Search

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) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Work on narcissism has identified two variants: grandiose and vulnerable. The variants share an antagonistic core, but differ in neuroticism and extraversion. The current study explored how the variants relate to behavioral aggression following provocation. Results showed an interaction between grandiose narcissism and condition, such that grandiose narcissism was positively related to aggression only among those who were provoked, though the magnitude of this interaction was dependent on which measure of grandiose narcissism was used. A similar effect for vulnerable narcissism was not found. Moderated mediation analyses showed that antagonism-related traits were responsible for this relation. For vulnerable narcissism, moderated mediation results showed competing relations among vulnerable narcissism components—neuroticism-related traits were negatively related while antagonism-related traits were positively related. Results are discussed in the context of previous work. Antagonism-related traits, as opposed to traits related to extraversion and neuroticism, are most important in explaining narcissistic aggression.

Tests of statistical interactions (or tests of moderation effects) in personality disorder research are a common way for researchers to examine nuanced hypotheses relevant to personality pathology. However, the nature of statistical interactions makes them difficult to reliably detect in many research scenarios. The present study used a flexible, simulation-based approach to estimate statistical power to detect trait-by-trait interactions common to psychopathy research using the Triarchic Model of Psychopathy and the Psychopathic Personality Inventory. Our results show that even above average sample sizes in these literatures (e.g., N = 428) provide inadequate power to reliably detect trait-by-trait interactions, and the sample sizes needed to detect interaction effect sizes in realistic scenarios are extremely large, ranging from 1,300 to 5,200. The implications for trait-by-trait interactions in psychopathy are discussed, as well as how the present findings might generalize to other areas of personality disorder research. We provide recommendations for how to design research studies that can provide informative tests of interactions in personality disorder research, but also highlight that a more realistic option is to abandon the traditional approach when testing for interaction effects and adopt alternative approaches that may be more productive.

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

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.

We respond to a critique by Patrick et al. (2020) of our recent study (Roy et al., 2020) that raised questions regarding the three-factor model of the Triarchic Psychopathy Measure (TriPM). Roy et al. demonstrated that a replicable model involving seven unidimensional factors accounted for the TriPM items across North American and European general population samples, as well as European male offenders. Despite having access to large TriPM datasets, the Patrick et al. critique relied on tangential analyses of general personality traits, using a single college sample with TriPM data as supplemental. Thus, Patrick et al. ignored findings highlighting multidimensional TriPM scales and the uncertainty they introduce with respect to the larger nomological network of psychopathy. In our reply, we demonstrate additional problems with the three-factor TriPM model and show that the seven-factor model out-performs the three-factor model in predicting correlates of psychopathy. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

As research on the dark triad (DT; the interrelated constructs of Machiavellianism, narcissism, and psychopathy) has accumulated, a subset of this research has focused on explicating what traits may account for the overlap among the DT members. Various candidate traits have been investigated, with evidence supporting several of them, including antagonism (vs. agreeableness), honesty-humility, and callousness and interpersonal manipulation (the latter 2 as a set). The present study sought to test the leading candidates against one another in their ability to account for the shared variance among the DT members. Using a preregistered analytical plan, we found that agreeableness (as measured by the International Personality Item Pool-NEO-120), honesty-humility (H/H) from the HEXACO-Personality Inventory, and the Self-Report Psychopathy Scale subscales of Callous Affect and Interpersonal Manipulation accounted for all or nearly all of the shared variance among the DT members. Big Five Inventory (BFI)-based measures of Agreeableness (BFI and BFI-2) accounted for notably less variance in most cases. The results were consistent across 2 large samples (Ns of 627 and 628) and across various DT measurement approaches. We argue that the most parsimonious explanation for findings on the core of the DT is that such traits all fall under the umbrella of antagonism. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Agreeableness is one of the major domains included within prominent hierarchical models of personality like the five–factor model. (Low) agreeableness is the strongest correlate of a variety of antisocial behaviours relative to the other five–factor model domains. Although there is substantial evidence that (low) agreeableness is arguably the most important personality correlate of various antisocial behaviours, this evidence is descriptive and provides little information on the direction or processes underlying the relation. Process–related research has started to provide more insight into how agreeableness–related traits give rise to various antisocial and prosocial behaviours. The proposed study looked to first replicate previous research on some of the potential cognitive–emotional processes related to agreeableness and then conduct exploratory analyses to identify which, if any, of the empirically identified facets of agreeableness bear specific relations to the processes under study. Overall, we were unable to replicate the primary effects of interest in regard to processes of agreeableness and found little support for our preregistered confirmatory and exploratory hypotheses despite having high power (≥.94) to detect these effects. Nonetheless, process models of personality remain at the vanguard of personality research, and we discuss how the current results can inform future work in this area. © 2020 European Association of Personality Psychology

Recent reviews suggest that, like much of the psychological literature, research studies using laboratory aggression paradigms tend to be underpowered to reliably locate commonly observed effect sizes (e.g., r = ~.10 to .20, Cohen’s d = ~.20 to .40). In an effort to counter this trend, we provide a “power primer” that laboratory aggression researchers can use as a resource when planning studies using this methodology. Using simulation-based power analyses and effect size estimates derived from recent literature reviews, we provide sample size recommendations based on type of research question (e.g., main effect vs. two-way vs. three-way interactions) and correlations among predictors. Results highlight the large number of participants that must be recruited to reach acceptable (~80%) power, especially for tests of interactions where the recommended sample sizes far exceed those typically employed in this literature. These discrepancies are so substantial that we urge laboratory aggression researchers to consider a moratorium on tests of three-way interactions. Although our results use estimates from the laboratory aggression literature, we believe they are generalizable to other lines of research using behavioral tasks, as well as psychological science more broadly. We close by offering a series of best practice recommendations and reiterating long-standing calls for attention to statistical power as a basic element of study planning.

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.

Since its introduction in 2002, dark-triad research—the simultaneous study of psychopathy, narcissism, and Machiavellianism—has exploded, with the publication of hundreds of peer-reviewed articles, books, and chapters, as well as coverage by the lay media. Unfortunately, several limitations to this research are unrecognized or ignored. These limitations include (a) the treatment of dark-triad constructs as unidimensional, contrary to evidence for their multidimensionality; (b) the indistinctness between current measures of Machiavellianism and psychopathy; (c) the use of multivariate statistical approaches that pose statistical and interpretive difficulties; (d) failure to test dark-triad relations directly against one another; and (e) methodological concerns related to convenience sampling and reliance on mono-method approaches. We discuss these problems in detail and describe solutions that can result in a more robust, replicable, and meaningful literature moving forward.

Personality researchers have posited multiple ways in which the relations between personality traits and life outcomes may be moderated by other traits, but there are well-known difficulties in reliable detection of such trait-by-trait interaction effects. Estimating the prevalence and magnitude base rates of trait-by-trait interactions would help to assess whether a given study is suited to detect interaction effects. We used the Life Outcomes of Personality Replication Project dataset to estimate the prevalence, nature, and magnitude of trait-by-trait interactions across 81 self-reported life outcomes ( n ≥ 1350 per outcome). Outcome samples were divided into two halves to examine the replicability of observed interaction effects using both traditional and machine learning indices. The study was adequately powered (1 − β ≥ .80) to detect the smallest interaction effects of interest (interactions accounting for a Δ R2 of approximately .01) for 78 of the 81 (96%) outcomes in each of the partitioned samples. Results showed that only 40 interactions (5.33% of the original 750 tests) showed evidence of strong replicability through robustness checks (i.e., demographic covariates, Tobit regression, and ordinal regression). Interactions were also uniformly small in magnitude. Future directions for research on trait-by-trait interactions are discussed.

Numerous studies leverage item response theory (IRT) methods to examine measurement characteristics of alcohol use disorder (AUD) diagnostic criteria. Less work has examined the consistency of AUD IRT parameter estimates, an essential step for establishing measurement invariance, making statements about symptom diagnosticity, and validating the theoretical construct. A Bayesian meta-analysis of IRT discrimination values for AUD criteria across 33 independent samples (Total N = 321,998) revealed that overall consistency of AUD criteria discriminations was low (generalized intraclass correlation range = .105-.249). However, specific study characteristics accounted for substantial variability, suggesting that the unreliability is partially systematic. We replicated evidence of differential item functioning (DIF) via established factors (e.g., age, gender), but the magnitudes were small compared with DIF associated with assessment instrument. These results offer practical recommendations regarding which instruments to use when specific AUD criteria are of interest and which criteria are most sensitive when comparing demographic groups.

The Triarchic Psychopathy Measure (TriPM) is based on a 3-dimensional conceptual model, though few studies have directly tested a 3-factor structure. The current study used a large community sample (N = 1,064, 53% males, Mage = 34) to test the structure of the TriPM via exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis, along with 4 community replication samples from North American and Europe (Ns = 511–603, 33–49% males) and 1 European male offender sample (N = 150). Three of these samples were also used to model the correlations between relevant external correlates and the original TriPM factors versus emergent factors to examine the cost of misspecifying TriPM structure. The model analyses did not support a 3-factor model (comparative fit index =.76, root mean square error of approximation =.08), revealing a number of items with limited statistical information, but uncovered a 7-factor structure (comparative fit index =.92, root mean square error of approximation =.04). From the majority of Boldness, Meanness, and Disinhibition scale items, respectively, emerged 3 factors reflecting Positive Self-Image, Leadership, and Stress Immunity; 2 factors tapping Callousness and Enjoy Hurting; and 2 factors involving Trait Impulsivity and Overt Antisociality. Further, the Enjoy Hurting and Overt Antisociality factors were more strongly correlated with one another than with the other scales from their home domains (Callousness and Impulsivity). All 7 emergent factors were differentially associated with the external correlates, suggesting that the 3 original TriPM factors do not optimally represent the conceptual model underlying the TriPM. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved)

Psychopathy and narcissism are multidimensional constructs with substantial overlap. Low agreeableness (i.e., antagonism) features prominently in clinical and theoretical descriptions of both disorders. The authors examined whether antagonism components of their assessments accounted for the overlap between narcissism and psychopathy. Next, they tested whether the antagonism components were responsible for the relations that narcissism and psychopathy bore to aggression outcomes. Using multiple regression, the authors found that the low agreeableness component accounted for the majority of overlap between psychopathy and narcissism, nearly all of the variance in narcissism's relations with aggression outcomes, and the majority of variance in psychopathy's relations with aggression outcomes. Disinhibitory traits, which serve to distinguish psychopathy from narcissism, accounted for incremental variance in aggression outcomes for psychopathy. Results are discussed in the context of the overlap between narcissism and psychopathy. The authors argue that low agreeableness is largely responsible for the maladaptive outcomes associated with grandiose narcissism and psychopathy.

The Five Factor Model (FFM) of personality is the dominant hierarchical model of personality. Previous work has demonstrated the importance of the FFM domains and facets in understanding a variety of antisocial behaviors ranging from non-violent antisocial behavior to a variety of aggression outcomes. The aim of the present meta-analysis was to quantitatively summarize the empirical work that has examined these relations, as well as update and expand previous work in this area using Bayesian meta-analytic methods. A comprehensive search of available literature on the FFM and antisocial behavior was conducted and posterior distributions of effect sizes were computed for the FFM domains (across 12 antisocial outcomes). The meta-analytic results supported the primary importance of (low) Agreeableness and (low) Conscientiousness in predicting antisocial behavior across antisocial outcomes, with the exception of the outcome related to child molestation. The importance of Neuroticism was more dependent on the specific antisocial outcome under examination. The results are discussed in the context of the descriptive research on the FFM and antisocial behavior, and how Bayesian methods provide additional utility in estimation and prediction compared to more common frequentist methods. Furthermore, we recommend that future work on the FFM and antisocial behavior move towards process-level analyses to further examine how traits are implicated in different forms of antisocial behavior.

We see little benefit to separating Honesty-Humility from the broader FFM Agreeableness domain. In our commentary, we summarize several studies showing that although lexically-based Big Five measures under-represent H-H content, the same cannot be said for FFM-based measures. We also indicate that contrary to claims by some advocates, FFM-based Agreeableness is more strongly related to the Dark Triad than H-H. Finally, we review a recent study examining the lower-order structure of FFM Agreeableness that failed to reveal a separate H-H factor, despite more than adequate representation of that content.

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.

Historical conceptualizations have framed personality disorders (PDs) as unchanging and ego-syntonic. However, recent evidence suggests that individuals with PD traits may have some insight into their personality and consider those traits to be somewhat ego-dystonic. To replicate and extend previous findings, participants (N = 328) self-reported their PD trait levels, likability of those traits, impairment, capability for change, and desired trait levels. The results demonstrated that individuals with PD traits tolerate but still dislike those traits, believe that they cause them problems, and are interested in reducing them. Level of PD trait did not relate to perception of capability for change. Likability and impairment moderated most of the relations between actual PD trait and desired level. That is, there was a stronger correlation between actual and desired levels among individuals who liked the trait more; there was also greater agreement between actual and desired levels among individuals who found the traits less impairing. For 2 of the traits-Negative Affectivity and Detachment-individuals who felt more capable of changing these traits demonstrated greater agreement between their actual and desired levels. These data suggest that individuals with PD traits do not generally see them as particularly likable and see them as impairing; such impressions may have important implications for where individuals ultimately prefer to reside on these PD trait domains. (PsycINFO Database Record

Research examining the relation between personality and antisocial and aggressive behaviors has shown that traits related to antagonism and disinhibition are the most important correlates of such behaviors. However, much of this research has focused on personality at a higher-order level, such as the domain level within the Five Factor Model (FFM). The present meta-analysis specifically focused on the lower-order facet scales of the FFM (as measured by the NEO-PI-R and IPIP-NEO) which have been shown to add important predictive utility above the domains. Expanding on previous work, the current study examined the relations between the FFM facets and a variety of antisocial behaviors including physical aggression, relational aggression , reactive aggression, proactive aggression, and non-violent antisocial behavior. Meta-analytic results show that a subset of FFM facets, primarily those related to antagonistic and disinhibited behavior, showed the most consistent relations with antisocial behaviors. However, effect size magnitudes were influenced by what type of antisocial behavior was examined. The results are discussed within the broader context of research on personality and antisocial behavior, etiological models of aggressive behavior, and the degree to which the results match the trait profiles of constructs with robust links to antisocial behavior (i.e., psychopathy).

The importance of genetic influences for the Five Factor/Big Five Model (BFM) traits is well established. Relatively understudied, however, are the presence and magnitude of sex differences in genetic and environmental variance of these traits. The current study tested if men and women differ (1) qualitatively in the genetic mechanisms, or (2) quantitatively, on the genetic and environmental variance, contributing to BFM personality domains. Results from a nationally representative U.S. adult twin sample (N = 973 pairs) supported phenotypic (i.e., mean level) sex differences in three of five personality traits (Neuroticism, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness) but did not support genetic or environmental sex differences in any trait.

Since its emergence 14 years ago the dark triad (DT), composed of narcissism, psychopathy, and Machiavellianism, has become an increasingly popular research focus. Yet questions remain over whether the DT components are sufficiently distinct from another. We examined the nomological networks of each DT component through a meta-analysis of the available literature on the DT. We conducted 3 separate analyses-an examination of the average intercorrelations among the DT components (k = 156), an examination of similarities in each DT component's nomological network (k = 159), and an examination of the effect sizes between DT components and 15 outcome categories (k range = 7 to 42). Our results indicate that the nomological networks of psychopathy and Machiavellianism overlap substantially while narcissism demonstrated differential relations compared with psychopathy and Machiavellianism. These results remained relatively constant after controlling for DT assessment approach. We argue that the current literature on Machiavellianism may be better understood as a secondary psychopathy literature. Future directions for DT research are discussed in light of our meta-analytic results. (PsycINFO Database Record

Multivariate procedures (e.g. structural equation modelling) are essential to personality psychology, but interpretive difficulties can arise when examining the relations between residualized variables (i.e. the residual content of a variable after its overlap with other variables has been statistically controlled for) and outcomes of interest. These issues have been the focus of recent debate within the research literature on the Dark Triad, which is a collection of interrelated but theoretically distinct personality constructs made up of narcissism, Machiavellianism and psychopathy. The present paper highlights previous work on the issue of partialling and also makes use of recent developments surrounding meta–analytic structural equation modelling to reliably assess the impact of partialling on the empirical profiles of the Dark Triad components. The results show that numerous interpretive difficulties arise after partialling the overlap among the Dark Triad components, most notably for narcissism and Machiavellianism. The results are discussed in the context of contemporary Dark Triad research in addition to discussing the implications for structural equation modelling methods in personality psychology more generally. Recommendations are made for how future research can mitigate the interpretive difficulties that may arise from partialling. Copyright © 2018 European Association of Personality Psychology

Research on narcissism has shown it to be multidimensional construct. As such, the relations the larger construct bear with certain outcomes may mask heterogeneity apparent at the more basic trait level. This article used the Five Factor Narcissism Inventory, a Five-Factor Model–based measure of narcissism that allows for multiple levels of analysis, to examine the relative importance of narcissistic traits in relation to aggression, externalizing behavior, and self-esteem outcomes in two independent samples. The relative importance of the narcissism factors was determined through the use of dominance analysis—a relatively underused method for determining relative importance among a set of related predictors. The results showed that antagonism, compared with agentic extraversion and neuroticism, was the dominant predictor across all forms of aggressive behavior. Additional analyses showed that subscales within the broader factor of antagonism also showed differential importance relative to one another for certain aggression outcomes. The results are discussed in the context of the relation between narcissism and aggression and highlight the utility of using extensions of regression-based analyses to explore the heterogeneity within personality constructs.

Interest in the Dark Triad (DT), which consists of narcissism, psychopathy, and Machiavellianism, has steadily grown since the introduction of the DT in 2002. One research question that has garnered significant attention relates to what constitutes the common core of the DT constructs. Multiple hypotheses have been offered and these hypotheses tend to focus on antagonism and/or specific antagonism-related traits. The present chapter reviews research that has sought to explicate the core of the DT, and we highlight the possibility that particular methodological approaches may lead to differing conclusions about which traits and behaviors best account for the overlap among the DT constructs. These points notwithstanding, the best available data suggest that specific traits related to (low) honesty and (low) modesty constitute the core of the DT. However, additional work is needed to adequately test leading hypotheses against one another regarding what traits and behaviors can best account for the overlap among the DT constructs.

Machiavellianism is characterized by planfulness, the ability to delay gratification, and interpersonal antagonism (i.e., manipulativeness and callousness). Although its theoretically positive relations with facets of Conscientiousness should help distinguish Machiavellianism from psychopathy, current measurements of Machiavellianism are indistinguishable from those of psychopathy in large part because of their assessment of low Conscientiousness. The goal of the present study was to create a measure of Machiavellianism that is more in line with theory using an expert-derived profile based on the 30 facets of the five-factor model (FFM) and then test the validity of that measure by comparing it with relevant constructs. Previously collected expert ratings of the prototypical Machiavellian individual on FFM facets yielded a profile of 13 facets including low Agreeableness and high Conscientiousness. Items were written to represent each facet, resulting in a 201-item Five Factor Machiavellianism Inventory (FFMI). Across 2 studies, with a total of 710 participants recruited via Mechanical Turk, the FFMI was reduced to its final 52-item form and was shown to relate as expected to measures of Big Five personality traits, current Machiavellianism measures, psychopathy, narcissism, ambition, and impulsivity. The FFMI is a promising alternative Machiavellianism measure. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).

Objective Increasing attention has been paid to the distinction between the dimensions of narcissistic grandiosity and vulnerability. We examine the degree to which basic traits underlie vulnerable narcissism, with a particular emphasis on the importance of Neuroticism and Agreeableness. Method Across four samples (undergraduate, online community, clinical-community), we conduct dominance analyses to partition the variance predicted in vulnerable narcissism by the Five-Factor Model personality domains, as well as compare the empirical profiles generated by vulnerable narcissism and Neuroticism. Results These analyses demonstrate that the lion's share of variance is explained by Neuroticism (65%) and Agreeableness (19%). Similarity analyses were also conducted in which the extent to which vulnerable narcissism and Neuroticism share similar empirical networks was tested using an array of criteria, including self-, informant, and thin slice ratings of personality; interview-based ratings of personality disorder and pathological traits; and self-ratings of adverse events and functional outcomes. The empirical correlates of vulnerable narcissism and Neuroticism were nearly identical (MrICC = .94). Partial analyses demonstrated that the variance in vulnerable narcissism not shared with Neuroticism is largely specific to disagreeableness-related traits such as distrustfulness and grandiosity. Conclusions These findings demonstrate the parsimony of using basic personality to study personality pathology and have implications for how vulnerable narcissism might be approached clinically.

Despite years of research and the inclusion of psychopathy in DSM-5, there remains debate over the fundamental components of psychopathy. Although there is agreement about traits related to agreeableness and conscientiousness, there is less agreement about traits related to fearless dominance (FD) or boldness. The present article uses proxies of FD and self-centered impulsivity (SCI) to examine the contribution of FD-related traits to the predictive utility of psychopathy in a large, longitudinal sample of boys to test four possibilities: FD (a) assessed earlier is a risk factor, (b) interacts with other risk-related variables to predict later psychopathy, (c) interacts with SCI interact to predict outcomes, and (d) bears curvilinear relations to outcomes. SCI received excellent support as a measure of psychopathy in adolescence; however, FD was unrelated to criteria in all tests. It is suggested that FD be dropped from psychopathy and that future research focus on agreeableness and conscientiousness.