Evidence has accrued to suggest that there are 2 distinct dimensions of narcissism, which are often labeled grandiose and vulnerable narcissism. Although individuals high on either of these dimensions interact with others in an antagonistic manner, they differ on other central constructs (e.g., Neuroticism, Extraversion). In the current study, we conducted an exploratory factor analysis of 3 prominent self-report measures of narcissism (N=858) to examine the convergent and discriminant validity of the resultant factors. A 2-factor structure was found, which supported the notion that these scales include content consistent with 2 relatively distinct constructs: grandiose and vulnerable narcissism. We then compared the similarity of the nomological networks of these dimensions in relation to indices of personality, interpersonal behavior, and psychopathology in a sample of undergraduates (n=238). Overall, the nomological networks of vulnerable and grandiose narcissism were unrelated. The current results support the need for a more explicit parsing of the narcissism construct at the level of conceptualization and assessment.
The DSM-5 includes a novel approach to the diagnosis of personality disorders (PDs) in Section III, in order to stimulate further research with the possibility that this proposal will be included more formally in future DSM iterations. The current study provides the first test of this proposal in a clinical sample by simultaneously examining its two primary components: a system for rating personality impairment and a newly developed dimensional model of pathological personality traits. Participants were community adults currently receiving outpatient mental health treatment who completed a semi-structured interview for DSM-IV PDs and were then rated in terms of personality impairment and pathological traits. Data on the pathological traits were also collected via self-reports using the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5). Both sets of trait scores were compared to self-report measures of general personality traits, internalizing symptoms, and externalizing behaviors. Inter-rater reliabilities for the clinicians’ ratings of impairment and the pathological traits were fair. The impairment ratings manifested substantial correlations with symptoms of depression and anxiety, DSM-5 PDs, and DSM-5 pathological traits. The clinician and self-reported personality trait scores demonstrated good convergence with one another, both accounted for substantial variance in DSM-IV PD constructs, and both manifested expected relations with the external criteria. The traits but not the impairment ratings demonstrated incremental validity in the prediction of the DSM-IV PDs. Overall, the current results support the general validity of several of the components of this new PD diagnostic system and point to areas that may require further modification.
The fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) includes an alternative model of personality disorders (PDs) in Section III, consisting in part of a pathological personality trait model. To date, the 220-item Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5; Krueger, Derringer, Markon, Watson, & Skodol, 2012) is the only extant self-report instrument explicitly developed to measure this pathological trait model. The present study used item response theory-based analyses in a large sample (n = 1,417) to investigate whether a reduced set of 100 items could be identified from the PID-5 that could measure the 25 traits and 5 domains. This reduced set of PID-5 items was then tested in a community sample of adults currently receiving psychological treatment (n = 109). Across a wide range of criterion variables including NEO PI-R domains and facets, DSM-5 Section II PD scores, and externalizing and internalizing outcomes, the correlational profiles of the original and reduced versions of the PID-5 were nearly identical (rICC = .995). These results provide strong support for the hypothesis that an abbreviated set of PID-5 items can be used to reliably, validly, and efficiently assess these personality disorder traits. The ability to assess the DSM-5 Section III traits using only 100 items has important implications in that it suggests these traits could still be measured in settings in which assessment-related resources (e.g., time, compensation) are limited.
There has been a substantial increase in the use of personality assessment measures constructed using items from the International Personality Item Pool (IPIP) such as the 300-item IPIP-NEO (Goldberg, 1999), a representation of the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI-R; Costa & McCrae, 1992). The IPIP-NEO is free to use and can be modified to accommodate its users' needs. Despite the substantial interest in this measure, there is still a dearth of data demonstrating its convergence with the NEO PI-R. The present study represents an investigation of the reliability and validity of scores on the IPIP-NEO. Additionally, we used item response theory (IRT) methodology to create a 120-item version of the IPIP-NEO. Using an undergraduate sample (n = 359), we examined the reliability, as well as the convergent and criterion validity, of scores from the 300-item IPIP-NEO, a previously constructed 120-item version of the IPIP-NEO (Johnson, 2011), and the newly created IRT-based IPIP-120 in comparison to the NEO PI-R across a range of outcomes. Scores from all 3 IPIP measures demonstrated strong reliability and convergence with the NEO PI-R and a high degree of similarity with regard to their correlational profiles across the criterion variables (rICC = .983, .972, and .976, respectively). The replicability of these findings was then tested in a community sample (n = 757), and the results closely mirrored the findings from Sample 1. These results provide support for the use of the IPIP-NEO and both 120-item IPIP-NEO measures as assessment tools for measurement of the five-factor model.
There has been a substantial increase in the simultaneous study of 3 related constructs--psychopathy, Machiavellianism, and narcissism--since being termed the dark triad (DT; Paulhus & Williams, 2002). Growing interest in the DT has led to the development of 2 short, efficient measures that reduce the number of items typically used from 124 to 12 (Dirty Dozen, or DD; Jonason & Webster, 2010) and 27 (Short Dark Triad, or SD3; Jones & Paulhus, in press), respectively. Using a community sample collected online (N = 287), we examined the convergent, discriminant, incremental, and criterion validity of scores from 2 brief measures of the DT. In general, scores from the SD3 scales manifested stronger convergent and incremental validity in relation to longer, more established measures of the DT constructs. Scores from both brief DT measures evidenced adequate discriminant validity as well as criterion validity in relation to traits from the five-factor model. However, the SD3 Narcissism Scale appears to assess primarily the grandiose aspects of this construct, whereas the DD captures both vulnerable and grandiose features of narcissism. Overall, if a short measure of the DT is required, the SD3 yields data that are more consistent with these constructs as they are measured using more established and validated measures.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.