William Hart’s research while affiliated with University of Alabama and other places

Vulnerable and grandiose narcissism may relate differentially to psychological states following ego-threat. We hypothesized that following ego-threat, more (vs. less) vulnerable narcissistic people would be more motivated toward action as evidenced by neural correlates of action preparation (suppressed motor-cortical beta activity) when a competitive opportunity is present (vs. not present). Participants (N = 34; 67.6% female) completed measures of vulnerable and grandiose narcissism and baseline electroencephalography activity; subsequently, they received ego-threat via insulting feedback and later learned they would have the opportunity to compete against the insulter. Electroencephalography activity was recorded just after the insult and once again after learning about the competition opportunity. Vulnerable but not grandiose narcissism was associated with enhanced perceived ego-threat after the insult and greater suppressed beta activity after learning about the competition opportunity relative to baseline or just after the insult; moreover, this greater suppressed beta activity associated with vulnerable narcissism was nullified upon accounting for its overlap with perceived ego-threat. Only vulnerable narcissism related to more action preparation potentially to engage in motivated behavior to repair their ego in response to a greater perceived ego-threat. Broadly, the findings bolster the view that vulnerable and grandiose narcissistic individuals may not share similar reactions to ego-threat, such that vulnerable narcissistic responding entails greater perception of ego-threat and motivation to redress the slight.

Personality disorders (PDs) are thought to be ego-syntonic, but evidence on this matter is limited. To expand on the evidence, we examined whether people with varying levels of PD traits show tendencies to adjust their behavior to create correspondence with their (self-perceived) PD trait levels. Specifically, we examined whether people higher (vs. lower) in five PD traits would present the self to others in ways that expressed relatively more (vs. less) of those traits regardless of situational advantages. Nonclinical participants (N = 343) self-reported their levels of five PD traits and then imagined participating in a study wherein conveying personality pathology to an experimenter could be advantageous (unhealthy-advantage condition) or disadvantageous (healthy-advantage condition). Overall, participants higher (vs. lower) in a PD trait conveyed relatively more (vs. less) of that PD trait to the experimenter regardless of experimental condition. Broadly, the present work has implications for understanding the ego-syntonic nature of PDs.

Neuroticism predicts behaviors symptomatic of behavior dysregulation. One idea is that Neuroticism encompasses deficits in executive functioning; despite this link being empirically substantiated, it remains poorly understood. If Neuroticism is associated with executive functioning deficits due to it activating impulsivity in response to negative emotion, and if Negative Urgency (NU) is the specific aspect of emotional impulsivity that amplifies impulsivity in response to negative emotion, then Neuroticism’s link to executive functioning deficits should be enhanced in individuals higher in NU. A large representative sample of US adults ( N = 446; M age = 46.10; 51.1% female; 78.0% White) completed validated measures of Neuroticism, NU and Positive Urgency (PU), and executive functioning deficits. As predicted, we found that Neuroticism’s link to executive functioning deficits was moderated by NU (after controlling for PU) but not PU (after controlling for NU); specifically, Neuroticism’s relation to executive functioning deficits was over twice as large for people with elevated (+1 SD) versus de-elevated (−1 SD) levels of NU. Furthermore, NU moderated relations between each Neuroticism facet (e.g., Anxiety, Anger) and executive functioning deficits. The findings extend understanding of how Neuroticism relates to executive functioning, suggesting utility in distinguishing between PU and NU and potentially studying Neuroticism and NU as interacting.

Sexual sadism has long been of interest to scholars and clinicians in psychology, and most research on sexual sadism has focused on forensic samples. However, recently, research has uncovered the existence of sexual sadism in general populations. Measures designed to assess sexual sadism in the general population are lacking. To address this gap, we created the Index of Consensual Sexual Sadism (ICSS) and performed some initial psychometric testing of its structure, measurement invariance, validity (e.g., distinguishment from everyday sadism), and reliability. In this preregistered study, separate samples of community adults and undergraduates (N = 1,391; Mage = 24.21, SDage = 10.92, rangeage = 18–85; 68.40% female; 76.10% White) completed the ICSS and measures of sadistic pleasure in sexual and nonsexual contexts, normal personality traits (HEXACO), personality disorder traits, antagonistic personality features (e.g., psychopathy), frequency of sadistic sexual fantasies, romantic relationship satisfaction, and social desirability. The ICSS demonstrated a unidimensional structure that was invariant across the tested groupings of sample type, sex, and age; in addition, the scale had only a trivial relation to social desirability bias, and it related to the other outcomes in a way that highlighted its construct validity and distinguished it from everyday sadism. The ICSS seems a viable candidate for assessing consensual sexual sadism so that clinicians and researchers can begin evaluating the full spectrum of sexual sadism.

Authoritarianism has been of interest to multiple fields in the social sciences (e.g., psychology, political science). Though traditionally conceptualized as a right-wing phenomenon, burgeoning research suggests it is also a left-wing phenomenon. The Left-Wing Authoritarianism Index-13 (LWAI-13) was recently developed as a brief measure of left-wing authoritarianism and its three factors: anti-hierarchical aggression, top-down censorship, and anti-conventionalism. Though prior work provided evidence for the LWAI-13’s factor structure and construct validity, its measurement invariance (MI) remains untested. We evaluated the LWAI-13’s MI regarding sex, age, and education; scalar MI was evidenced for all groupings. Thus, the structural properties of the LWAI-13 appeared robust to the three group distinctions.

Liberals tend to indicate being less happy than conservatives; although one perspective suggests this happiness gap reflects liberals’ enhanced concern over the systemic maltreatment of others, the “maladjustment perspective” suggests it reflects, in part, liberals’ tendencies to reject aspects of conservatism that support agency and produce some life benefits. Some evidence seems to favor the maladjustment perspective; but, here, we sought to build on this perspective by examining its predictions in the context of Left-wing Authoritarianism (LWA). LWA is positively associated with liberalism, but, relative to liberalism, it encompasses aspects more rejecting of conservatism. US adults (N = 446) completed measures of LWA, happiness, agency, life impairment, and antagonistic personality constructs (e.g., sadism). The data supported the maladjustment perspective in the context of LWA: After accounting for liberalism (and demographics inclusive of age and sex), LWA was negatively related to happiness and positively related to agency deficiencies and life impairments; the latter two characteristics (reflective of maladjustment) completely accounted for LWA’s negative relation to happiness. These findings were generally consistent across LWA’s three facets. LWA also had a positive relationship to antagonistic personality constructs; hence, LWA is probably not conducive to enhanced concern over the systemic maltreatment of others. Additional analyses revealed that the anti-conventional facet of LWA completely accounted for relationships between liberalism and happiness, agency deficiencies, and life impairments. The results offer some novel insight into the ideological happiness gap.

Although clinical psychologists have long speculated that antagonistic individuals may lack insight into their moral deficits, some evidence has shown that more (vs. less) antagonistic people view moral traits as somewhat desirable and rate themselves as lower on moral characteristics (suggestive of some insight). But, we suggest that antagonistic people’s struggles with insight can be detected as part of a basic social–cognitive bias that entails believing the self is better-than-average on socially desirable characteristics (i.e., the “better-than-average effect” [BTAE]). Specifically, although antagonistic people may rate themselves lower on moral characteristics than less antagonistic people, they may still believe that their relative standing on moral characteristics compares favorably to others. Participants (N = 515) completed indicators of the Dark Tetrad (D4) constructs (narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy, and sadism) and rated themselves in relation to others on moral and immoral character traits. Overall, participants exhibited very large BTAEs (i.e., rated the self as “better-than-average” on moral character traits); only psychopathy and sadism consistently related negatively to BTAEs, but people with elevations in each D4 construct (or any D4 facet) still exhibited large-to-very-large BTAEs. Such antagonistic participants viewed themselves as possessing substantially greater amounts of moral than immoral character traits but viewed average others as possessing an equal mix of these traits.