Convergence of narcissism measures from the perspective of general personality functioning

The construct of narcissism has a lengthy history and has been operationalized and measured by a variety of instruments. In this study, five narcissism scales were compared in terms of alternative conceptualizations of narcissism offered by C. C. Morf and F. Rhodewalt (2001), D. L. Paulhus (2001), and S. Vazire and D. C. Funder (2006), using the domains and facets of the five-factor model as a common point of comparison. The findings provided little support for the conceptualizations of Morf and Rhodewalt or Vazire and Funder. Support was obtained for the conceptualization of Paulhus, particularly as assessed by the Narcissistic Personality Inventory and, secondarily, the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory-III. Implications for the assessment and conceptualization of narcissism are discussed.     

A Comparison of Obsessive–Compulsive Personality Disorder Scales

In this study, we utilized a large undergraduate sample (N = 536), oversampled for the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed., text revision [DSM–IV–TR]; American Psychiatric Association, 2000) obsessive–compulsive personality disorder (OCPD) pathology, to compare 8 self-report measures of OCPD. No prior study has compared more than 3 measures, and the results indicate that the scales had only moderate convergent validity. We also went beyond the existing literature to compare these scales to 2 external reference points: their relationships with a well-established measure of the five-factor model of personality (FFM) and clinicians' ratings of their coverage of the DSM–IV–TR criterion set. When the FFM was used as a point of comparison, the results suggest important differences among the measures with respect to their divergent representation of conscientiousness, neuroticism, and agreeableness. Additionally, an analysis of the construct coverage indicated that the measures also varied in terms of their representation of particular diagnostic criteria. For example, whereas some scales contained items distributed across the diagnostic criteria, others were concentrated more heavily on particular features of the DSM–IV–TR disorder.     

An examination of the Validity of the Elemental Psychopathy Assessment: Relations with Other Psychopathy Measures,Aggression, and Externalizing Behaviors

The Elemental Psychopathy Assessment (EPA) is a new self-report measure of psychopathy designed to assess the personality traits associated with psychopathy from a Five Factor Model perspective. The current study examined the validity of the EPA in sample of undergraduates by examining the relations between the EPA scales and three validated self-report psychopathy instruments, as well as assessments of aggression, substance use, and antisocial behavior. The EPA scales manifested strong convergent validity with the extant psychopathy measures and an expected pattern of relations with measures of externalizing behaviors. Overall, the EPA appears to be a promising measure of psychopathy which provides new opportunities to explore the underlying structure of this construct and parse its relations with constructs central to its nomological network.     

Gender bias in self-report personality disorder inventories

There has been considerable controversy and research regarding gender biases in the diagnosis of personality disorders, but few studies have explored whether personality disorder self-report inventories might contain gender biases. The current study investigated whether items from three commonly used inventories evidence a potential for gender bias. Subjects were from outpatient mental health clinics. Items were considered gender biased if they exhibited gender differences and failed to correlate with or, more importantly, correlated negatively with dysfunction. Thirty-eight items evidenced potential bias, the majority of which were from Narcissistic scales. The implications of the results for the clinical assessment of purportedly maladaptive personality traits and for the construction of personality disorder scales are discussed.     

A five-factor measure of dependent personality traits

This study provides convergent, discriminant, and incremental validity data for a new measure of dependent personality traits from the perspective of the five-factor model (FFM). Dependent personality trait scales were constructed as maladaptive variants of FFM facets (e.g., Gullibility as a maladaptive variant of FFM trust). Based on responses from 383 undergraduates, the convergent validity of the Five-Factor Dependency Inventory (FFDI) scales was tested with respect to 2 measures of the FFM, 6 dependency trait scales, and 4 measures of dependent personality disorder. Discriminant validity was tested with respect to FFM facets from alternative domains. Incremental validity was tested with respect to the ability of the FFM dependent personality trait scales to account for variance in 2 established measures of dependency, after variance accounted for by respective FFM facet scales and other measures of DPD was first removed. The results of this study provided support for the validity of the FFDI assessment of dependency from the perspective of the FFM.     

Measures to assess maladaptive variants of the five-factor model

The five-factor model (FFM) is the predominant dimensional model of general personality structure. A considerable body of research supports the hypothesis that personality disorders can be conceptualized as extreme or maladaptive variants of the domains and facets of the FFM. However, existing measures of the FFM are confined largely to the normal variants. The purpose of this special section of the Journal of Personality Assessment is to provide the development and initial validation of self-report inventory scales to assess obsessive-compulsive, borderline, narcissistic, avoidant, and dependent personality traits from the perspective of the FFM, which complement the similarly constructed existing measures for psychopathic, histrionic, and schizotypal personality traits.     

A five-factor measure of schizotypal personality traits

The current study provides convergent, discriminant, and incremental validity data for a new measure of schizotypy from the perspective of the five-factor model (FFM) of general personality structure. Nine schizotypy scales were constructed as maladaptive variants of respective facets of the FFM (e.g., Aberrant Ideas as a maladaptive variant of FFM Openness to Ideas). On the basis of data from 143 undergraduates, the convergent validity of these nine scales was tested with respect to seven established measures of schizotypy and the respective facets of the FFM. Discriminant validity was tested with respect to facets from other FFM domains and components of schizotypy. Incremental validity was tested with respect to the ability of the FFM schizotypy scales to account for variance in two established measures of schizotypy, after variance accounted for by respective FFM facets and other established measures of schizotypy were first removed. The findings support the validity of these new scales as measures of schizotypal traits and as maladaptive variants of the FFM.