Psychopathy and the Five Factor Model in a Noninstitutionalized Sample: A Domain and Facet Level Analysis

The relationship of primary and secondary psychopathic dispositions as measured by the Levenson Self-Report Psychopathy (LSRP) Scales to NEO-PI-R domain and facet scales of the Five Factor Model (FFM) was examined in a sample (N = 463) of young adults. Previous investigations were extended by (1) addressing the relationship of higher- (i.e., domain) and lower-order (i.e., facet) FFM traits to primary and secondary psychopathy in noninstitutionalized persons, in an attempt to validate hypotheses by T. A. Widiger and D. R. Lynam (1998); (2) examining sex differences in FFM traits in relation to these two psychopathic dispositions; and (3) lending further evidence for the validity of the LSRP. LSRP primary psychopathy was marked by low Agreeableness whereas LSRP secondary psychopathy was characterized by high Neuroticism, low Agreeableness, and low Conscientiousness. Although few sex differences were found between primary and secondary psychopathy, findings support the use of NEO-PI-R domain and facet scales in the identification of personality disorder.     

Borderline and avoidant personality disorders and the five-factor model of personality: a comparison between DSM-IV diagnoses and NEO-PI-R.

A self-report measure of the Five-Factor Model (FFM) of personality, NEO-PI-R, was administered to a sample of patients with borderline (BPD, N = 29) or avoidant PD (AVPD, N = 34), admitted to a day treatment program, to investigate the NEO-PI-R profiles of the disorders, and the ability of NEO-PI-R to discriminate between the two disorders. The diagnoses were assessed according to the LEAD standard. AVPD was associated with high levels of Neuroticism and Agreeableness, and low levels of Extraversion and Conscientiousness. BPD was associated with high levels of Neuroticism and low levels of Agreeableness, Extraversion, and Conscientiousness. Eighty-eight percent of the AVPD group had high scores on Neuroticism and low scores on Extraversion, whereas 65% of the BPD group were high on Neuroticism and low on Agreeableness. The Extraversion and Agreeableness scales of NEO-PI-R discriminated between patients with BPD and those with AVPD. Patients with BPD scored significantly higher on the Angry Hostility and Impulsiveness subscales of Neuroticism and significantly lower on three Extraversion subscales, three Agreeableness subscales, and one Conscientiousness subscale. At the DSM-IV criterion level, there were more significant relationships between the subscales of NEO-PI-R and the AVPD criteria than with the BPD criteria. The findings suggest that the FFM has good discriminating ability regarding BPD and AVPD. However, there may be a closer conceptual relationship between the FFM and AVPD than between the FFM and BPD.     

Cross-cultural replication of the five-factor model and comparison of the NEO-PI-R and MMPI-2 PSY-5 scales in a Dutch psychiatric sample

The authors investigated cross-cultural replicability of the five-factor model (FFM) of personality as represented by the revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R; P. T. Costa & R. R. McCrae, 1992) in a sample of 423 Dutch psychiatric patients. Also, NEO-PI-R domain scales were compared with the Personality Psychopathology Five (PSY-5; A. R. Harkness & J. L. McNulty, 1994) scales of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (J. N. Butcher, W. G. Dahlstrom, J. R. Graham, A. Tellegen, & B. Kaemmer, 2002). Principal-components analysis with procrustean rotation confirmed the hypothesized structural similarity of the present sample with the U.S. normative factor scores. All of the hypothesized relations between NEO-PI-R and PSY-5 scales were confirmed. The results provide evidence for cross-cultural replicability of the FFM and for validity of the NEO-PI-R and PSY-5 constructs in the psychological assessment of psychiatric patients.     

Competition and cooperation in the five-factor model: individual differences in achievement orientation

The authors investigated the relationship between basic achievement orientations of competition and cooperation and the five-factor model of personality as measured by the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R; P. T. Costa & R. R. McCrae, 1992). They examined 2 types of competition: hypercompetition (R. M. Ryckman, B. Thornton, & J. C. Butler, 1994) and personal development competition (R. M. Ryckman, M. Hammer, L. M. Kaczor, & J. A. Gold, 1996), as conceptualized by K. Horney (1937). In a sample of 251 young adults, 14% to 38% of the variance in achievement orientations was collectively predicted by NEO-PI-R domain scales. Of NEO-PI-R predictors, Agreeableness was most important in characterizing differences between various achievement orientations; Agreeableness was negatively related to hypercompetition, positively related to cooperation, and unrelated to personal development competition. Extraversion was positively related to both cooperation and personal development competition but was unrelated to hypercompetition. In contrast, Openness and Conscientiousness were least helpful in differentiating among achievement orientations. These findings support the useful application of the NEO-PI-R in achievement research and highlight competition and cooperation as interpersonally laden achievement orientations.     

Matters of conscience and conscientiousness: the place of ego development in the Five-factor model

The Five-factor model (FFM; Digman, 1990; Goldberg, 1990) and Loevinger's (1994) theory of ego development are two active research traditions that are often construed as incompatible approaches to the study of personality. For example, each theory proposes a different view of the concept of conscientiousness. Loevinger argued that FFM conscientiousness, which emphasizes attributes such as order, self-discipline, and achievement striving, lacks a moral component and is more similar to the conformist stage in her theory. To investigate these claims, we administered the Revised NEO-Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R; Costa & McCrae, 1992) and the Washington University Sentence Completion Test (WUSCT; Hy & Loevinger, 1996) to 120 university students on 2 separate occasions. Together, the five traits of the FFM significantly predicted item sum scores from the WUSCT (multiple R = .54). Unique linear relationships of Openness to Experience and Agreeableness with ego level demonstrated that the two theories proposed similar constructs. We argue that these two FFM dimensions have conceptual relevance to the cognitive and interpersonal aspects of the ego development construct. We draw further connections between these FFM dimensions, ego development, and human values.     

Autotelic personality through a five-factor lens: Individual differences in flow-propensity

Autotelic personality represents an individual difference factor believed to have an increased propensity to experience flow. In 316 young adults, we administered the Dispositional Flow Scale-2 (DFS-2; Jackson & Eklund, 2002) targeted to general life activities to capture cross-situational consistency in the propensity to experience flow, and a well-established measure of the Five Factor Model of personality (i.e., the NEO Personality Inventory Revised; NEO-PI-R; Costa & McCrae, 1992). NEO-PI-R domains of Neuroticism (−), Extraversion (+), Agreeableness (−), and Conscientiousness (+) predicted global flow propensity, accounting for 38% of the measured variance. Canonical correlation analysis highlighted these domains in relation to DFS-2 components of flow with the first canonical correlation (R = .73) accounting for 53.4% of the shared variance between NEO domains and DFS-2 subscales. Individually, DFS-2 subscales were variously predicted by NEO domains (e.g., Time Transformation at 4%; Clear Goals at 44%). NEO Openness was notably lacking in predicting flow components. These findings emphasize the strong and substantial relationship of FFM personality traits to flow-propensity.     

Positive and negative symptoms of schizotypy and the Five-factor model: a domain and facet level analysis

In this study, we investigated the Five-factor model in the concurrent prediction of positive symptom schizotypy as measured by the Magical Ideation (Eckblad & Chapman, 1983) and Perceptual Aberration (Chapman, Chapman, & Raulin, 1978) scales and negative symptom schizotypy as measured by the Physical Anhedonia (Chapman, Chapman, & Raulin, 1976) and Revised Social Anhedonia (Eckblad, Chapman, Chapman, & Mishlove, 1982; Mishlove & Chapman, 1985) scales. Previous studies suggest that these measures reflect the core symptoms found in schizotypal and schizoid personality disorder (Bailey, West, Widiger, & Freiman, 1993). Negative symptoms were significantly predicted by Neuroticism (+), Extraversion (-), Openness (-), and Agreeableness (-) domains of the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R; Costa & McCrae, 1992). Additionally, positive symptoms were significantly predicted by Neuroticism (+), Openness (+), and Agreeableness (-). In addition, we examined the validity of lower order traits in de- scribing these symptoms of character pathology. These findings lend further support for the use of domain and facet scales of the NEO-PI-R in the identification of personality pathology.     

The Eysenckian personality factors and their correlations with academic performance

Background. The relationship between personality and academic performance has long been explored, and a recent meta‐analysis established that measures of the five‐factor model (FFM) dimension of Conscientiousness have similar validity to intelligence measures. Although currently dominant, the FFM is only one of the currently accepted models of personality, and has limited theoretical support. In contrast, the Eysenckian personality model was developed to assess a specific theoretical model and is still commonly used in educational settings and research. Aims. This meta‐analysis assessed the validity of the Eysenckian personality measures for predicting academic performance. Sample. Statistics were obtained for correlations with Psychoticism, Extraversion, and Neuroticism (20–23 samples; N from 8,013 to 9,191), with smaller aggregates for the Lie scale (7 samples; N= 3,910). Methods. The Hunter–Schmidt random effects method was used to estimate population correlations between the Eysenckian personality measures and academic performance. Moderating effects were tested using weighted least squares regression. Results. Significant but modest validities were reported for each scale. Neuroticism and Extraversion had relationships with academic performance that were consistent with previous findings, while Psychoticism appears to be linked to academic performance because of its association with FFM Conscientiousness. Age and educational level moderated correlations with Neuroticism and Extraversion, and gender had no moderating effect. Correlations varied significantly based on the measurement instrument used. Conclusions. The Eysenckian scales do not add to the prediction of academic performance beyond that provided by FFM scales. Several measurement problems afflict the Eysenckian scales, including low to poor internal reliability and complex factor structures. In particular, the measurement and validity problems of Psychoticism mean its continued use in academic settings is unjustified.     

Autobiographical memory as a dynamic process: Autobiographical memory mediates basic tendencies and characteristic adaptations

Two studies tested whether autobiographical memory content and phenomenology mediate two consistent findings in the personality literature: Neuroticism and subjective health and Conscientiousness and achievement striving. In Study 1, participants (N = 162) retrieved and rated four memories and completed measures of Neuroticism and subjective health. In Study 2, participants (N = 345) retrieved and rated two memories and completed measures of Conscientiousness and achievement goals and study strategies. In both studies, memory content and phenomenology mediated the relations between personality and health and achievement in expected ways. For example, participants high in Neuroticism reported more somatic complaints because their memories were saturated with negative affective content. Discussion focuses on the utility of integrating trait and social–cognitive approaches to personality.     

Neuroticism: how does one slice the PI(e)?

Costa and McCrae's operationalization of the Five-Factor Model, the Neuroticism, Extraversion, and Openness Personality Inventory—Revised (NEO-PI-R; Costa and McCrae, 1992a), measures five broad dimensions of personality: Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness. According to Costa and McCrae, the Neuroticism (N) domain scale subsumes six facets. Although derived rationally and tested factor analytically, the factorial structure of the facet scales has yet to be unequivocally confirmed with analytic methods imposed at the item level. Using confirmatory and exploratory factor-analytic techniques, this study examines and tests the structure of the N domain scale of the NEO-PI-R. Confirmatory factor analysis indicates poor replication of the structure of the N scale. Results of the exploratory factor analysis indicate that while three of the facets replicated quite well, the other three factors did not correspond to Costa and McCrae's formulation. Future research should elaborate on the factorial structure and construct validity of the N facet scales, especially if they are to be used and interpreted in personality and clinical assessment. © 1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Experimental Manipulation of NEO-PI-R Items

Research assessing the relationship of the Five-factor model (FFM) of personality to personality disorder symptomatology has generally been consistent with theoretical expectations. Three exceptions, however, have been failures to confirm predicted associations of the NEO-Personality Inventory-Revised (NEO-PI-R; Costa & McCrae, 1992b) Conscientiousness scale with obsessive-compulsive personality disorder symptomatology, the NEO-PI-R Agreeableness scale with dependent symptomatology, and the NEO-PI-R Openness scale with schizotypal symptomatology. It was the hypothesis of this study that these findings might be due in part to a relative emphasis on adaptive rather than maladaptive variants of these domains of personality functioning within the NEO-PI-R. This hypothesis was tested by experimentally altering NEO-PI-R items to reverse their implications for maladaptiveness. The predicted correlations of the FFM were confirmed with the experimentally altered items in a sample of 86 adult psychiatric outpatients.     

Development and initial validation of validity scales for the NEO-Five Factor Inventory

Based upon the methodology established by Schinka, Kinder, and Kremer (Schinka, J. A., Kinder, B. N., & Kremer, T. (1997). Research validity scales for the NEO-PI-R: Development and initial validation. Journal of Personality Assessment, 68, 127–138), a set of validity scales were developed for the NEO-Five Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI, Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory and NEO Five Factor Inventory Professional Manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources). In Study 1, 111 undergraduates completed the NEO-FFI and item means, standard deviations, and intercorrelations were used to construct measures of Positive Impression Management, Negative Impression Management, and Inconsistent Responding. In Study 2, 146 participants completed the NEO-FFI under one of five instructional sets (control, fake good, fake bad, graduate psychology and police academy admissions). A set of randomly produced NEO-FFI profiles were added to this data set. ANOVA results provided support for the utility of the validity scales, as they were differentially sensitive to random responding, positive and negative impression management in hypothesized ways.     

Cognitive and affective components of empathy and their relationship with personality dimensions in a Chinese sample

Empathy is an essential component of social interactions and may be related to personality characteristics. However, this issue has not been extensively examined in a Chinese sample. Students at six universities in China (N = 257) completed the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI), the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire‐Revised (EPQ‐R), and the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS‐21). Using multiple regression analyses, and after accounting for demographic variables (sex and age), it was found that the affective empathy component Personal Distress positively predicted EPQ‐R Neuroticism scores (β = .49), negatively predicted Extraversion (β = –.21) and Lie scale scores (β = –.22), and positively predicted DASS‐21 Depression (β = .26), Anxiety (β = .34) and Stress scores (β = .39). Empathic Concern positively predicted Lie Scale scores (β = .21), and negatively predicted Psychoticism scores (β = –.24). Individuals with high scores in Empathic Concern were also found to score more highly on Fantasy, Personal Distress, Neuroticism, Stress and Anxiety. Thus, more empathic individuals are likely to experience elevations in negative affectivity when they perceive the emotional suffering of others.     

Psychopathy and the Five-factor model of personality: a replication and extension

It has recently been argued that psychopathy can be understood and represented using common dimensions of personality taken from the Five-factor model (FFM). In this research, we examined this possibility by using the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R; Costa & McCrae, 1992) to assess psychopathy in an undergraduate sample. Specifically, we matched individuals' NEO-PI-R profiles with an expert-generated psychopathy prototype to yield a psychopathy score. These scores were correlated with self-reports of drug use, delinquency, risky sex, aggression, and several laboratory tasks. FFM psychopathy was significantly related to all forms of deviance, although the effects tended to be small in size. Moreover, individuals who more closely resembled the prototypic FFM psychopath were more aggressive in a laboratory aggression task, less willing to delay gratification in a time discounting task, and demonstrated a preference for aggressive responses in a social information-processing paradigm.     

A personological examination of self- and other-forgiveness in the five factor model

In a sample composed of 147 undergraduates (age range 18 to 55 years; M = 22), we conducted an examination of the convergent and discriminant validity of self- and other-forgiveness in the Five-factor model of personality (FFM). Using multiple measures of each construct, principal components analysis (PCA) supported a 2-component model of forgiveness. Findings for the PCA and external correlates with the FFM provided evidence for a largely orthogonal relationship between self- and other-forgiveness. Specifically, self-forgiveness was negatively related to Neuroticism and unrelated to Agreeableness, whereas other-forgiveness was unrelated to Neuroticism and positively related to Agreeableness. Overlap between the constructs was found in which both self- and other-forgiveness were negatively related to the hostility facet of Neuroticism and the order facet from Conscientiousness and positively related to the warmth and positive emotions facet scales from the Extraversion domain of the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (Costa & McCrae, 1992). Overall, these findings suggest that self- and other-forgiveness, although seemingly similar, carry very different motivational underpinnings.     

Comparative validity of the Shedler and Westen Assessment Procedure-200

A predominant dimensional model of general personality structure is the five-factor model (FFM). Quite a number of alternative instruments have been developed to assess the domains of the FFM. The current study compares the validity of 2 alternative versions of the Shedler and Westen Assessment Procedure (SWAP-200) FFM scales, 1 that was developed on the basis of items identified by J. Shedler and D. Westen (2004) and 1 that used items identified by R. R. McCrae, C. E. Lokenhoff, and P. T. Costa (2005). The comparative validity of both measures was examined in a sample of persons who evidenced personality-related problems in living (N = 94). The McCrae et al. Neuroticism, Agreeableness, and Openness scales were superior to their respective Shedler and Westen scales. Both research teams developed comparably valid Extraversion and Conscientiousness scales. Implications of the results for future SWAP-200 research are discussed.     

On the invalidity of validity scales: evidence from self-reports and observer ratings in volunteer samples

Because of the potential for bias and error in questionnaire responding, many personality inventories include validity scales intended to correct biased scores or identify invalid protocols. The authors evaluated the utility of several types of validity scales in a volunteer sample of 72 men and 106 women who completed the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R; P. T. Costa & R. R. McCrae, 1992) and the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire (MPQ; A. Tellegen, 1978/1982) and were rated by 2 acquaintances on the observer form of the NEO-PI-R. Analyses indicated that the validity indexes lacked utility in this sample. A partial replication (N = 1,728) also failed to find consistent support for the use of validity scales. The authors illustrate the use of informant ratings in assessing protocol validity and argue that psychological assessors should limit their use of validity scales and seek instead to improve the quality of personality assessments.     

The Mental Vulnerability Questionnaire: A psychometric evaluation

Eplov, L.F., Petersen, J., Jørgensen, T., Johansen, C., Birket‐Smith, M., Lyngberg, A. C. & Mortensen, E. L. (2010). The Mental Vulnerability Questionnaire: A psychometric evaluation. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology 51, 548–554. The Mental Vulnerability Questionnaire was originally a 22 item scale, later reduced to a 12 item scale. In population studies the 12 item scale has been a significant predictor of health and illness. The scale has not been psychometrically evaluated for more than 30 years, and the aim of the present study was both to evaluate the psychometric properties of the 22 and 12 item scales and of three new scales. The main study sample was a community sample comprising more than 6,000 men and women. In this sample the coefficients of homogeneity were all over 0.30 for the three new scales, but below 0.30 for the 12 and the 22 item scales. All five Mental Vulnerability scales had positively skewed score distributions which were associated significantly with both SCL‐90‐R symptom scores and NEO‐PI‐R personality scales (primarily Neuroticism and Extraversion). Coefficient alpha was highest for the 22 and 12 item scales, and the two scales also showed the highest long‐term stability. The three new scales reflect relatively independent dimensions of Psychosomatic Symptoms, Mental Symptoms, and Interpersonal Problems, but because of reliability problems it remains an open question whether they will prove useful as predictors of health and morbidity.     

International comparison of Cloninger’s temperament dimensions

Cloninger’s Tridimensional Personality Questionnaire (TPQ) and Temperament and Character Inventory (TCI) have been developed to measure the following temperament dimensions: novelty seeking (NS), harm avoidance (HA), reward dependence (RD) and persistence (P). We used our previous Finnish normative study of the TPQ and TCI (Miettunen et al., 2004) to estimate correction coefficients to convert TPQ scales to comparable TCI scales. Our aim was to compare these corrected temperament dimension scores across 20 countries adjusting for study sample differences in age and gender. In all, some variations were found in these temperament scores between countries. Differences were especially apparent between the Asian and the Western countries. By far the lowest mean score of the RD was in Japan (11.2 vs. 15.4 for other countries; effect size Cohen’s d = −5.74; z-test p < 0.001) and the highest mean score in P was in USA (5.5 vs. 4.4; d = 4.24, p = 0.001). Some of the findings could be explained by sample differences (e.g. age and education); while some may reflect real differences in the ways which personality is related to cultural factors, such as individualism/collectivism. These differences should be considered when interpreting studies with data on TPQ/TCI from different countries.     

Individual differences in relatedness and individuality: An exploration of two constructs

Sociotropy and autonomy are two personality dimensions that relate to an individual's vulnerability to depression. Independent and interdependent self-construals are two distinctive cognitive formulations of the self derived from cross-cultural research. Both of these sets of constructs reflect self and other orientations. The purpose of the present study was to empirically examine the various factors that emerge when these two constructs are integrated. 652 participants responded to the Personal Style Inventory [Robins, C. J., Ladd, J., Welkowitz, J., Blaney, P. H., Diaz, R. & Kutcher, G. (1991). The Personal Style Inventory: Preliminary validation studies of new measures of sociotropy and autonomy. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 16, 277–300.], the Sociotropy-Autonomy Scale [Clark, D. A. & Beck, A. T. (1991). Personality factors in dysphoria: A psychometric refinement of Beck's Sociotropy-Autonomy Scale. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 13, 369–388.] and the Self-Construal Scale [Singelis, T. M. (1994). The measurement of independent and interdependent self-construals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 580–591.]. Four factors emerged from a factor analysis conducted on the items of the three scales measuring sociotropy-autonomy and independent and interdependent self-construal. These four factors are discussed in the context of vulnerability to depression.