Journal of personality assessment
-
This study provides convergent, discriminant, and incremental validity data for a new measure of narcissistic personality traits created from the perspective of the Five-factor model (FFM) of general personality structure. Fifteen scales were constructed as maladaptive variants of respective facets of the FFM (e.g., Reactive Anger as a narcissistic variant of angry hostility), with item selection made on the basis of a criterion-keying approach using results from 167 undergraduates. ⋯ Incremental validity was tested with respect to the ability of the FFM narcissism trait scales to account for variance in 2 alternative measures of narcissism, after variance accounted for by respective NEO PI-R facet scales and other established measures of narcissism were first removed. The findings support the validity of these new scales as measures of narcissistic personality traits and as maladaptive variants of the FFM.
-
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). ⋯ 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.
-
A new self-report assessment of the basic traits of avoidant personality disorder (AVD) was developed using a general trait model of personality (Five-factor model; FFM) as a framework. Scales were written to assess maladaptive variants of 10 FFM traits found to be robustly related to AVD across a variety of methods. ⋯ The FFAvA scales also demonstrated substantial incremental validity in the prediction of existing AVD measures and indexes of social discomfort over their FFM counterparts. The FFAvA provides an opportunity to examine AVD and its correlates using smaller, more basic units of personality rather than more global symptoms that might blend these elements.
-
In this study, we evaluated the internal psychometric properties and external correlates of scores on the Clinical, Content, and Supplementary scales in a forensic sample of 496 adolescents (315 boys and 181 girls) who were court-ordered to receive psychological evaluations. We examined Cronbach's alpha coefficients, scale intercorrelation matrices, and frequencies of scale elevations. Further, we found varying degrees of support for the convergent and discriminant validity of scores on the MMPI-A (Butcher et al., 1992 ) Clinical, Content, and Supplementary scales. This study adds to the body of literature establishing the utility of the MMPI-A in forensic evaluations.
-
The application of psychological measures often results in item response data that arguably are consistent with both unidimensional (a single common factor) and multidimensional latent structures (typically caused by parcels of items that tap similar content domains). As such, structural ambiguity leads to seemingly endless "confirmatory" factor analytic studies in which the research question is whether scale scores can be interpreted as reflecting variation on a single trait. An alternative to the more commonly observed unidimensional, correlated traits, or second-order representations of a measure's latent structure is a bifactor model. ⋯ To address this, herein we (a) describe issues that arise in conceptualizing and modeling multidimensionality, (b) describe exploratory (including Schmid-Leiman [Schmid & Leiman, 1957] and target bifactor rotations) and confirmatory bifactor modeling, (c) differentiate between bifactor and second-order models, and (d) suggest contexts where bifactor analysis is particularly valuable (e.g., for evaluating the plausibility of subscales, determining the extent to which scores reflect a single variable even when the data are multidimensional, and evaluating the feasibility of applying a unidimensional item response theory (IRT) measurement model). We emphasize that the determination of dimensionality is a related but distinct question from either determining the extent to which scores reflect a single individual difference variable or determining the effect of multidimensionality on IRT item parameter estimates. Indeed, we suggest that in many contexts, multidimensional data can yield interpretable scale scores and be appropriately fitted to unidimensional IRT models.