Response biases

Response biases comprise a variety of systematic tendencies of responding to questionnaire items. Response biases exert an influence on item responses in addition to any constructs that the questionnaire is designed to measure and can therefore potentially bias the corresponding trait level estimates. This chapter addresses general response biases that are independent of item content, including response styles (e.g., extreme response style, acquiescence) and rater biases (halo effect, leniency/severity bias), as well as response biases that are related to item content and depend strongly on the context (socially desirable responding). The chapter summarizes research on correlates of response biases and research on inter-individual and cross-cultural differences in engaging in response styles and rater biases. It describes different methods that can be applied at the test construction stage to prevent or minimize the occurrence of response biases. Finally, it depicts methods developed for correcting for the effects of response biases.</p

Does multidimensional forced-choice prevent faking? Comparing the susceptibility of the multidimensional forced-choice format and the rating scale format to faking

A common concern with self-reports of personality traits in selection contexts is faking. The multidimensional forced-choice (MFC) format has been proposed as an alternative to rating scales (RS) that could prevent faking. The goal of this study was to compare the susceptibility of the MFC format and RS format to faking in a simulated high-stakes setting when using normative scoring for both formats. Participants were randomly assigned to three groups (total N = 1,867) and filled out the Big Five Triplets once under an honest instruction and once under a fake-good instruction. Latent mean differences between the honest and fake-good administrations indicated that the Big Five domains were faked in the expected direction. Faking effects for all traits were larger for RS compared to MFC. Faking effects were also larger for the MFC version with mixed triplets compared to the MFC version with triplets that were fully matched regarding their social desirability. The MFC format does not prevent faking completely, but it reduces faking substantially. Faking can be further reduced in the MFC format by matching the items presented in a block regarding their social desirability

Investigating response styles and item homogeneity using item response models

Measurement invariance is a pre-requisite for drawing accurate and valid inferences concerning individuals’ trait levels from questionnaire data. However, several factors exist that can influence a person’s item responses in addition to his or her latent trait level. The research in this dissertation was aimed at investigating three of these factors: 1) individual differences in response styles, 2) the measurement invariance of items between subgroups of respondents, and 3) the measurement invariance of items across assessment periods. Mixed Rasch analyses of data from the German NEO-PI-R showed that respondents differed systematically in their response scale use: some preferred extreme categories while others preferred moderate categories. Multidimensional item response models showed that response styles (especially extreme response style) explained variance in item responses that was incremental to the variance explained by the traits. Thus, individual differences in response styles had an influence on item responses. The measurement invariance of items between subgroups of respondents was investigated with respect to differential item functioning for gender in the German NEO-PI-R. Several NEO-PI-R facets especially on neuroticism, agreeableness, and conscientiousness contained items that were not measurement invariant for men and women. The measurement invariance of items across assessment periods was investigated for link items from the reading and science domains in the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA). Measurement invariance was violated for both item sets. Some items showed large differences in item difficulty between assessments which may in part be attributed to changes in item wording and position effects. In sum, it was shown that individual differences in response styles, the lack of measurement invariance of items between subgroups of respondents, and the lack of measurement invariance of items across assessment periods can impair the measurement of the intended traits and in consequence render trait inferences and comparisons between individuals or groups invalid. Thus, measures should be taken to reduce the impact of factors that interfere with measurement invariance. These measures can be aimed at test construction where, for example, the item or response format can be adjusted to elicit response styles to a lesser degree and items can be selected that have invariance properties across subgroups of participants and across assessment periods

Reducing the Overlap Between Machiavellianism and Subclinical Psychopathy: The M7 and P7 Scales

Machiavellianism (Mach) and subclinical psychopathy are two widely studied antagonistic personality traits with distinct theoretical conceptualizations. Mach is conceptualized by strategic deviousness, cynicism, and pragmatic morality, whereas subclinical psychopathy is conceptualized by impulsive antisocial tendencies, callousness, and rule-breaking. However, existing measures of the two traits are typically highly correlated and have very similar nomological networks. Notably, even though psychopathy scales should be more strongly positively associated with antisocial impulsivity and more strongly negatively associated with conscientiousness than Mach scales, existing Mach and psychopathy scales tend to be similarly related to these constructs. We created a new Mach scale, the M7, and a new psychopathy scale, the P7, by selecting items from existing Mach and psychopathy scales on the basis of the correlations of these items with antisocial impulsivity and conscientiousness. Across three studies (combined N = 4,607), the M7 and P7 showed acceptable to good psychometric properties in terms of closeness to unidimensionality, measurement precision, temporal stability, measurement invariance across language and gender groups, and convergent and discriminant validity (nomological network, self-other agreement, and interpersonal perceptions in group interactions). Most importantly, the new scales assess clearly distinct latent traits that are more in line with their theoretical conceptualizations than established scales are

Longitudinal associations of narcissism with interpersonal, intrapersonal, and institutional Outcomes : an investigation using a representative sample of the German population

Most studies have treated grandiose narcissism as a unidimensional construct and investigated its associations in cross-sectional convenience samples. The present research systematically addresses these limitations by investigating the associations of agentic and antagonistic aspects of narcissism in the interpersonal, intrapersonal, and institutional domains, cross-sectionally and longitudinally in a population-representative sample. We used data (N = 1,526) from the representative, longitudinal German Socio-economic Panel study innovation sample (SOEP-IS). Both pre-registered and exploratory research questions regarding interpersonal, intrapersonal, and institutional outcomes of agentic and antagonistic aspects of narcissism were tested. Cross-sectional associations generally confirmed the differential adaptivity of narcissism aspects: While agentic narcissism was related to friendship, happiness, self-esteem, employment, leadership and income, antagonistic narcissism was negatively related to intrapsychic adjustment. Longitudinally, agentic aspects were positively associated with holding a leadership position while the antagonistic aspects were related to lower self-esteem and being unemployed. Additional differentiated longitudinal associations were found for different age groups with most associations being more pronounced in middle adulthood. The present research highlights the importance of studying grandiose narcissism as a two-dimensional construct, in populations that are diverse and representative of the broader population, and with outcomes relevant to the population studied

The narcissism epidemic is dead; long live the narcissism epidemic

Are recent cohorts of college students more narcissistic than their predecessors? To address debates about the so-called “narcissism epidemic,” we used data from three cohorts of students (N1990s = 1,166; N2000s = 33,647; N2010s = 25,412) to test whether narcissism levels (overall and specific facets) have increased across generations. We also tested whether our measure, the Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI), showed measurement equivalence across the three cohorts, a critical analysis that had been overlooked in prior research. We found that several NPI items were not equivalent across cohorts. Models accounting for nonequivalence of these items indicated a small decline in overall narcissism levels from the 1990s to the 2010s (d = ?0.27). At the facet-level, leadership (d = ?0.20), vanity (d = –0.16), and entitlement (d = –0.28) all showed decreases. Our results contradict the claim that recent cohorts of college students are more narcissistic than earlier generations of college students

Equivalence of Narcissistic Personality Inventory constructs and correlates across scoring approaches and response formats

The prevalent scoring practice for the Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI) ignores the forced-choice nature of the items. The aim of this study was to investigate whether findings based on NPI scores reported in previous research can be confirmed when the forced-choice nature of the NPI’s original response format is appropriately modeled, and when NPI items are presented in different response formats (true/false or rating scale). The relationships between NPI facets and various criteria were robust across scoring approaches (mean score vs. model-based), but were only partly robust across response formats. In addition, the scoring approaches and response formats achieved equivalent measurements of the vanity facet and in part of the leadership facet, but differed with respect to the entitlement facet

Age and gender differences in narcissism: A comprehensive study across eight measures and over 250,000 participants

Age and gender differences in narcissism have been studied often. However, considering the rich history of narcissism research accompanied by its diverging conceptualizations, little is known about age and gender differences across various narcissism measures. The present study investigated age and gender differences and their interactions across eight widely used narcissism instruments (i.e., Narcissistic Personality Inventory, Hypersensitive Narcissism Scale, Dirty Dozen, Psychological Entitlement Scale, Narcissistic Personality Disorder Symptoms from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Version IV, Narcissistic Admiration and Rivalry Questionnaire-Short Form, Single-Item Narcissism Scale, and brief version of the Pathological Narcissism Inventory). The findings of Study 1 (N = 5,736) revealed heterogeneity in how strongly the measures are correlated. Some instruments loaded clearly on one of the three factors proposed by previous research (i.e., Neuroticism, Extraversion, Antagonism), while others cross-loaded across factors and in distinct ways. Cross-sectional analyses using each measure and meta-analytic results across all measures (Study 2) with a total sample of 270,029 participants suggest consistent linear age effects (random effects meta-analytic effect of r = -.104), with narcissism being highest in young adulthood. Consistent gender differences also emerged (random effects meta-analytic effect was -.079), such that men scored higher in narcissism than women. Quadratic age effects and Age × Gender effects were generally very small and inconsistent. We conclude that despite the various conceptualizations of narcissism, age and gender differences are generalizable across the eight measures used in the present study. However, their size varied based on the instrument used. We discuss the sources of this heterogeneity and the potential mechanisms for age and gender differences