Search

Objective: Narcissism can manifest in grandiose and vulnerable patterns of experience and behavior. While largely unrelated in the general population, individuals with clinically relevant narcissism are thought to display both. Our previous studies showed that trait measures of grandiosity and vulnerability were unrelated at low-to-moderate levels of grandiose narcissism, but related at high levels.Method: We replicate and extend these findings in a preregistered individual data meta-analysis ("mega-analysis") using data from the Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI)/Hypersensitive Narcissism Scale (HSNS; N = 10,519, k = 28) and the Five-Factor Narcissism Inventory (FFNI; N = 7,738, k = 17).Results: There was strong evidence for the hypothesis in the FFNI (βGrandiose < 1 SD = .08, βGrandiose > 1 SD = .36, βGrandiose > 2 SD = .53), and weaker evidence in the NPI/HSNS (βGrandiose < 1 SD = .00, βGrandiose > 1 SD = .12, βGrandiose > 2 SD = .32). Nonlinearity increased with age but was invariant across other moderators. Higher vulnerability was predicted by elevated antagonistic and low agentic narcissism at subfactor level.Conclusion: Narcissistic vulnerability increases at high levels of grandiosity. Interpreted along Whole Trait Theory, the effects are thought to reflect state changes echoing in trait measures and can help to link personality and clinical models.

More than 70 years ago, Maslow put forward an integrated theory of human motivation that still captures the public imagination. Still, integration with modern theory and research remains elusive. The current study aims to fill this gap in the psychological literature, linking Maslow’s theory to contemporary theory and research on personality and well-being. Toward this aim, the new 30-item “Characteristics of Self-Actualization Scale (CSAS)” was developed. Scale validation showed that 10 characteristics of self-actualizing people as proposed by Maslow load on a general factor of self-actualization and demonstrate external validity. Those reporting more characteristics of self-actualization were more motivated by growth, exploration, and love of humanity than the fulfillment of deficiencies in basic needs. The characteristics of self-actualization were also associated with greater well-being across a number of indicators of well-being, including greater life satisfaction, self-acceptance, positive relations, environmental mastery, personal growth, autonomy, purpose in life, and self-transcendent experiences. Self-actualization scores also predicted work-related outcomes and creativity across multiple domains of achievement. The results provide support for Maslow’s proposed characteristics of self-actualization and basic motivational framework, bringing the concept of self-actualization so frequently discussed by the founding humanistic psychologists firmly into the 21st century.

In this study, we aimed to explore the relationships between intuitive abilities, intelligence (explicit cognitive ability) and personality. We found that intuition is not homogenous and there are three types of intuitive ability: Coherence & Insight, Implicit Learning and Subjective Intuitive Abilities that showed different patterns of relationships with explicit cognitive ability and personality. Coherence & Insight was predicted by intelligence and Openness to Aesthetics. Implicit Learning was weakly predicted by explicit cognitive ability. Subjective Intuitive Abilities was predicted only by Openness subscales: Fantasy, Action and Ideas. We demonstrated that intuition is not a unitary psychological construct but rather a complex cognitive conglomerate that incorporates diverse processes and mechanisms and these intuitive abilities are largely independent from psychometric intelligence.

While there is a growing literature on “dark traits” (i.e., socially aversive traits), there has been a lack of integration with the burgeoning research literature on positive traits and fulfilling and growth-oriented outcomes in life. To help move the field toward greater integration, we contrasted the nomological network of the Dark Triad (a well-studied cluster of socially aversive traits) with the nomological network of the Light Triad, measured by the 12-item Light Triad Scale (LTS). The LTS is a first draft measure of a loving and beneficent orientation toward others (“everyday saints”) that consists of three facets: Kantianism (treating people as ends unto themselves), Humanism (valuing the dignity and worth of each individual), and Faith in Humanity (believing in the fundamental goodness of humans). Across four demographically diverse samples (N = 1,518), the LTS demonstrated excellent reliability and validity, predicting life satisfaction and a wide range of growth-oriented and self-transcendent outcomes above and beyond existing measures of personality. In contrast, the Dark Triad was negatively associated with life satisfaction and growth-oriented outcomes, and showed stronger linkages to selfish, exploitative, aggressive, and socially aversive outcomes. This exploratory study of the contrasting nomological networks of the Light vs. Dark Triad provides several ways forward for more principled and data driven approaches to explore both the malevolent and beneficent sides of human nature.

There is broad consensus that there are at least two different dimensions of narcissism: vulnerable and grandiose. In this study, the authors use a new trifurcated, three-factor model of narcissism to examine relations between aspects of narcissism and an array of clinically relevant criteria related to psychopathology, the self, authenticity, and well-being. Neurotic and antagonistic aspects of narcissism emerged as the most clinically relevant dimensions of narcissism, bearing relations with outcomes relating to interpersonal guilt, insecure attachment styles, cognitive distortions, maladaptive defense mechanisms, experiential avoidance, impostor syndrome, weak sense of self, inauthenticity, low self-esteem, and reduced psychological well-being. Grandiose narcissism was not correlated with most forms of psychopathology and was even positively associated with life satisfaction. Nevertheless, a surprising link was found between grandiose narcissism and multiple indicators of inauthenticity. Implications for the appropriate conceptualization, assessment, and treatment of pathological narcissism are discussed.

Is human nature good or evil? Light or dark? Machiavelli described human nature as selfish and greedy. Abraham Lincoln appealed to the better angels of our nature. Drawing on primate research and human personality science we provide insight into this centuries-old debate. Latent profile analyses of self-reports from two general population samples (Total N = 36,788) uncovered distinct personality subtypes, a “dark” trait profile (Machiavellian, narcissistic, psychopathic traits), a “light” trait profile (Kantianism, humanism, faith in humanity), and a “middle” subtype threading between the other two. The light subtype evidenced affiliative interpersonal functioning and greater trust in others, as well as higher life satisfaction and positive self-image. The dark subtype reflected interpersonal dominance, competitiveness, and aggression. In both general population samples, the dark trait subtype was the least prevalent. However, in a third sample of U.S. Senators (N = 143), based on observational data, the dark subtype was most prevalent and associated with longer tenure in political office, though less legislative success. Results suggest that human nature reflects both light and dark features, serving affiliative (pro-social) and dominance (pro-self) functions, with subtype prevalence varying considerably based on profession.

Nearly everyone has the ability for creative thought. Yet, certain individuals create works that propel their fields, challenge paradigms, and advance the world. What are the neurobiological factors that might underlie such prominent creative achievement? In this study, we focus on morphometric differences in brain structure between high creative achievers from diverse fields of expertise and a 'smart' comparison group of age-, intelligence-, and education-matched average creative achievers. Participants underwent a high-resolution structural brain imaging scan and completed a series of intelligence, creative thinking, personality, and creative achievement measures. We examined whether high and average creative achievers could be distinguished based on the relationship between morphometric brain measures (cortical area and thickness) and behavioral measures. Although participants' performance on the behavioral measures did not differ between the two groups aside from creative achievement, the relationship between posterior parietal cortex morphometry and creativity, intelligence, and personality measures depended on group membership. These results suggest that extraordinary creativity may be associated with measurable structural brain differences, especially within parietal cortex.

Mating Intelligence (MI) is a hypothesized constellation of mental adaptations that generate adaptive strategies in human mating (Geher & Miller, 2008). Although past research has theoretically explored and empirically evaluated the construct, using a MI scale that was borne of the ideas from Geher and Miller’s work, this study seeks further understanding of this construct by demonstrating incremental validity. Two studies, each with large samples, demonstrate that MI predicts important outcomes beyond traditional conceptions of personality and intelligence. Exploratory factor analyses revealed that the factor structure suggested in previous work was generally congruent with predictions. Further, MI accounted for a significant portion of variance in mating success after controlling for age, the five-factor model of personality and general intelligence.

The Big Five personality dimension Openness/Intellect is the trait most closely associated with creativity and creative achievement. Little is known, however, regarding the discriminant validity of its two aspects-Openness to Experience (reflecting cognitive engagement with perception, fantasy, aesthetics, and emotions) and Intellect (reflecting cognitive engagement with abstract and semantic information, primarily through reasoning)-in relation to creativity. In four demographically diverse samples totaling 1,035 participants, we investigated the independent predictive validity of Openness and Intellect by assessing the relations among cognitive ability, divergent thinking, personality, and creative achievement across the arts and sciences. We confirmed the hypothesis that whereas Openness predicts creative achievement in the arts, Intellect predicts creative achievement in the sciences. Inclusion of performance measures of general cognitive ability and divergent thinking indicated that the relation of Intellect to scientific creativity may be due at least in part to these abilities. Lastly, we found that Extraversion additionally predicted creative achievement in the arts, independently of Openness. Results are discussed in the context of dual-process theory.

Creativity is sexy, but are all creative behaviors equally sexy? We attempted to clarify the role of creativity in mate selection among an ethnically diverse sample of 815 undergraduates. First we assessed the sexual attractiveness of different forms of creativity: ornamental/aesthetic, applied/technological, and everyday/domestic creativity. Both males and females preferred ornamental/aesthetic forms of creativity in a prospective sexual partner than applied/technological and everyday/domestic forms of creativity. Secondly, we assessed the simultaneous prediction of general cognitive ability, personality, divergent thinking, self-perceptions of creativity, and creative achievement on preferences for different forms of creativity in a prospective sexual partner. The results were generally consistent with assortative mating. The most robust predictors of a preference for applied/technological forms of creativity in a potential sexual partner were intellectual interests and creative achievement in applied/technological domains. In contrast, the most robust predictor of a preference for ornamental/aesthetic forms of creativity was openness to experience. The results suggest that openness to experience and its associated aesthetic, perceptual, and affective aspects are the primary characteristics influencing the sexual attractiveness of a creative display. Further, the results demonstrate the importance of also taking into account individual differences in personality, interests, and creative achievement when considering the sexual attractiveness of different manifestations of creativity.

Objective: Personality traits are associated with well-being, but the precise correlates vary across well-being dimensions and within each Big Five domain. This study is the first to examine the unique associations between the Big Five aspects (rather than facets) and multiple well-being dimensions. Method: Two samples of U.S. participants (Total N = 706, Mage = 36.17, 54% female) recruited via Amazon's Mechanical Turk completed measures of the Big Five aspects and subjective, psychological, and PERMA well-being. Results: One aspect within each domain was more strongly associated with well-being variables. Enthusiasm and Withdrawal were strongly associated with a broad range of well-being variables, but other aspects of personality also had idiosyncratic associations with distinct forms of positive functioning (e.g., Compassion with positive relationships, Industriousness with accomplishment, and Intellect with personal growth). Conclusions: An aspect-level analysis provides an optimal (i.e., parsimonious yet sufficiently comprehensive) framework for describing the relation between personality traits and multiple ways of thriving in life. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Openness to experience is the broadest personality domain of the Big Five, including a mix of traits relating to intellectual curiosity, intellectual interests, perceived intelligence, imagination, creativity, artistic and aesthetic interests, emotional and fantasy richness, and unconventionality. Likewise, creative achievement is a broad construct, comprising creativity across the arts and sciences. The aim of this study was to clarify the relationship between openness to experience and creative achievement. Toward this aim, I factor analyzed a battery of tests of cognitive ability, working memory, Intellect, Openness, affect, and intuition among a sample of English Sixth Form students (N = 146). Four factors were revealed: explicit cognitive ability, intellectual engagement, affective engagement, and aesthetic engagement. In line with dual-process theory, each of these four factors showed differential relations with personality, impulsivity, and creative achievement. Affective engagement and aesthetic engagement were associated with creative achievement in the arts, whereas explicit cognitive ability and intellectual engagement were associated with creative achievement in the sciences. The results suggest that the Intellectual and Openness aspects of the broader openness to experience personality domain are related to different modes of information processing and predict different forms of creative achievement.

The ability to automatically and implicitly detect complex and noisy regularities in the environment is a fundamental aspect of human cognition. Despite considerable interest in implicit processes, few researchers have conceptualized implicit learning as an ability with meaningful individual differences. Instead, various researchers (e.g., Reber, 1993; Stanovich, 2009) have suggested that individual differences in implicit learning are minimal relative to individual differences in explicit learning. In the current study of English 16-17. year old students, we investigated the association of individual differences in implicit learning with a variety of cognitive and personality variables. Consistent with prior research and theorizing, implicit learning, as measured by a probabilistic sequence learning task, was more weakly related to psychometric intelligence than was explicit associative learning, and was unrelated to working memory. Structural equation modeling revealed that implicit learning was independently related to two components of psychometric intelligence: verbal analogical reasoning and processing speed. Implicit learning was also independently related to academic performance on two foreign language exams (French, German). Further, implicit learning was significantly associated with aspects of self-reported personality, including intuition, Openness to Experience, and impulsivity. We discuss the implications of implicit learning as an ability for dual-process theories of cognition, intelligence, personality, skill learning, complex cognition, and language acquisition. © 2010 Elsevier B.V.

The brain's default network (DN) has been a topic of considerable empirical interest. In fMRI research, DN activity is associated with spontaneous and self‐generated cognition, such as mind‐wandering, episodic memory retrieval, future thinking, mental simulation, theory of mind reasoning, and creative cognition. Despite large literatures on developmental and disease‐related influences on the DN, surprisingly little is known about the factors that impact normal variation in DN functioning. Using structural equation modeling and graph theoretical analysis of resting‐state fMRI data, we provide evidence that Openness to Experience—a normally distributed personality trait reflecting a tendency to engage in imaginative, creative, and abstract cognitive processes—underlies efficiency of information processing within the DN. Across two studies, Openness predicted the global efficiency of a functional network comprised of DN nodes and corresponding edges. In Study 2, Openness remained a robust predictor—even after controlling for intelligence, age, gender, and other personality variables—explaining 18% of the variance in DN functioning. These findings point to a biological basis of Openness to Experience, and suggest that normally distributed personality traits affect the intrinsic architecture of large‐scale brain systems. Hum Brain Mapp 37:773–779, 2016. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

The Big Five personality dimension Openness/Intellect is the trait most closely associated with creativity and creative achievement. Little is known, however, regarding the discriminant validity of its two aspects-Openness to Experience (reflecting cognitive engagement with perception, fantasy, aesthetics, and emotions) and Intellect (reflecting cognitive engagement with abstract and semantic information, primarily through reasoning)-in relation to creativity. In four demographically diverse samples totaling 1,035 participants, we investigated the independent predictive validity of Openness and Intellect by assessing the relations among cognitive ability, divergent thinking, personality, and creative achievement across the arts and sciences. We confirmed the hypothesis that whereas Openness predicts creative achievement in the arts, Intellect predicts creative achievement in the sciences. Inclusion of performance measures of general cognitive ability and divergent thinking indicated that the relation of Intellect to scientific creativity may be due at least in part to these abilities. Lastly, we found that Extraversion additionally predicted creative achievement in the arts, independently of Openness. Results are discussed in the context of dual-process theory.

Researchers agree that mental illness is neither necessary nor sufficient for creativity. But is there still a significant link between the two? The oft-cited studies by Jamison (1989), Andreasen (1987), and Ludwig (1995) showing a link between mental illness and creativity have been criticized on the grounds that they involve small, highly specialized samples with weak and inconsistent methodologies and a strong dependence on subjective and anecdotal accounts (Schlesinger, 2009). To be sure, research does show that many eminent creators—particularly in the arts—had harsh early life experiences (such as social rejection, parental loss, or physical disability) and mental, and emotional instability (Ludwig, 1995, 1998; Simonton, 1994). However, this does not mean that mental illness was a contributing factor to their eminence. There are many eminent people without mental illness or harsh early life experiences, and there is very little evidence suggesting that clinical, debilitating mental illness is conducive to productivity and innovation. What’s more, only a few of us ever reach eminence. Beghetto and Kaufman (2007) argue that we can display creativity in many different ways, from the creativity inherent in the learning process (“mini-c”), to everyday forms of creativity (“little-c”) to professionallevel expertise in any creative endeavor (“Pro-c”), to eminent creativity (“Big-C”). Engagement in everyday forms of creativity (Richards, 2007)—expressions of originality and meaningfulness in daily life—certainly do not require suffering. Quite the contrary, people who engage in everyday forms of creativity—such as making a collage, taking photographs, or publishing in a literary magazine—tend to be more open-minded, curious, persistent, positive, energetic, and intrinsically motivated by their activities (Ivcevic, 2007; Ivcevic and Mayer, 2009). Those scoring high in everyday creativity also tend to report feeling a greater sense of well-being and personal growth compared to their classmates who engage less in everyday creative behaviors. Creating can also be therapeutic for those who are already suffering. For instance, research shows that expressive writing increases immune system functioning (Kaufman and Sexton, 2006; Kaufman and Kaufman, 2009), and the emerging field of posttraumatic growth is showing how people can turn adversity into creative growth (Tedeschi and Calhoun, 2004; Forgeard, 2013). That said, there is a grain of truth to the notion that creativity and mental illness are related, but the truth is much more nuanced—and we think interesting—than the more romanticized notions of the link. To see the matter clearly, we need to take a step back and consider what we mean by “creativity” and “mental illness” in the first place. While there are many forms of mental illness, this paper focuses on schizophrenia, a mental disorder characterized by a severe disconnect from reality, including a tendency to experience thoughts that are divergent, disorganized, and delusional. One aspect of creativity is obviously novelty or originality. Schizophrenic thoughts are more likely to be unique or new. So, by its very nature, schizophrenia disposes one toward satisfying one requirement for creative thought: namely originality. Originality is not sufficient for creativity, however, for as Kant (2000) observed long ago, “there can be original nonsense,” as in the word salad of a schizophrenic patient. For a product to be creative it must not only be new but also useful, effective, or valuable in some way (Sternberg and Lubart, 1999; Gaut, 2010; Klausen, 2010). A highly original product might be deemed a symptom of mental illness or an expression of creativity depending on whether or not it is useful. Creativity is maximized when both novelty and utility are simultaneously maximized. These two features—novelty and utility—respectively depend on two cognitive functions: the generation of ideas popping up in conscious thought, and the selection of ideas to be explored, developed, and ultimately expressed or realized in the form of an observable product (cf. Finke et al., 1992). These two cognitive functions map nicely onto the Blind Variation and Selective Retention (BVSR) model of creativity (Campbell, 1960; Simonton, 2011; Jung et al., 2013; Jung, 2014). The more productively one generates ideas (regardless of the extent to which

Several dispositional traits have been examined in mating contexts by evolutionary psychologists. Such traits include life history strategy, sociosexuality, and the Big Five. Recently, scholars have examined the validity and predictive utility of mating intelligence, a new construct designed to capture the cognitive processes that underlie mating psychology. The current research employed a battery of dispositional traits that include all these constructs in an effort to predict preferences for different kinds of sex acts. Sexual acts vary wildly, and the ability to predict this variability may well hold an important key to underlying sexual strategies. A sample of 607 young adults (144 males and 463 females) completed measures of each of these traits as well as a measure of preference for specific sex acts (along with providing information on their sexual orientation). The traits predicted variability in preference for sex acts – with mating intelligence being the most predictive (for instance, mating intelligence was positively related to preference for vaginal intercourse across the sexes). Sex differences emerged (e.g., males show a stronger preference for anal sex than do females). Discussion focuses on (a) sex differences in preference for sex acts along with (b) why the trait variables predicted preferences in sex acts.