The Dark Five: A reconsideration of the Short Dark Tetrad (SD4)

IF 3.5 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL Personality and Individual Differences Pub Date : 2024-11-21 DOI:10.1016/j.paid.2024.112971
J.J. Crawford , C. Smyth , B.P. Crossey , D. Waldeck
{"title":"The Dark Five: A reconsideration of the Short Dark Tetrad (SD4)","authors":"J.J. Crawford ,&nbsp;C. Smyth ,&nbsp;B.P. Crossey ,&nbsp;D. Waldeck","doi":"10.1016/j.paid.2024.112971","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The measurement of ‘dark’ personality traits has been shown to be susceptible to error. In particular, the Dark Tetrad is theorized to fit poorly to the 4-factor structure within the SD4 (Paulhus et al., 2021). The present study examined the structural validity of the SD4 by using a dataset of internet users (<em>n</em> = 604). A robust approach to confirmatory factor analysis revealed that the 4-factor model proposed by Paulhus et al. (2021) did not appropriately reflect the data. Alternatively, an exploratory 5-factor model (<em>The Dark Five</em>; including coalition-building, grandiose exhibitionism, psychopathy, violent voyeurism, and indirect sadism) resulted in better statistical fit than the 4-factor model. Moreover, the Dark Five allowed the successful discrimination of psychopathy and sadism and explained more variance in attachment orientation than had the 4-factor model. Future research using the SD4 to measure ‘dark’ personalities or to explore differences between psychopathy and sadism may therefore benefit by testing the 5-factor model or opting for a different measure of the Dark Tetrad.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48467,"journal":{"name":"Personality and Individual Differences","volume":"235 ","pages":"Article 112971"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Personality and Individual Differences","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886924004318","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The measurement of ‘dark’ personality traits has been shown to be susceptible to error. In particular, the Dark Tetrad is theorized to fit poorly to the 4-factor structure within the SD4 (Paulhus et al., 2021). The present study examined the structural validity of the SD4 by using a dataset of internet users (n = 604). A robust approach to confirmatory factor analysis revealed that the 4-factor model proposed by Paulhus et al. (2021) did not appropriately reflect the data. Alternatively, an exploratory 5-factor model (The Dark Five; including coalition-building, grandiose exhibitionism, psychopathy, violent voyeurism, and indirect sadism) resulted in better statistical fit than the 4-factor model. Moreover, the Dark Five allowed the successful discrimination of psychopathy and sadism and explained more variance in attachment orientation than had the 4-factor model. Future research using the SD4 to measure ‘dark’ personalities or to explore differences between psychopathy and sadism may therefore benefit by testing the 5-factor model or opting for a different measure of the Dark Tetrad.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
黑暗五重奏重新考虑短黑暗四分体(SD4)
对 "黑暗 "人格特质的测量容易出现误差。特别是,根据理论,"黑暗四因子 "与 SD4 中的 4 因子结构拟合度较低(Paulhus 等人,2021 年)。本研究使用网民数据集(n = 604)检验了 SD4 的结构有效性。稳健的确认性因子分析方法显示,Paulhus 等人(2021 年)提出的 4 因子模型并不能恰当地反映数据。另外,一个探索性的 5 因子模型(黑暗五因子,包括建立联盟、炫耀性展示癖、精神变态、暴力窥淫癖和间接虐待狂)比 4 因子模型的统计拟合效果更好。此外,与 4 因子模型相比,黑暗五子模型能够成功区分变态心理和虐待狂,并能解释更多依恋取向的变异。因此,未来使用 SD4 来测量 "黑暗 "人格或探索变态心理与虐待狂之间差异的研究,可以通过测试 5 因子模型或选择不同的 "黑暗四因子 "测量方法来获益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.50
自引率
4.70%
发文量
577
审稿时长
41 days
期刊介绍: Personality and Individual Differences is devoted to the publication of articles (experimental, theoretical, review) which aim to integrate as far as possible the major factors of personality with empirical paradigms from experimental, physiological, animal, clinical, educational, criminological or industrial psychology or to seek an explanation for the causes and major determinants of individual differences in concepts derived from these disciplines. The editors are concerned with both genetic and environmental causes, and they are particularly interested in possible interaction effects.
期刊最新文献
Knowledge structure of personality and individual differences: A 43 year's retrospective of the journal using bibliometric analysis Examining the longitudinal relationship between family conflict and bullying in Chinese children: The serial mediating roles of personal mastery and social anxiety How and when perceived COVID-19 crisis disruption triggers employee work withdrawal behavior: The role of perceived control and trait optimism To avoid disconnection or approach connection: Loneliness predicts social robot anthropomorphism via different social motivations in the UK and China Personality profiles in SAPA data: An exploratory study
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1