Chelsea E. Sleep

Examining the DSM-5 Alternative Personality Disorder Model Operationalization of Antisocial Personality Disorder and Psychopathy in a Male Correctional Sample

For decades, it has been known that the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) diagnosis of Antisocial Personality Disorder (ASPD) is a nonadequate operationalization of psychopathy (Crego & Widiger, 2015). The DSM-5 alternative model of personality disorders provides an opportunity to rectify some of these long held concerns. The current study compared the Section III alternative models trait-based conception of ASPD with the categorical model from the main diagnostic codes section of DSM-5 in terms of associations with differing models of psychopathy. We also evaluated the validity of the trait-based conception more broadly in relation to measures of antisocial tendencies as well as psychopathy. Participants were 200 male inmates who were administered a battery of self-report and interview-based researcher rating measures of relevant constructs. Analyses showed that Section III ASPD outperformed Section II ASPD in predicting scores on Hares (2003) Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R; r = .88 vs. .59). Additionally, aggregate scores for Section III ASPD performed well in capturing variance in differing ASPD and psychopathy measures. Finally, we found that the Section III ASPD impairment criteria added incrementally to the Section III ASPD traits in predicting PCL-R psychopathy and SCID-II ASPD. (PsycINFO Database Record

Vulnerable Narcissism Is (Mostly) a Disorder of Neuroticism

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 lions 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.

Perils of partialing redux: The case of the Dark Triad.

The Dark Triad (DT) is a collection of overlapping aversive personality profiles constituting psychopathy, narcissism, and Machiavellianism. Debates remain regarding the optimal way to examine the unique outcomes associated with each construct, with several scholars advocating partialing these profiles in multiple regression analyses (i.e., removing their shared variance). The present paper details the pitfalls inherent in this approach by comparing the convergence and divergence of relations derived from raw and residualized DT composite scores. In Sample 1 (N = 393), DT scores were examined to determine the extent to which their raw and residualized components manifested similar relationships with the Five-Factor Model and the DSM–5 Section III personality disorder traits. In Sample 2 (N = 542), the same approach was taken in relation to an array of associated behaviors (e.g., antisocial behavior, promiscuity). Findings from Samples 1 and 2 demonstrate that the use of residualized (vs. raw) coefficients presents important interpretative challenges for both narcissism and Machiavellianism. This study illustrates the substantial interpretive difficulties that can arise when using findings from residualized analyses (e.g., multiple regression) to build nomological networks around Dark Triad constructs. We argue that bivariate relations be given preferential treatment, given their more direct ties to the assessments, and that if multivariate approaches are to be used, they must be accompanied by strong theory about the components of DT constructs.

Narcissism and Response Validity: Do Individuals With Narcissistic Features Underreport Psychopathology?

Narcissism is broadly described as a grandiose sense of self, feelings of entitlement, and a need for attention and admiration. Theorists have long suggested that to maintain an overly positive self-image, individuals with narcissistic features often self-enhance (Leary, 2007) and exhibit distorted (John & Robins, 1994) self-perceptions. Despite this theoretical link, little is known about its relationship to response style, particularly in regard to underreporting or defensiveness. Nevertheless, response style has been extensively studied in psychopathy, narcissism’s closest neighbor, due to concerns that psychopathic individuals may lack insight into their traits and/or may be unwilling to admit to perceived faults or difficulties. Given the limited research on this topic, we examined narcissism’s relation to response style in multiple samples (i.e., two undergraduate samples; one incarcerated sample) with several well-validated measures of response validity and narcissism. Across samples, the findings indicate that narcissism is not characterized by response invalidity, at least not in low-stakes research settings; in fact, vulnerable features of narcissism were found to be negatively associated with underreporting and a defensive response style. Implications for the present findings are discussed.

Ratings of affective and interpersonal tendencies differ for grandiose and vulnerable narcissism: A replication and extension of Gore and Widiger (2016)

OBJECTIVE Theoretical conceptions of narcissism have long been characterized by two seemingly opposing poles: grandiosity and vulnerability. The goal of the current study was to investigate the extent to which traits associated with one profile are perceived to co-occur with the other within an individual. METHOD Lay raters (N = 862; 56% female; 80% Caucasian; Mage  = 37) recruited from Amazons MTurk were assigned to one of four conditions in which they rated how often a series of narcissistic traits were displayed by a prototypical grandiose narcissist, a vulnerable narcissist, a close friend, or themselves. Vulnerable narcissism items were specifically worded to assess internalizing- versus externalizing-based emotional responses. RESULTS Results suggest that grandiosely narcissistic individuals are seen as responding angrily to ego-threatening situations, whereas vulnerably narcissistic individuals are seen as responding with a broader array of negative emotions, including anger, sadness, and shame. In contrast, vulnerably narcissistic individuals were not rated as consistently demonstrating behaviors, attitudes, or cognitions associated with grandiose narcissism. CONCLUSIONS Grandiose and vulnerable narcissistic individuals both exhibit anger in response to ego threat, but sadness/shame responses are more characteristic of vulnerable narcissism.

Examining the Relations Among the DSM–5 Alternative Model of Personality, the Five-Factor Model, and Externalizing and Internalizing Behavior.

Given long-standing criticisms of the DSM’s reliance on categorical models of psychopathology, including the poor reliability and validity of personality-disorder diagnoses, the American Psychiatric Association (APA) published an alternative model (AM) of personality disorders in Section III of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM–5; APA, 2013), which, in part, comprises 5 pathological trait domains based on the 5-factor model (FFM). However, the empirical profiles and discriminant validity of the AM traits remain in question. We recruited a sample of undergraduates (N = 340) for the current study to compare the relations found between a measure of the DSM–5 AM traits (i.e., the Personality Inventory for DSM–5; PID-5; Krueger, Derringer, Markon, Watson, & Skodol, 2012) and a measure of the FFM (i.e., the International Personality Item Pool; IPIP; Goldberg, 1999) in relation to externalizing and internalizing symptoms. In general, the domains from the 2 measures were significantly related and demonstrated similar patterns of relations with these criteria, such that Antagonism/low Agreeableness and Disinhibition/low Conscientiousness were related to externalizing behaviors, whereas Negative Affectivity/Neuroticism was most significantly related to internalizing symptoms. However, the PID-5 demonstrated large interrelations among its domains and poorer discriminant validity than the IPIP. These results provide additional support that the conception of the trait model included in the DSM–5 AM is an extension of the FFM, but highlight some of the issues that arise due to the PID-5’s more limited discriminant validity.

Personality Disorder Traits: Perceptions of Likability, Impairment, and Ability to Change as Correlates and Moderators of Desired Level.

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.

DSM-5 alternative model of personality disorder: testing the trait perspective captured in Criterion B

We review the trait model (i.e., Criterion B) included as a central piece of the alternative model of personality disorder (PD) included in DSM-5. The pathological traits are organized into five domains with 25 facets that overlap substantially with basic personality models (e.g., five-factor model). These PD traits can be reliably assessed using a variety of measures; however, questions of poor discriminant validity have been raised. Concerns were raised that this model would result in the loss of clinically meaningful constructs (e.g., borderline personality disorder) but the empirical literature suggests that the traits can faithfully and adequately assess traditional PD constructs. Although personality dysfunction and pathological traits are required for this alternative model, impairment and traits largely overlap with only the latter demonstrating substantial and consistent incremental validity.

Personality disorder traits: Testing insight regarding presence of traits, impairment, and desire for change.

Mixed findings exist as to whether personality pathology involves a critical lack of awareness and insight. Research questions about insight and awareness in personality pathology are typically assessed via comparing self- and informant reports of traits. However, recent studies have measured insight by asking individuals to evaluate additional questions about impairment and desire to change. The present study uses a variety of approaches to examine these issues, including investigations of convergence between self- and informant reports (N = 197 dyads; correlations and comparisons of means) of personality psychopathology, desired trait levels, and perceptions of impairment. Convergence was observed between levels of self- and informant-reported traits, desired traits, and impairment. However, individuals rated themselves higher on pathological trait levels and impairment than did their informants. Furthermore, individuals with relatively higher pathological traits desired higher levels of these traits (but lower than their actual scores) than individuals with lower scores; on the actual measurement scale, however, these higher scorers rated their desired level below the neutral point. Overall, individuals with pathological personality traits possess a reasonable degree of insight into their actual trait levels and associated impairment.

Narcissism and Self-Esteem: A Nomological Network Analysis

Similarity between narcissism and self-esteem seems intuitive, as both capture positive perceptions of the self. In the current undertaking, we provide a broad comparison of the nomological networks of grandiose narcissism and explicit self-esteem. Pooling data from 11 existing samples (N = 4711), we compared the relations of narcissism and self-esteem to developmental experiences, individual differences, interpersonal functioning, and psychopathology. Both constructs are positively related to agentic traits and assertive interpersonal approaches, but differ in relation to agreeableness/communion. Self-esteem emerged as a wholly adaptive construct negatively associated with internalizing psychopathology and generally unrelated to externalizing behaviors. Unlike self-esteem, narcissism was related to callousness, grandiosity, entitlement, and demeaning attitudes towards others that likely partially explain narcissism’s links to maladaptive outcomes.