Michael L. Crowe

Using online, crowdsourcing platforms for data collection in personality disorder research: The example of Amazon’s Mechanical Turk.

The use of crowdsourcing platforms such as Amazon’s Mechanical Turk (MTurk) for data collection in the behavioral sciences has increased substantially in the past several years due in large part to (a) the ability to recruit large samples, (b) the inexpensiveness of data collection, (c) the speed of data collection, and (d) evidence that the data collected are, for the most part, of equal or better quality to that collected in undergraduate research pools. In this review, we first evaluate the strengths and potential limitations of this approach to data collection. Second, we examine how MTurk has been used to date in personality disorder (PD) research and compare the characteristics of such research to PD research conducted in other settings. Third, we compare PD trait data from the Section III trait model of the DSM–5 collected via MTurk to data collected using undergraduate and clinical samples with regard to internal consistency, mean-level differences, and factor structure. Overall, we conclude that platforms such as MTurk have much to offer PD researchers, especially for certain kinds of research (e.g., where large samples are required and there is a need for iterative sampling). Whether MTurk itself remains the predominant model of such platforms is unclear, however, and will largely depend on decisions related to cost effectiveness and the development of alternatives that offer even greater flexibility.

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.

A Comparison of the Nomological Networks Associated With Forced-Choice and Likert Formats of the Narcissistic Personality Inventory

ABSTRACT The Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI) is one of the most popular measures of narcissism. However, its use of a forced-choice response set might negatively affect some of its psychometric properties. The purpose of this research was to compare a Likert version of the NPI, in which only the narcissistic response of each pair was given, to the original NPI, in 3 samples of participants (N = 1,109). To this end, we compared the nomological networks of the forced-choice and Likert formats of the NPI in relation to alternative measures of narcissism, narcissistic personality disorder, entitlement, self-esteem, general personality traits (reported by self and informants), interpersonal styles, and general pathological traits included in the DSM–5. The Likert format NPI—total and subscales—manifested similar construct validity to the original forced-choice format across all criteria with only minor differences that seem to be due mainly to the increased reliability and variability found in the Likert NPI Entitlement/Exploitativeness subscale. These results provide evidence that a version of the NPI that employs a Likert format can justifiably be used in place of the original.

Consensual lay profiles of narcissism and their connection to the Five-Factor Narcissism Inventory.

Although there is evidence that experts agree on the traits that characterize narcissism, this agreement may be due, in part, to the influence of the operationalizations based on the American Psychiatric Association’s series of Diagnostic and Statistical Manuals of Mental Disorders (American Psychiatric Association [APA], 1980, 1994, 2013). Because these trait descriptions are important in shaping conceptualizations and serving as empirical criteria for construct validation, we explored their generalizability. In Study 1, we collected lay ratings (N = 1,792) of prototypical cases of narcissism across 15 different categories (e.g., gender, age, occupational status) on the 30 traits of the five-factor model (FFM). There was good agreement within and across rating categories and the trait profiles were quite similar to existing ratings made by academicians and clinicians. In Study 2 (N = 603), we examined the degree to which various scores from the Five-Factor Narcissism Inventory–Short Form (FFNI-SF; Sherman et al., 2015) provided empirical matches to these FFM profiles (mean lay ratings from Study 1; existing expert-based and meta-analytically derived profiles). In general, scores from the FFNI-SF grandiose scale, as well as the empirically derived FFNI-SF Antagonism and Agentic Extraversion components yielded FFM profiles closely aligned to the various consensus profiles. These results are generally consistent with a burgeoning literature that suggests that the FFNI/FFNI-SF is a promising tool for the study of narcissism given its comprehensiveness, flexibility, and ties to the predominant model of personality.

Uncovering the structure of Agreeableness from Self-Report Measures

OBJECTIVE Although there are several models of the lower-order structure of Agreeableness, empirically derived descriptions of this domain are largely nonexistent. We examined the factor structure of Agreeableness items from multiple scales in order to empirically determine the facet-level structure of the domain. METHOD Participants (N = 1,205; 73% female; 84% White; Mage  = 35.5, SD = 17.26) completed 131 items from 22 scales measuring Agreeableness. RESULTS A series of factor analyses was conducted on 104 items to identify factor emergence of the domain from a single factor to increasingly more specific factors. A five-factor solution consisting of facets labeled Compassion, Morality, Trust, Affability, and Modesty was identified as most appropriate. Factors from all levels of the construct were compared to current measures of the domain as well as a number of criterion variables. The patterns of association with criterion variables at the lower level of the Agreeableness domain showed significant divergence. CONCLUSIONS The current results highlight how specific Agreeableness traits unfold from broader to more specific facets and how these traits are represented in existing measures of this important domain.

Using Dominance Analysis to Decompose Narcissism and Its Relation to Aggression and Externalizing Outcomes

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.

Development and validation of the Narcissistic Vulnerability Scale: An adjective rating scale.

There is an ongoing debate regarding the nature of narcissism such that some argue that narcissistic individuals oscillate between grandiose and vulnerable states, whereas others argue these dimensions are stable traits (e.g., grandiose individuals remain in grandiose states). Scales sensitive to fluctuations in narcissistic states are necessary to address this question. The current study (N = 1,613 across three samples) validates the newly developed Narcissistic Vulnerability Scale (NVS), a brief (11-item) adjective-based measure of vulnerable narcissism. Expert ratings were used for item selection. The NVS’s factor structure was evaluated along with its correlations with measures of grandiose and vulnerable narcissism, five-factor model traits, and self-esteem. A subset of NVS items were also evaluated using an ecological momentary assessment design. Results indicate the NVS is a unidimensional measure of vulnerable narcissism that could be used in either trait-oriented or state-oriented analyses, the latter of which may be particularly well suited to answering the most pressing questions in the study of narcissism.

Comparing self-report measures of grandiose narcissism, vulnerable narcissism, and narcissistic personality disorder in a male offender sample.

Despite a growing interest in the use of self-report measures of narcissism among student, community, and clinical samples, the research on narcissism in prison samples is sparse, despite elevated rates of narcissism in these samples. The current study examined the relations between commonly used measures of grandiose narcissism (Narcissistic Personality Inventory–13 [NPI-13]), vulnerable narcissism (Hypersensitive Narcissism Scale [HSNS]), and narcissistic personality disorder (NPD; Personality Diagnostic Questionnaire [PDQ]) in a sample of adult male offenders (N = 179). The NPI-13 and PDQ NPD scales overlapped substantially with one another and manifested similar empirical profiles (rICC = .81), with both being substantially correlated with interview-based symptoms of NPD, entitlement, psychopathy, and externalizing behaviors. Conversely, the HSNS manifested more limited relations with other measures of NPD and related traits (e.g., entitlement), as well as externalizing behaviors, and was more strongly related to internalizing symptoms. Consistent with previous work, NPD appears to be a blend of grandiose and vulnerable narcissism as the PDQ’s empirical profile overlapped with that of the HSNS (rICC = .51), which was not true for the NPI-13 (rICC = .18). Analyses of the incremental validity of the 3 measures suggested that the NPI-13 was particularly successful in accounting for unique variance in these relevant criteria. These results underscore the benefit of utilizing multiple measures to distinguish empirical correlates of grandiose narcissism, vulnerable narcissism, and NPD.