Structure of Dark Triad Dirty Dozen Across Eight World Regions

The Dark Triad (i.e., narcissism, psychopathy, Machiavellianism) has garnered intense attention over the past 15 years. We examined the structure of these traits’ measure—the Dark Triad Dirty Dozen (DTDD)—in a sample of 11,488 participants from three W.E.I.R.D. (i.e., North America, Oceania, Western Europe) and five non-W.E.I.R.D. (i.e., Asia, Middle East, non-Western Europe, South America, sub-Saharan Africa) world regions. The results confirmed the measurement invariance of the DTDD across participants’ sex in all world regions, with men scoring higher than women on all traits (except for psychopathy in Asia, where the difference was not significant). We found evidence for metric (and partial scalar) measurement invariance within and between W.E.I.R.D. and non-W.E.I.R.D. world regions. The results generally support the structure of the DTDD

The effect of particulate debris on the insulation integrity of SSC coils during molding and collaring

In order to simulate the effect of accidentally introduced debris on SSC coil insulation integrity, models consisting of two pieces of insulated SSC cable have been loaded in an hydraulic press after introducing foreign particles between the layers. The tests were originally suggested by R. Palmer of the SSC Laboratory. A high voltage (2 Kv) was continually applied between the two cables and the load gradually increased until an electrical short occurred. The high voltage was used as an easy method of detecting insulation punctures and to continue the general type of testing begun at Brookhaven by J. Skaritka, now at the SSC Laboratory, and continued at Fermilab by F. Markley and presented at last year`s session of the Conference. A range of particles of different size, shape, and hardness were used, and both conducting and insulating particles were included. Fine wires were also used. When the data are normalized using the control (no particles added), data for each cable batch used, there is a slight correlation between pressure at breakdown and particle size for cables insulated with Kapton only. Adjustment must be made for soft particles that tend to deform and for particles with aspect ratios greater than one. Additional measurements have also been made where the opoxy-fiberglass layer was added to the Kapton insulation overwrap. These show a correlation between conductivity and breakdown pressure. 1 ref., 7 figs

The effect of particulate debris on the insulation integrity of SSC coils during molding and collaring

In order to simulate the effect of accidentally introduced debris on SSC coil insulation integrity, models consisting of two pieces of insulated SSC cable have been loaded in an hydraulic press after introducing foreign particles between the layers. The tests were originally suggested by R. Palmer of the SSC Laboratory. A high voltage (2 Kv) was continually applied between the two cables and the load gradually increased until an electrical short occurred. The high voltage was used as an easy method of detecting insulation punctures and to continue the general type of testing begun at Brookhaven by J. Skaritka, now at the SSC Laboratory, and continued at Fermilab by F. Markley and presented at last year's session of the Conference. A range of particles of different size, shape, and hardness were used, and both conducting and insulating particles were included. Fine wires were also used. When the data are normalized using the control (no particles added), data for each cable batch used, there is a slight correlation between pressure at breakdown and particle size for cables insulated with Kapton only. Adjustment must be made for soft particles that tend to deform and for particles with aspect ratios greater than one. Additional measurements have also been made where the opoxy-fiberglass layer was added to the Kapton insulation overwrap. These show a correlation between conductivity and breakdown pressure. 1 ref., 7 figs

Individual self > relational self > collective self - But why? Processes driving the self‐hierarchy in self‐ and person perception

Objective:The self has three parts: individual, relational, and collective. Typically,people personally value their individual self most, their relational self less, and theircollective self least. This self-hierarchy is consequential, but underlying processeshave remained unknown. Here, we propose two process accounts. Thecontentaccountdraws upon selves’agentic–communal content, explaining why the individ-ual self is preferred most. Theteleology accountdraws upon selves’instrumentalityfor becoming one’s personal ideal, explaining why the collective self is preferredleast.Method:In Study 1 (N5200, 45% female,Mage532.9 years, 79% Caucasian), par-ticipants listed characteristics of their three selves (individual, relational, collective)and evaluated those characteristics in seven preference tasks. Additionally, we ana-lyzed the characteristics’agentic–communal content, and participants rated theircharacteristics’teleological instrumentality. Study 2 (N5396, 55% female,Mage534.5 years, 76% Caucasian) used identical methodology and featured an addi-tional condition, where participants evaluated the selves of a friend.Results:Study 1 reconfirmed the self-hierarchy and supported both process accounts.Study 2 replicated and extended findings. As hypothesized, when people evaluateothers’selves, adifferentself-hierarchy emerges (relational>individual>collective).Conclusions:This research pioneers process-driven explanations for the self-hierarchy, establishing why people prefer different self-parts in themselves than inothers

Agentic narcissism, communal narcissism, and prosociality

Grandiose narcissism and prosociality are important topics in personality and social psychology, but research on their interplay is lacking. We present a first large-scale, systematic, and multimethod investigation linking the two. In 2 studies (N1 = 688, N2 = 336), we assessed grandiose narcissism comprehensively (i.e., agentic and communal narcissism) and examined its relations with instantiations of prosociality, namely, objective prosociality (actual behavior in Study 1; round-robin informant-reports in a real-life setting in Study 2) and subjective prosociality (self-perceptions in Studies 1 and 2). We obtained a consistent set of results. Agentic narcissism was related to lower objective prosociality and lower subjective prosociality. Communal narcissism, by contrast, was unrelated to objective prosociality, but was related to higher subjective prosociality. Additionally, we tested for prosociality self-enhancement among agentic and communal narcissists. Agentic narcissists evinced the same (and modest) level of prosociality self-enhancement as their non-narcissistic counterparts. Communal narcissists, by contrast, evinced substantial levels of prosociality self-enhancement, whereas their non-narcissistic counterparts did not enhance their prosociality at all. We discuss implications of the findings for the literature on narcissism and antisociality, and for the concept of prosocial personality. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved

Individual self > relational self > collective self – But why? Processes driving the self-hierarchy in self- and person-perception.

Objective: The self has three parts: individual, relational, and collective. Typically, people personally value their individual self most, their relational self less, and their collective self least. This self‐hierarchy is consequential, but underlying processes have remained unknown. Here, we propose two process accounts. The content account draws upon selves' agentic–communal content, explaining why the individual self is preferred most. The teleology account draws upon selves' instrumentality for becoming one's personal ideal, explaining why the collective self is preferred least. Method: In Study 1 (N = 200, 45% female, Mage = 32.9 years, 79% Caucasian), participants listed characteristics of their three selves (individual, relational, collective) and evaluated those characteristics in seven preference tasks. Additionally, we analyzed the characteristics' agentic–communal content, and participants rated their characteristics' teleological instrumentality. Study 2 (N = 396, 55% female, Mage = 34.5 years, 76% Caucasian) used identical methodology and featured an additional condition, where participants evaluated the selves of a friend. Results: Study 1 reconfirmed the self‐hierarchy and supported both process accounts. Study 2 replicated and extended findings. As hypothesized, when people evaluate others' selves, a different self‐hierarchy emerges (relational > individual > collective). Conclusions: This research pioneers process‐driven explanations for the self‐hierarchy, establishing why people prefer different self‐parts in themselves than in others