Momentary assessment of the relations between narcissistic traits, interpersonal behaviors, and aggression.

INTRODUCTION: This study explores the associations among narcissistic traits, interpersonal behaviors, and aggression using repeated, situation-based measurement. We examine narcissism's relations with aggression across three levels of its theorized hierarchy (level 1: narcissism; level 2: grandiose vs. vulnerable narcissism; level 3: antagonism, agentic extraversion, and narcissistic neuroticism). METHODS: Using an experience-sampling approach, the current study examined the effects of narcissism and its finer-grained components on daily affective experiences and aggressive behaviors in the context of interpersonal interactions. Data were collected from 477 undergraduate students who were instructed to complete four prompts a day for ten consecutive days. RESULTS: Narcissism at the global construct level positively predicted multiple indices of episodic aggression (i.e., aggressive temper, aggressive urge, verbal aggression). At the dual-dimension level, grandiose narcissism specifically predicted aggression, and then at the trifurcated level, interpersonal antagonism predicted aggression by itself and in interaction with event-level negative affect. Negative affect consistently exhibited both within- and between-person effects on aggression. CONCLUSION: In real-life social interactions, narcissism dimensions differentially affect the way individuals experience social interactions and process negative affect, and thus in both research and clinical practice, narcissism is best assessed as a heterogeneous, multidimensional construct.

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.

Comparing Brief Measures of Narcissism-Internal Consistency, Validity, and Coverage.

Many measures, varying in breadth and length, have been constructed to measure narcissism. In recent years, super-short forms have become popular in research settings. Although brief measures hold some advantages, their brevity can come at psychometric costs. Participants recruited from Amazon's Mechanical Turk (N = 473) completed long and brief narcissism measures and criterion measures in a randomized order. Short forms were examined and compared to long forms in terms of their completion times and psychometric properties. Generally, the short forms demonstrated adequate internal consistency, variable convergence with each other, mostly moderate to strong convergence with long forms, and appropriate convergence with external criteria. These findings suggest that some short forms may be used when efficiency of survey administration is particularly important without significant psychometric cost. We discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the brief measures and make recommendations for which to use depending on the priorities of a given study.

The Questionable Practice of Partialing to Refine Scores on and Inferences About Measures of Psychological Constructs.

Partialing is a statistical approach researchers use with the goal of removing extraneous variance from a variable before examining its association with other variables. Controlling for confounds through analysis of covariance or multiple regression analysis and residualizing variables for use in subsequent analyses are common approaches to partialing in clinical research. Despite its intuitive appeal, partialing is fraught with undesirable consequences when predictors are correlated. After describing effects of partialing on variables, we review analytic approaches commonly used in clinical research to make inferences about the nature and effects of partialed variables. We then use two simulations to show how partialing can distort variables and their relations with other variables. Having concluded that, with rare exception, partialing is ill-advised, we offer recommendations for reducing or eliminating problematic uses of partialing. We conclude that the best alternative to partialing is to define and measure constructs so that it is not needed.

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.

Development of a measure of aggressive behavior expectancies in adults: The Aggression Expectancy Questionnaire.

According to sociocognitive theories, aggression is learned and elicited through a series of cognitive processes, such as expectancies, or the various consequences that an individual considers more or less likely following aggressive behavior. The current manuscript describes a measurement development project that ultimately yielded a 16-item measure of positive and negative aggression expectancies suitable for use in adult populations. Across two content generation surveys, two preliminary item refinement studies, and three full studies, we took an iterative approach and administered large item pools to several samples and refined item content through a combination of empirical (i.e., factor loadings, model fit) and conceptual (i.e., content breadth, non-redundancy) considerations. The Aggression Expectancy Questionnaire displays a four-factor structure, as well as evidence of convergent and divergent validity with self-reported aggression and relevant basic (e.g., antagonism, anger) and complex (e.g., psychopathy) personality variables. It is posited that this type of cognitive mechanism may serve as an intermediary link between distal characterological predictors of aggression and its proximal manifestation, which is in line with several prominent theories of personality and may ultimately hold clinical utility by providing a framework for aggression interventions.

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.

The relation between narcissism and aggression: A meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Narcissism is a complex, hierarchical construct that can be studied at the one, two, or three factor levels with different components within each level having their own unique nomological networks. The manner in which narcissism-both broadly and narrowly construed-is linked to aggression is important to understand given longstanding clinical and empirical observations of a link between the two and the critical implications of aggression. METHODS: The current preregistered meta-analysis (k = 118) took a novel methodological approach in exploring the association between the three levels of narcissism (i.e., global construct level, dual-dimension level, trifurcated level) and three indices of aggression (i.e., general, proactive, reactive). RESULTS: Results revealed that the global construct of narcissism shows a moderate positive association with different indices of aggression. Vulnerable narcissism associated strongly and positively with reactive aggression and general aggression. At the trifurcated level, interpersonal antagonism associated positively with all indices of aggression, agentic extraversion associated negatively with all indices of aggression, and narcissistic neuroticism associates positively with general and reactive aggression. CONCLUSION: The study highlighted the importance of studying narcissism, and potentially other personality profiles, at a finer-grained level to better understand crucial psychological processes associated with the construct of interest.

Structural brain differences do not mediate the relations between sex and personality or psychopathology.

INTRODUCTION: Males and females tend to exhibit small but reliable differences in personality traits and indices of psychopathology that are relatively stable over time and across cultures. Previous work suggests that sex differences in brain structure account for differences in domains of cognition. METHODS: We used data from the Human Connectome Project (N = 1098) to test whether sex differences in brain morphometry account for observed differences in the personality traits neuroticism and agreeableness, as well as symptoms of internalizing and externalizing psychopathology. We operationalized brain morphometry in three ways: omnibus measures (e.g., total gray matter volume), Glasser regions defined through a multi-modal parcellation approach, and Desikan regions defined by structural features of the brain. RESULTS: Most expected sex differences in personality, psychopathology, and brain morphometry were observed, but the statistical mediation analyses were null: sex differences in brain morphometry did not account for sex differences in personality or psychopathology. CONCLUSIONS: Men and women tend to exhibit meaningful differences in personality and psychopathology, as well as in omnibus morphometry and regional morphometric differences as defined by the Glasser and Desikan atlases, but these morphometric differences appear unrelated to the psychological differences.

The distinction between symptoms and traits in the Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP).

The Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP) is an empirically and quantitatively derived dimensional classification system designed to describe the features of psychopathology and, ultimately, to replace categorical nosologies. Among the constructs that HiTOP organizes are "symptom components" and "maladaptive traits," but past HiTOP publications have not fully explicated the distinction between symptoms and traits. We propose working definitions of symptoms and traits and explore challenges, exceptions, and remaining questions. Specifically, we propose that the only systematic difference between symptoms and traits in HiTOP is one of time frame. Maladaptive traits are dispositional constructs that describe persistent tendencies to manifest features of psychopathology, whereas symptoms are features of psychopathology as they are manifest during any specific time period (from moments to days to months). This has the consequence that almost every HiTOP dimension, at any level of the hierarchy, can be assessed as either a trait or a symptom dimension, by adjusting the framing of the assessment. We discuss the implications of these definitions for causal models of the relations between symptoms and traits and for distinctions between psychopathology, normal personality variation, and dysfunction.

Examining the conceptual and empirical distinctiveness of Agreeableness and "dark" personality items.

OBJECTIVE: A growing research literature has focused on what have been termed "dark" personality traits/constructs. More recently, the "dark factor" of personality has been proposed as a unifying framework for this research. To date, little work has rigorously investigated whether the traits/constructs investigated in the context of the dark factor can be captured by existing models of normative personality, namely Agreeableness from the Five-factor Model. Thus, the "dark factor" may be an instance of the "jangle" fallacy, where two constructs with different names are in fact the same construct. METHOD: We used a preregistered approach that made use of bass-ackward factor analysis, structural equation modeling, and nomological network analysis to investigate the distinction between the D factor and Agreeableness. RESULTS: Agreeableness and the D factor were similar in their coverage of antagonistic personality content, strongly negatively related (latent r = -.90), and showed near perfect profile dissimilarity (rICC  = -.99). CONCLUSIONS: The results suggested that the D factor can be understood as the opposite pole of Agreeableness (i.e., antagonism) and not as a distinct construct. We discuss the implications for researchers interested in continuing to advance the study of antagonistic personality traits.

Does Machiavellianism meaningfully differ from psychopathy? It depends.

Machiavellianism is a personality construct characterized by cynicism, callousness, and skillful manipulation of others to achieve personal gains. We review the Machiavellianism literature with a particular focus on its measurement alongside narcissism and psychopathy in the so-called "Dark Triad" (DT). We discuss criticisms of Machiavellianism on the grounds of insufficient construct validity as well as its virtual indistinguishability from psychopathy when assessed by commonly used instruments. As a response to these criticisms, we offer the super-short form of the Five Factor Machiavellianism Inventory (FFMI-SSF) as an alternative. The goal of the present study was to evaluate the FFMI-SSF in relation to psychopathy and basic personality traits (i.e., the Five Factor Model) and to compare it to widely used measures of the DT and psychopathy in a large undergraduate sample (n = 1004).

Development and Validation of the Super-Short Form of the Five Factor Machiavellianism Inventory (FFMI-SSF).

Previous findings have showed that existing measures of Machiavellianism often fail to distinguish Machiavellianism from another construct in the Dark Triad (i.e., psychopathy) and do not align with theoretical descriptions. To rectify this, a 52-item measure (i.e., FFMI) was developed to measure traits that are the most theoretically relevant to Machiavellianism using the Five-Factor model of personality. The aim of the current study is to develop a briefer version of the FFMI that can be used in situations in which efficiency is critical. Using data collected from three samples (total N = 1,945), we developed a 15-item measure of Machiavellianism (i.e., FFMI-SSF) that was shown to be similarly effective as the FFMI in capturing core personality traits relevant to Machiavellianism and distinguishing Machiavellianism from psychopathy and narcissism.

Exploring Gender Differences in Machiavellianism Using a Measurement Invariance Approach.

Research suggests that men and women differ on mean levels of Dark Triad personality constructs such as Machiavellianism, but few studies have investigated whether or not these differences are due to actual latent trait differences or bias in measurement. Further, recent research suggests important challenges associated with existing measures of MACH in terms of overlap with psychopathy and matching expert descriptions. The present study took a recently developed measure of Machiavellianism (the Five Factor Machiavellianism Inventory; FFMI), based on the five-factor model, and examined its invariance across gender. Strong (or scalar) factorial invariance was established, indicating that latent factor means can be compared between men and women using this measure. Mean-level differences showed that men had higher levels of latent factors related to antagonism and social dominance. In terms of total score, men reported significantly higher mean levels of Machiavellianism. The findings of the present study lend support to the notion that mean level differences in Machiavellianism across gender are not artifacts of measurement bias.

The quandary of covarying: A brief review and empirical examination of covariate use in structural neuroimaging studies on psychological variables.

Although covarying for potential confounds or nuisance variables is common in psychological research, relatively little is known about how the inclusion of covariates may influence the relations between psychological variables and indices of brain structure. In Part 1 of the current study, we conducted a descriptive review of relevant articles from the past two years of NeuroImage in order to identify the most commonly used covariates in work of this nature. Age, sex, and intracranial volume were found to be the most commonly used covariates, although the number of covariates used ranged from 0 to 14, with 37 different covariate sets across the 68 models tested. In Part 2, we used data from the Human Connectome Project to investigate the degree to which the addition of common covariates altered the relations between individual difference variables (i.e., personality traits, psychopathology, cognitive tasks) and regional gray matter volume (GMV), as well as the statistical significance of values associated with these effect sizes. Using traditional and random sampling approaches, our results varied widely, such that some covariate sets influenced the relations between the individual difference variables and GMV very little, while the addition of other covariate sets resulted in a substantially different pattern of results compared to models with no covariates. In sum, these results suggest that the use of covariates should be critically examined and discussed as part of the conversation on replicability in structural neuroimaging. We conclude by recommending that researchers pre-register their analytic strategy and present information on how relations differ based on the inclusion of covariates.

Using item-level analyses to better understand the consequences of partialing procedures: An example using the Dark Triad.

OBJECTIVE: Partialing procedures are frequently used in psychological research. The present study sought to further explore the consequences of partialing, focusing on the replicability of partialing-based results. METHOD: We used popular measures of the Dark Triad (DT; Machiavellianism, narcissism, and psychopathy) to explore the replicability of partialing procedures. We examined whether the residual content of popular DT scales is similar to the residual content of DT scales derived from separate samples based on relations with individual items from the IPIP-NEO-120, allowing for a finer-grained analysis of residual variable content. RESULTS: Profiles were compared using three sample sizes (Small N = 156-157, Moderate N = 313-314, Large N = 627-628) randomly drawn from a large MTurk sample (N = 1,255). There was low convergence between original and residual DT scales within samples. Additionally, results showed that the content of residual Dirty Dozen scales was not similar across samples. Comparable results were found for short Dark Triad-Machiavellianism, but only in the moderate and small samples. CONCLUSION: The results indicate that there are important issues that arise when using partialing procedures, including replicability issues surrounding residual variables. Reasons for the observed results are discussed and further research examining the replicability of residual-based results is recommended.

Conceptualizing the UPPS-P model of impulsive personality through network analysis: Key dimensions and general robustness across young adulthood.

OBJECTIVE: Within the UPPS-P model of impulsive personality, negative urgency, positive urgency, lack of premeditation, lack of perseverance, and sensation seeking dimensions have been linked to unique etiological mechanisms and outcomes. Yet, additional research is needed exploring direct relations among dimensions to determine how these relations may contribute to the nature of impulsive personality and its correlates. The current study used network analysis to clarify relations among UPPS-P dimensions and assess global robustness of these relations across young adulthood. METHOD: Participants included a longitudinal sample of 525 college students (48% male, 18-26 years) who completed the UPPS-P once per year for three consecutive years. RESULTS: Network structure was globally robust with particularly strong relations emerging between positive and negative urgency, as well as between lack of premeditation and lack of perseverance, across waves. Lack of premeditation consistently emerged as a central dimension. Additional analyses suggested lack of premeditation and sensation seeking as most robustly related with retrospectively reported frequency of alcohol use. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggested general robustness in the relations among impulsive personality dimensions, with relations involving lack of premeditation being particularly important for characterizing impulsive personality's nature. Sensation seeking and lack of premeditation may warrant particular focus when linking impulsive personality with frequency of alcohol use.

Exploring the structure of narcissism: Toward an integrated solution.

OBJECTIVE: Despite decades of work on narcissism, there remain many active areas of exploration and debate including a clear and consensual description of its underlying components. Understanding narcissism's factor structure is necessary for the precise measurement and investigation of specific psychological and behavioral processes. The aim of the current study was to explore the structure of narcissism by examining it at varying hierarchical levels. METHOD: Participants recruited from Amazon's Mechanical Turk (N = 591) completed 303 narcissism items encompassing 46 narcissism scales and subscales. Criterion variables measuring the five-factor model, self-esteem, aggression, and externalizing behavior were also collected. RESULTS: A series of factor analyses reveal the factor structure of narcissism at a range of specificities. No more than five meaningful factors (i.e., Grandiosity, Neuroticism, Antagonism, Distrustful Self-reliance, Attention-seeking) were identified and the most parsimonious model appears to be a three-factor structure. Narcissism scales that effectively capture each of the identified factors are identified. Factors diverged in their associations with criterion variables. CONCLUSIONS: A three-factor model (i.e., Agentic Extraversion, Narcissistic Neuroticism, Self-centered Antagonism) seems to be the most parsimonious conceptualization. Larger factor solutions are discussed, but future research will be necessary to determine the value of these increasingly narrow factors.

Criterion A of the AMPD in HiTOP.

The categorical model of personality disorder classification in the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed. [DSM-5]; American Psychiatric Association, 2013 ) is highly and fundamentally problematic. Proposed for DSM-5 and provided within Section III (for Emerging Measures and Models) was the Alternative Model of Personality Disorder (AMPD) classification, consisting of Criterion A (self-interpersonal deficits) and Criterion B (maladaptive personality traits). A proposed alternative to the DSM-5 more generally is an empirically based dimensional organization of psychopathology identified as the Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP; Kotov et al., 2017 ). HiTOP currently includes, at the highest level, a general factor of psychopathology. Further down are the five domains of detachment, antagonistic externalizing, disinhibited externalizing, thought disorder, and internalizing (along with a provisional sixth somatoform dimension) that align with Criterion B. The purpose of this article is to discuss the potential inclusion and placement of the self-interpersonal deficits of the DSM-5 Section III Criterion A within HiTOP.

Uncovering the structure of agreeableness from self-report measures.

OBJECTIVE: Although there are several models of the lower-order structure of Agreeableness, empirically derived descriptions of this domain are largely nonexistent. We examined the factor structure of Agreeableness items from multiple scales in order to empirically determine the facet-level structure of the domain. METHOD: Participants (N = 1,205; 73% female; 84% White; Mage = 35.5, SD = 17.26) completed 131 items from 22 scales measuring Agreeableness. RESULTS: A series of factor analyses was conducted on 104 items to identify factor emergence of the domain from a single factor to increasingly more specific factors. A five-factor solution consisting of facets labeled Compassion, Morality, Trust, Affability, and Modesty was identified as most appropriate. Factors from all levels of the construct were compared to current measures of the domain as well as a number of criterion variables. The patterns of association with criterion variables at the lower level of the Agreeableness domain showed significant divergence. CONCLUSIONS: The current results highlight how specific Agreeableness traits unfold from broader to more specific facets and how these traits are represented in existing measures of this important domain.