Interpersonal antagonism is one of the major domains of maladaptive personality. Structure-based investigations of antagonism have generally been consistent in highlighting the more specific antagonistic traits (e.g., manipulativeness, callousness) that underlie the broader domain. However, less work has attempted to merge structural and functional accounts of antagonism to assess how specific antagonistic traits manifest in daily life. This exploratory study examined how antagonism and its specific features relate to outcomes assessed using ecological momentary assessment (EMA) methods. Across four independent EMA samples (N range = 297–396; total N = 1,365; observations per outcome = 5,419–17,735), we investigated how antagonistic traits related to theoretically relevant, EMA-based outcomes (e.g., affect, empathy, coldness-warmth in interpersonal interactions). Results showed robust findings across samples and operationalizations of antagonism (e.g., antagonism’s relation with negative affect), along with more mixed results (e.g., antagonism’s RELATION with different measures of empathy). We discuss future research directions for structural and functional accounts of antagonism.
American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.).
2.
BaumertA.SchmittM.PeruginiM.JohnsonW.BlumG.BorkenauP.CostantiniG.DenissenJ. J. A.FleesonW.GraftonB.JayawickremeE.KurziusE.MacLeodC.MillerL. C.ReadS. J.RobertsB.RobinsonM. D.WoodD.WrzusC. (2017). Integrating personality structure, personality process, and personality development. European Journal of Personality, 31(5), 503–528. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2115
3.
CostaP. T.McCraeR. R. (1992). Four ways five factors are basic. Personality and Individual Differences, 13, 653–656.
4.
CostaP. T.Jr.McCraeR. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. Psychological Assessment Resources.
5.
CôtéS.MoskowitzD. S. (1998). On the dynamic covariation between inter-personal behavior and affect: Prediction from neuroticism, extraversion, and agreeableness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 1032–1046.
6.
CroweM. L.LynamD. R.CampbellW. K.MillerJ. D. (2019). Exploring the structure of narcissism: Toward an integrated solution. Journal of Personality, 87, 1151–1169.
7.
EdershileE. A.WoodsW. C.SharpeB. M.CroweM. L.MillerJ. D.WrightA. G. C. (2019). A day in the life of narcissus: Measuring narcissistic grandiosity and vulnerability in daily life. Psychological Assessment, 31, 913–924.
8.
FleesonW. (2001). Toward a structure-and process-integrated view of personality: Traits as density distributions of states. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 1011–1027.
9.
FleesonW.GallagherP. (2009). The implications of Big Five standing for the distribution of trait manifestation in behavior: Fifteen experience-sampling studies and a meta-analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 1097–1114.
10.
FrickP. J.RayJ. V.ThorntonL. C.KahnR. E. (2014). Can callous-unemotional traits enhance the understanding, diagnosis, and treatment of serious conduct problems in children and adolescents? A comprehensive review. Psychological Bulletin, 140, 1–57.
11.
GleasonK. A.Jensen-CampbellL. A.RichardsonD. S. (2004). Agreeableness as a predictor of aggression in adolescence. Aggressive Behavior, 30, 43–61. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.20002
12.
GriffinS. A.SamuelD. B. (2014). A closer look at the lower-order structure of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5: Comparison with the Five-Factor Model. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 5, 406–412.
13.
HallquistM. N.WileyJ. F. (2018). MplusAutomation: An R package for facilitating large-scale latent variable analyses in Mplus. Structural Equation Modeling, 25, 621–638.
14.
HareR. D.NeumannC. S. (2008). Psychopathy as a clinical and empirical construct. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 4, 217–246.
15.
HyattC. S.ZeichnerA.MillerJ. D. (2019). Laboratory aggression and personality traits: A meta-analytic review. Psychology of Violence, 9, 675–689.
16.
Jensen-CampbellL. A.GleasonK. A.AdamsR.MalcolmK. T. (2003). Interpersonal conflict, agreeableness, and personality development. Journal of Personality, 71, 1059–1086.
17.
KaurinA.BeeneyJ. E.SteppS. D.ScottL. N.WoodsW. C.PilkonisP. A.WrightA. G. C. (2020). Attachment and borderline personality disorder: Differential effects on daily socio-affective processes. Affective Science, 1(3), 117–127. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42761-020-00017-7
18.
KieslerD. J. (1983). The 1982 interpersonal circle: A taxonomy for complementarity in human transactions. Psychological Review, 90, 185–214.
19.
KotovR.KruegerR. F.WatsonD.BagbyM.CarpenterW. T.CaspiA. (2017). The Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP): A dimensional alternative to traditional nosologies. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 126(4): 454–477. http://doi.org/10.1037/abn0000258.
20.
KruegerR. F.DerringerJ.MarkonK. E.WatsonD.SkodolA. E. (2012). Initial construction of a maladaptive personality trait model and inventory for DSM-5. Psychological Medicine, 42, 1879–1890.
21.
KruegerR. F.HobbsK. A.ConwayC. C.DickD. M.DretschM. N.EatonN. R.ForbesM. K.ForbushK. T.KeyesK. M.LatzmanR. D.MicheliniG.PatrickC. J.SellbomM.SladeT.SouthS. C.SunderlandM.TackettJ.WaldmanI.WaszczukM. A., & HiTOP Utility Workgroup. (2020). Validity and utility of Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP): II. Externalizing superspectrum. World Psychiatry, 19(2), 151–172. https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.20730
22.
LynamD. R.HoyleR. H.NewmanJ. P. (2006). The perils of partialling: Cautionary tales from aggression and psychopathy. Assessment, 13, 328–341.
23.
LynamD. R.MillerJ. D. (2019). The basic trait of Antagonism: An unfortunately underappreciated construct. Journal of Research in Personality, 81, 118–126.
24.
MaplesJ. L.CarterN. T.FewL. R.CregoC.GoreW. L.SamuelD. B.WilliamsonR. L.LynamD. R.WidigerT. A.MarkonK. E.KruegerR. F.MillerJ. D. (2015). Testing whether the DSM-5 personality disorder trait model can be measured with a reduced set of items: An item response theory investigation of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5. Psychological Assessment, 27, 1195–1210. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000120
25.
McCraeR. R.CostaP. T.MartinT. A. (2005). The NEO-PI-3: A more readable Revised NEO Personality Inventory. Journal of Personality Assessment, 84, 261–270.
MillerJ. D.LynamD. R. (2012). An examination of the Psychopathic Personality Inventory’s nomological network: A meta-analytic review. Personality Disorders, 3, 305–326.
28.
MorseJ. Q.PilkonisP. A. (2007). Screening for personality disorders. Journal of Personality Disorders, 21, 179–198.
29.
MoskowitzD. S. (2010). Quarrelsomeness in daily life. Journal of Personality, 78, 39–66.
30.
MoskowitzD. S.CôtéS. (1995). Do interpersonal traits predict affect? A comparison of three models. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 915–924.
31.
MõttusR.WoodD.CondonD. M.BackM. D.BaumertA.CostantiniG.EpskampS.GreiffS.JohnsonW.LukaszewskiA.MurrayA.RevelleW.WrightA. G. C.YarkoniT.ZieglerM.ZimmermannJ. (2020). Descriptive, predictive and explanatory personality research: Different goals, different approaches, but a shared need to move beyond the Big Few traits. European Journal of Personality, 34(6), 1175–1201. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2311
32.
MuthénL. K.MuthénB. O. (2017). Mplus user’s guide (8th ed.).
33.
PihetS.De RidderJ.SuterM. (2017). Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA) goes to jail: Capturing daily antisocial behavior in its context, a feasibility and reliability study in incarcerated juvenile offenders. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 33, 87–96.
34.
PincusA. L.HopwoodC. F. (2012). A contemporary interpersonal model of personality pathology and personality disorder. In WidigerT. A. (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of personality disorders (pp. 372–398). Oxford University Press.
35.
R Core Team. (2020). R: A language and environment for statistical computing (Version 4.0.2) [Computer software]. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. http://www.R-project.org
36.
RingwaldW. R.HopwoodC. J.PilkonisP. A.WrightA. G. C. (2021). Dynamic features of affect and interpersonal behavior in relation to general and specific personality pathology. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 12(4), 365–376. https://doi.org/10.1037/per0000469
37.
RingwaldW. R.ManuckS. B.MarslandA. L.WrightA. G. C. (2021). Psychometric evaluation of a Big Five personality state scale for intensive longitudinal studies. Assessment. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/10731911211008254
38.
RingwaldW. R.WrightA. G. C. (2021). The affiliative role of empathy in everyday interpersonal interactions. European Journal of Personality, 35(2), 197–211. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2286
39.
RobinsonM. D. (2007). Personality, affective processing, and self-regulation: Toward process-based views of extraversion, neuroticism, and agreeableness. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 1, 223–235.
40.
RocheM. J. (2018). Examining the alternative model for personality disorder in daily life: Evidence for incremental validity. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 9, 574–583.
41.
RStudio Team. (2020). RStudio: Integrated development for R (Version 1.3.1093) [Computer software]. RStudio. http://www.rstudio.com/
42.
SadikajG.MoskowitzD. S.RussellJ. J.ZuroffD. C.ParisJ. (2012). Quarrelsome behavior in borderline personality disorder: Influence of behavioral and affective reactivity to perceptions of others. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 122, 195–207.
43.
SamuelD. B.WidigerT. A. (2008). A meta-analytic review of the relationships between the five-factor model and DSM-IV-TR personality disorders: A facet level analysis. Clinical Psychology Review, 28, 1326–1342.
44.
SeebothA.MõttusR. (2018). Successful explanations start with accurate descriptions: Questionnaire items as personality markers for more accurate predictions. European Journal of Personality, 32, 186–201.
45.
SimmsL. J.GoldbergL. R.RobertsJ. E.WatsonD.WelteJ.RottermanJ. H. (2011). Computerized Adaptive Assessment of Personality Disorder: Introducing the CAT-PD Project. Journal of Personality Assessment, 93, 380–389.
46.
SleepC. E.CroweM. L.CarterN. T.LynamD. R.MillerJ. D. (2021). Uncovering the structure of antagonism. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 12(4), 300–311. https://doi.org/10.1037/per0000416
47.
VizeC. E.CollisonK. L.MillerJ. D.LynamD. R. (2019). Using Bayesian methods to update and expand the meta-analytic evidence of the five-factor model’s relation to antisocial behavior. Clinical Psychology Review, 67, 61–77.
48.
VizeC. E.LynamD. R. (2020). Merging structural and process-related approaches to the study of agreeableness: A preregistered replication and extension attempt. European Journal of Personality, 34, 139–163.
49.
VizeC. E.MillerJ. D.LynamD. R. (2018). FFM facets and their relations with different forms of antisocial behavior: An expanded meta-analysis. Journal of Criminal Justice, 57, 67–75.
50.
WatsonD.ClarkL. A.TellegenA. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063–1070.
51.
WatsonD.StasikS. M.Ellickson-LarewS.StantonK. (2015). Extraversion and psychopathology: A facet-level analysis. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 124, 432–446.
52.
WickhamH. (2016). ggplot2: Elegant graphics for data analysis. Springer-Verlag.
53.
WilkowskiB. M.RobinsonM. D. (2007). The cognitive basis of trait anger and reactive aggression: An integrative analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 12, 3–21.
54.
WrightA. C. (2019). Antagonism from the perspective of Interpersonal Theory. In LynamD. R.MillerJ. D. (Eds.), The handbook of antagonism: Conceptualizations, assessment, consequences, and treatment of the low end of agreeableness (pp. 155–167). Elsevier.
55.
WrightA. G. C.KaurinA. (2020). Integrating structure and function in conceptualizing and assessing pathological traits. Psychopathology, 53, 1–9.
56.
WrightA. G. C.PincusA. L.HopwoodC. J.ThomasK. M.MarkonK. E.KruegerR. F. (2012). An interpersonal analysis of pathological personality traits in DSM-5. Assessment, 19, 263–275.
57.
WrightA. G. C.SimmsL. J. (2014). On the structure of personality disorder traits: Conjoint analyses of the CAT-PD, PID-5, and NEO-PI-3 Trait models. Journal of Personality Disorders, 5, 43–54.
58.
WrightA. G. C.SimmsL. J. (2016). Stability and fluctuation of personality disorder features in daily life. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 125, 641–656.
59.
WrightA. G. C.SteppS. D.ScottL. N.HallquistM. N.BeeneyJ. E.LazarusS. A.PilkonisP. A. (2017). The effect of pathological narcissism on interpersonal and affective processes in social interactions. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 126, 898–910.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
