Agreeableness and the common core of dark traits are functionally different constructs

The dark core of personality and socially aversive psychopathology

“…Finally, the finding that D accounts for substantial variance in dark traits and socially aversive psychopathology beyond the full range of basic personality traits (i.e., HEXACO) coroborates accumulating evidence (Moshagen et al, 2020) that—despite substantial associations—D is not simply the low pole of any one basic personality dimension such as Honesty‐Humility, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, or some additive combination of these (indeed our supplementary analyses also rule out the interaction representing “disconstraint” as a combination of Agreeableness and Conscientiousness, cf. Markon, Krueger, & Watson, 2005).…”

“…Importantly, it has been argued that D is not merely the counterpart of basic traits such as (Five‐Factor) Agreeableness or (HEXACO) Honesty‐Humility or any other basic personality dimension (Moshagen et al, 2018; Moshagen, Zettler, Horsten & Hilbig, 2020), suggesting that D will account for variance in socially aversive psychopathology beyond basic personality. In theory, D represents the commonalities of all dark and aversive traits alike, but it is distinct from the low pole of Agreeableness or Honesty‐Humility (or some combination of such dimensions) in several defining features, especially the representation of sadistic and spiteful tendencies and the broad inclusion of justifying beliefs (see Moshagen et al, 2018).…”

Age and gender differences in socially aversive (“dark”) personality traits

“…Notably, recent meta-analytic evidence on the "dark triad" traits indicates that their communalities neither reduce to honesty-humility or agreeableness, respectively, nor that honesty-humility or agreeableness can be perfectly predicted by the communalities of the dark triad traits (Schreiber & Marcus, 2020), which is mirrored by meta-analytic evidence indicating different nomological nets (Howard & van Zandt, 2020). By extension, it seems likely that the same also holds when considering D (representing not only the commonalities of the dark triad components, but also the basic disposition underlying all socially aversive traits), as hinted by evidence suggesting that D incrementally predicts a host of criterion measures (including behavioral outcomes) over both honesty-humility (Hilbig et al, 2020;Zettler, Schild, et al, 2020) and agreeableness Moshagen, Zettler, Horsten, et al, 2020). Nevertheless, it is clear that among the dimensions of basic personality, D is best approximated by honesty-humility or FFM-agreeableness.…”

“…In particular, FFM-agreeableness and HEXACO honesty-humility have been consistently found to be closely related to the commonality of instruments covering anti-socially labeled constructs (e.g., Hodson et al, 2018;Howard & Van Zandt, 2020). The exact nature of this relationship-to what extend the core of socially aversive personality traits overlaps with basic personality traitsis topic of ongoing debate Moshagen, Zettler, Horsten, et al, 2020;Schreiber & Marcus, 2020;Vize, Collison, et al, 2020;. As such, it would be interesting to consider differences in the age-related trends of these traits as well as potential age-specific covariation.…”

Self‐transcendence and life stories of humanistic growth among late‐midlife adults

“…After all, it took at least 50 years for personality psychology to settle on the Big Five as an integrative framework for dispositional personality traits (Goldberg, 1993). And even today, new traits are being proposed that do not fit readily within the Big Five scheme (Ashton & Lee, 2020; Moshagen, Zettler, Horsten, & Hiblig, 2020). The best strategy for narrative identity research, therefore, may be to promote creative work on two different fronts—continuing to derive promising constructs regarding newfound variations that arise in life narration (as the current study aims to achieve) while looking to synthesize constructs and results across different labs and contexts when appropriate.…”