Validation and cross-sample consistency of Chinese Five-Factor Narcissism Inventory (FFNI) in community and offender samples.

IF 3.3 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL Psychological Assessment Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-12-05 DOI:10.1037/pas0001353
Yuping Liu, Lu Zhao, Joshua D Miller, Donald R Lynam, Tianwei V Du, Bingtao Zhou, Mengcheng Wang, Bo Yang, Christopher J Hopwood
{"title":"Validation and cross-sample consistency of Chinese Five-Factor Narcissism Inventory (FFNI) in community and offender samples.","authors":"Yuping Liu, Lu Zhao, Joshua D Miller, Donald R Lynam, Tianwei V Du, Bingtao Zhou, Mengcheng Wang, Bo Yang, Christopher J Hopwood","doi":"10.1037/pas0001353","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Three-factor models of narcissism (Agentic, Neurotic, and Antagonistic Narcissism) have gained widespread recognition in the field. The Five-Factor Narcissism Inventory (FFNI) stands out as the most comprehensive and only tool to date that assesses all three narcissism domains. However, its validation in Chinese culture and forensic contexts remains largely unexplored. With community (<i>N</i> = 578) and offender (<i>N</i> = 726) samples from China, we examined 60-, 30-, and 15-item versions of the Chinese FFNI in terms of internal structure, external associates, and consistency across samples and versions. Our findings demonstrate acceptable internal consistencies and structural validity of each version of the Chinese FFNI, albeit with minor deviations in the Neurotic Narcissism factor. The FFNI demonstrated good cross-sample and cross-version consistency. These results suggest the utility of the FFNI in Chinese samples and suggest some comparability across community and offender groups. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":20770,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Assessment","volume":" ","pages":"e1-e14"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological Assessment","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0001353","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Three-factor models of narcissism (Agentic, Neurotic, and Antagonistic Narcissism) have gained widespread recognition in the field. The Five-Factor Narcissism Inventory (FFNI) stands out as the most comprehensive and only tool to date that assesses all three narcissism domains. However, its validation in Chinese culture and forensic contexts remains largely unexplored. With community (N = 578) and offender (N = 726) samples from China, we examined 60-, 30-, and 15-item versions of the Chinese FFNI in terms of internal structure, external associates, and consistency across samples and versions. Our findings demonstrate acceptable internal consistencies and structural validity of each version of the Chinese FFNI, albeit with minor deviations in the Neurotic Narcissism factor. The FFNI demonstrated good cross-sample and cross-version consistency. These results suggest the utility of the FFNI in Chinese samples and suggest some comparability across community and offender groups. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

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
中国五因素自恋量表(FFNI)在社区和罪犯样本中的验证和跨样本一致性。
自恋的三因素模型(能动性、神经性和对抗性自恋)在该领域得到了广泛的认可。五因素自恋量表(FFNI)是迄今为止最全面、唯一的评估所有三个自恋领域的工具。然而,它在中国文化和法医语境中的有效性在很大程度上仍未得到探索。我们选取了来自中国的社区(N = 578)和罪犯(N = 726)样本,从内部结构、外部联系以及样本和版本之间的一致性方面考察了60、30和15个项目版本的中国FFNI。我们的研究结果表明,尽管在神经质自恋因素上有轻微的差异,但每个版本的中国FFNI都具有可接受的内部一致性和结构有效性。FFNI显示出良好的跨样本和跨版本一致性。这些结果表明FFNI在中国样本中的实用性,并表明在社区和罪犯群体之间存在一些可比性。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA,版权所有)。
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
Psychological Assessment
Psychological Assessment PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
5.60%
发文量
167
期刊介绍: Psychological Assessment is concerned mainly with empirical research on measurement and evaluation relevant to the broad field of clinical psychology. Submissions are welcome in the areas of assessment processes and methods. Included are - clinical judgment and the application of decision-making models - paradigms derived from basic psychological research in cognition, personality–social psychology, and biological psychology - development, validation, and application of assessment instruments, observational methods, and interviews
期刊最新文献
Assessing childhood and adolescent development of self-concepts via a self-referent encoding task. Development and validation of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment for People with Vision Impairment (MOCA-VI). Theoretical limitations on mindreading measures: Commentary on Wendt et al. (2024). Points of contention in measure evaluation can arise from the use of divergent validity frameworks: A reply to Conway et al. (2025). Examining the factor structure of the nine-item Avoidant/Restrictive Food Intake Disorder Screen in a national U.S. military veteran sample.
×
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