Marcus Roth’s research while affiliated with University of Duisburg-Essen and other places

Initially conceptualized as a unique personality trait, Sensory Processing Sensitivity (SPS) has increasingly been criticized for its substantial empirical overlap with well-established personality traits such as the Big Five. When accounting for measurement errors, SPS subdimensions even overlap completely with traits such as neuroticism and openness to experiences. A recent study has further indicated a high association between SPS and vulnerable narcissism, but this has only been revealed at a manifest level (Jauk et al., 2023). With this study, we investigated the relationship between SPS, measured by the Highly Sensitive Person Scale, and established personality traits, including the HEXACO personality traits, narcissism, and self-esteem, through a latent variable approach. Using a sample of 1630 participants, latent regression analyses were conducted to explore how the traits mentioned above relate to the three components of SPS: Ease of Excitation (EOE), Low Sensory Threshold (LST), and Aesthetic Sensitivity (AES). Results indicated that neuroticism, openness to experience, and vulnerable narcis-sism are significantly associated with SPS components, with vulnerable narcissism showing the strongest association with EOE and LST and openness to experience with AES. These findings support the critiques regarding the postulate that SPS is a distinct construct within existing personality frameworks.

Previous research on narcissism has shown that men score higher than women on grandiose narcissism and women score higher than men on vulnerable narcissism. Along with theoretical discussions, these findings have contributed to the idea that vulnerable narcissism may reflect a female-typed form of narcissism and grandiose narcissism a male-typed form. In the present study, we used the 2D:4D finger-length ratio as a biological marker of prenatal estrogen/testosterone exposure (resulting in feminized/masculinized fetal development) to analyze the biological or more specifically the hormonal basis of vulnerable and grandiose narcissism. Separating our sample of 400 participants into women and men, we found that, in women, a lower 2D:4D ratio (indicative of lower estrogen/higher testosterone exposure) was related to higher grandiose narcissism, and in men, a higher 2D:4D ratio (indicative of higher estrogen/lower testosterone exposure) was related to higher vulnerable narcissism.

In the face of heterogeneity in the measurement of empathy, the Toronto Empathy Questionnaire (TEQ; Spreng et al., Journal of Personality Assessment, 91(1), 62-71 (2009)) was developed as a brief unidimensional tool by statistically forming a consensus from existing measures of the construct. The present study aimed to (1) validate a German version of the TEQ, and (2) contribute empirical evidence to the ongoing debate regarding a singular versus multidimensional factor structure of the TEQ. One cross-sectional and two longitudinal studies were performed, with a total of 1,075 participants. Our initial exploratory factor analyses suggested either a one- or a two-factor structure (with the two-factors clustering straight and reverse-scored items); the two-factor model outperformed the one-factor model using confirmatory factor analyses. However, after negated items were replaced by positively reworded alternatives, both models fit the data equally well. A comparison of the correlation patterns with numerous external measures indicated that a second factor of the TEQ is a methodological artifact of item wording. Finally, a unidimensional TEQ scale showed sufficient internal consistency, two-week test-retest reliability, one-year stability, as well as convergent and discriminant validity with measures of empathy, emotion recognition, emotion regulation, altruism, social desirability, and the Big Five personality traits.

The construct of “sensory processing sensitivity” has become an extremely popular concept outside the scientific literature under the term “high sensitivity” (HS), reflected in a variety of self-help guides and media reports. Therefore, the present study aimed to investigate this phenomenon by examining in-depth individuals who consider the label HS essential to their self-definition. In semi-structured interviews, 38 individuals described their understanding of HS and its perceived manifestations and impact on their lives (among other topics). Subsequently, the data were content-analytically evaluated, i.e., categorized and quantified. One key finding was that HS individuals feel relief following self-attribution or self-diagnosis. Moreover, this self-attribution replaced the feeling of being somehow different from the others, which almost all interviewees mentioned, with positive attributes. The main negative features of HS mentioned were feeling overwhelmed by sensory and emotional stimuli. The results are discussed with regard to the significance of the label HS for this group on the one hand, and with regard to alternative approaches for future research on the other hand.

Objectives Social mindfulness is a relatively new concept in psychological research and is attracting increasing attention. Recent studies have provided evidence of its relevance with regard to prosocial behavior and empathy, but also concerning individual well-being and psychological health. In such studies, social mindfulness has been assessed using the social mindfulness paradigm by Van Doesum and colleagues, which is the standard measure of social mindfulness to date. However, evidence is scarce or lacking with regard to whether this measurement approach is unidimensional, whether it produces (test-retest) reliable and valid measurements, and whether its associations with personality and empathy are replicable. Methods To test these assumptions, we assessed a sample of 265 participants currently working in health care professions on social mindfulness, several concepts of empathy, and the HEXACO personality dimensions longitudinally at two measurement occasions. Results The results supported the assumption of unidimensionality of the measure. Partial support was found for its reliability, validity, and replicability. Test-retest reliability was acceptable, but the associations with personality and empathy turned out weaker than expected. Conclusions The social mindfulness paradigm is an interesting approach toward understanding social mindfulness, meaning mindfulness of other people’s needs. Potential directions for the further development of the social mindfulness paradigm and its network of relations, especially to empathy, are discussed.

Social mindfulness has been described as the socially relevant disposition of being attentive to and considerate of other people's needs and acting accordingly. However, previous studies have not included actual other people. The goal of the present study is to test the hypothesis that people high versus low in social mindfulness are perceived as different by and have different impacts on the people in their personal environments. In our study, we used caregivers as primary participants and two types of other rater. First, primary participants were rated by their private long-term contacts (e.g., closest friend or significant other) on empathy, agreeableness, and honesty/humility. Second, patients provided satisfaction ratings of the care they received from their caregivers (i.e., primary participants). We found small associations between social mindfulness and other-rated empathy but no associations with other-rated agreeableness or honesty/humility. By contrast, the association between caregivers' social mindfulness and patients' satisfaction with their received care was large. The findings are interpreted with regard to differences in levels of acquaintanceship. We speculate that social mindfulness may be more relevant in formal settings than in close relationships.

Objective: Although almost every study evaluating psychological interventions includes the two components of acceptability and effectivity, their relationship is rarely examined. The current study closes this gap by performing secondary analyses of the intervention program 'empCARE'. The goal was to analyze the relationship between these two evaluation components. Design: The sample consists of 309 nurses (intervention group n = 172; control group n = 137). Data were collected before the training and longitudinally three times after the training. Main outcome measures: Psychological distress was assessed using the Symptom Checklist (SCL-90-R), and the Copenhagen Burnout Inventory. Personality traits were assessed using the HEXACO-60 and the Toronto Empathy Questionnaire. Acceptability was assessed using statements concerning participants' subjective evaluation of the training. Results: The results show that the intervention program was effective. Acceptability, measured only in the intervention group, was quite high. However, no connection was found between effectivity and acceptability. On the contrary, the results show that acceptability assessments depend more on personality factors than on intervention success. Conclusions: Researchers should examine the relationship between acceptability and effectivity in their data. It does not seem appropriate to rely on acceptability measurements as the sole evaluation criterion capturing the success of an intervention.

In previous research, group characteristics have often been measured without taking the individual perspective of the group members into account. Therefore, the influence of individual personality (and other individual-level characteristics) on group characteristic ratings beyond the influence of the actual group remains largely unexplored. Additionally, some studies use group means of individual personality as group characteristics, however, evidence for interrelations or differences between these approaches has not yet been empirically based. In the present study, we employed a sample of 301 individuals from 54 teams, all of which rated both characteristics of themselves and their teams. By averaging both self-ratings and group-ratings within each team, we were able to compare both approaches to group characteristics and found them to likely measure unrelated constructs. We also found influences of individual Extraversion and Agreeableness from the HEXACO model on direct group characteristic ratings beyond the influence of the actual group. Years of work experience and work strain operationalized through burnout symptoms did not predict group characteristic ratings beyond the influence of the actual group and individual personality. Our findings imply that individual ratings of a group characteristic are influenced to a larger degree by the raters’ individual perspectives than by the presumed actual group characteristic itself. Further implications for research applying individual personality to groups are discussed.