagonism in psychopathy. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

A comparative study of engagement in mobile and wearable health monitoring for bipolar disorder.

OBJECTIVES: Self-monitoring is recommended for individuals with bipolar disorder, with numerous technological solutions available. This study aimed to identify basic components of these solutions that increase engagement with self-monitoring. METHODS: Participants with bipolar disorder (n = 47) monitored their symptoms with a Fitbit and a smartphone app and were randomly assigned to either review or not review recorded symptoms weekly. We tested whether individuals would better adhere to and prefer monitoring with passive monitoring with an activity tracker compared to active monitoring with a smartphone app and whether individuals would better adhere to self-monitoring if their recorded symptoms were reviewed with an interviewer. RESULTS: Monitoring with a smartphone app achieved similar adherence and preference to Fitbit (P > .85). Linear mixed effects modeling found adherence decreased significantly more over the study for the Fitbit (12% more, P < .001) even though more participants reported they would use the Fitbit over a year compared to the app (72.3% vs 46.8%). Reviewing symptoms weekly did not improve adherence, but most participants reported they would prefer to review symptoms with a clinician (74.5%) and on monthly basis (57.5%) compared to alternatives. Participants endorsed sleep as the most important symptom to monitor, forgetfulness as the largest barrier to self-monitoring, and raising self-awareness as the best reason for self-monitoring. CONCLUSIONS: We recommend a combined strategy of wearable and mobile monitoring that includes reminders, targets raising self-awareness, and tracks sleep. A clinician may want to review symptoms on a monthly basis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03358238.