The purpose of the current study was to replicate the factor structure of the 14 positive schemas identified in the earlier study by Louis et al. (2018). Using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), and Multi-group CFA, the 14 positive schemas were found to be robust across four new non-clinical English-speaking community samples – USA (n = 396), South Africa (n = 390), Nigeria (n = 364), and India (n = 306). Further, results from CFA, and chi square tests showed that positive and negative schemas were independent but related constructs, and that they do not reflect bipolarity. Using hierarchical regression and Pearson’s correlations the negative schemas of Entitlement, Approval Seeking and Mistrust, and the positive schema of Empathic Consideration were found to be associated positively and negatively respectively with Machiavellianism, narcissism, and psychopathy of the Dark Triad scale in all four worldwide samples. Implications of this finding in Schema Therapy treatment were discussed.
AsparouhovT.MuthénB. O. (2006) Robust chi square difference testing with mean and variance adjusted test statistics. Mplus Web Notes, No. 10.
2.
BachB.SimonsenE.ChristoffersenP.KristonL. (2017). The young schema questionnaire 3 short form (YSQ-S3). European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 33(2), 134–143. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000272
3.
BamelisL. L. M.EversS. M. A. A.SpinhovenP.ArntzA. (2014). Results of a multicenter randomized controlled trial of the clinical effectiveness of schema therapy for personality disorders. American Journal of Psychiatry, 171(3), 305–322. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.2013.12040518
4.
BaranoffJ.OeiT. P. S.ChoS. H.KwonS.-M. (2006). Factor structure and internal consistency of the young schema questionnaire (short form) in Korean and Australian samples. Journal of Affective Disorders, 93(1–3), 133–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2006.03.003
5.
BookA.VisserB. A.VolkA. A. (2016). Unpacking “evil”: Claiming the core of the dark triad. Personality and Individual Differences, 101, 468. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.05.094.
6.
BouchardT. (1973). Studies in Machiavellianism. Edited by R. Christie and F. L. Geis. (New York: Academic Press, 1970. Pp. xii, 415. $12.50.). American Political Science Review, 67(1), 204–205. https://doi.org/10.2307/1958540.
7.
BrowneM. W.CudeckR. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In BollenK. A.LongJ. S. (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136–162). Sage.
8.
CeceroJ. J.NelsonJ. D.GillieJ. M. (2004). Tools and tenets of schema therapy: Toward the construct validity of the early maladaptive schema questionnaire-research version(EMSQ-R). Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy, 11(5), 344–357. https://doi.org/10.1002/cpp.401
9.
CohenJ. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155–159.
10.
CuiL.LinW.OeiT. P. S. (2011). Factor structure and psychometric properties of the young schema questionnaire (short form) in Chinese undergraduate students. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 9(6), 645–655. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-010-9283-4
11.
DerogatisL. R. (1994). Symptom checklist-90-R: Administration, scoring & procedure manual for the revised version of the SCL-90. National Computer Systems.
12.
EichhornB. R. (2014). Common method variance techniques. Cleveland state university, department of operations & supply chain management. SAS Institute Inc.
13.
FloydF. J.WidamanK. F. (1995). Factor analysis in the development and refinement of clinical assessment instruments. Psychological Assessment, 7(3), 286–299. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.7.3.286
14.
FurnhamA.HughesD. J.MarshallE. (2013). Creativity, OCD, narcissism and the big five. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 10, 91-98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2013.05.003.
15.
Giesen-BlooJ.van DyckR.SpinhovenP.van TilburgW.DirksenC.van AsseltT.KremersI.NadortM.ArntzA. (2006). Outpatient psychotherapy for borderline personality disorder. Archives of General Psychiatry, 63(6), 649–658. https://doi.org/10.1001/archpsyc.63.6.649
16.
GreenwaldA. G.PickrellJ. E.FarnhamS. D. (2002). Implicit partisanship: Taking sides for no reason. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(2), 367–379. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.83.2.367
17.
HawkeL. D.ProvencherM. D.ParikhS. V. (2013). Schema therapy for bipolar disorder: A conceptual model and future directions. Journal of Affective Disorders, 148(1), 118–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2012.10.034
18.
HoffartA.SextonH.HedleyL. M.WangC. E.HoltheH.HaugumJ. A.NordahlH. M.HovlandO. J.HolteA. (2005). The structure of maladaptive schemas: A confirmatory factor analysis and a psychometric evaluation of factor-derived scales. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 29(6), 627–644. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-005-9630-0
19.
HuL. T.BentlerP. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
20.
HunsleyJ.MeyerG. J. (2003). The incremental validity of psychological testing and assessment: Conceptual, methodological, and statistical issues. Psychological Assessment, 15(4), 446–455. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.15.4.446
21.
IBM Corp. (2015). IBM SPSS statistics for windows version 23.0. IBM Corp.
KennyD. A.KaniskanB.McCoachD. B. (2015). The performance of RMSEA in models with small degrees of freedom. Sociological Methods & Research, 44(3), 486–507. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124114543236
24.
KlaghoferR.BrählerE. (2001). Konstruktion und teststatistische prüfung einer kurzform der SCL-90-R [construction and test statistical evaluation of a short version of the SCL-90-R]. Zeitschrift für Klinische Psychologie, Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie, 49(2), 115–124.
25.
KristonL.SchäferJ.JacobG. A.HärterM.HölzelL. P. (2013). Reliability and validity of the German version of the young schema questionnaire - short form 3 (YSQ-S3). European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 29(3), 205–212. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000143
26.
LebudaI.FiguraB.KarwowskiM. (2021). Creativity and the dark triad: A meta-analysis. Journal of Research in Personality, 92(3), 104088. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2021.104088
27.
LeeC. W.TaylorG.DunnJ. (1999). Factor structure of the schema questionnaire in a large clinical sample. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 23(4), 441–451. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018712202933
28.
LeeK.AshtonM. C. (2014). The dark triad, the big five, and the hexaco model. Personality and Individual Differences, 67, 2–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.01.048.
29.
LeeS. J.ChoiY. H.RimH. D.WonS. H.LeeD.-W. (2015). Reliability and validity of the Korean young schema questionnaire-short form-3 in medical students. Psychiatry Investigation, 12(3), 295–304. https://doi.org/10.4306/pi.2015.12.3.295
30.
LockwoodG.PerrisP. (2012). A new look at core emotional needs. In van VreeswijkM.BroersenJ.NadortM. (Eds.), The wiley-blackwell handbook of ST: Theory, research and science (pp. 41–66). Wiley-Blackwell.
31.
LouisJ. P.LouisK. M. (2020). Good enough parenting: An in-depth perspective on meeting core emotional needs and avoiding exasperation. Morgan James Publishing.
32.
LouisJ. P.WoodA. M.LockwoodG.HoM.-H. R.FergusonE. (2018). Positive clinical psychology and schema therapy (ST): The development of the young positive schema questionnaire (YPSQ) to complement the young schema questionnaire 3 short form (YSQ-S3). Psychological Assessment, 30(9), 1199–1213. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000567
33.
LouisJ. P.DavidsonA.LockwoodG.WoodA. (2020). Positive perceptions of parenting and their links to theorized core emotional needs. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 29(4). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-020-01807-0
34.
MilfontT. L.FischerR. (2010). Testing measurement invariance across groups: Applications in cross-cultural research. International Journal of Psychological Research, 3(1), 111–121. https://doi.org/10.21500/20112084.857
35.
MolinaJ. G.RodrigoM. F.LosillaJ.-M.VivesJ. (2014). Wording effects and the factor structure of the 12-item general health questionnaire (GHQ-12). Psychological Assessment, 26(3), 1031–1037. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036472
36.
MoranP.LeeseM.LeeT.WaltersP.ThornicroftG.MannA. (2003). Standardised assessment of personality – abbreviated scale (SAPAS): Preliminary validation of a brief screen for personality disorder. British Journal of Psychiatry, 183(3), 228–232. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.183.3.228
37.
MorfC. C.RhodewaltF. (2001). Expanding the dynamic self-regulatory pro-cessing model of narcissism: Research directions for the future. Psychological Inquiry, 12(4), 243–251. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1204_3
NadortM.ArntzA.SmitJ. H.Giesen-BlooJ.EikelenboomM.SpinhovenP.van AsseltT.WensingM.van DyckR. (2009). Implementation of outpatient ST for borderline personality disorder with versus without crisis support by the therapist outside office hours: A randomized trial. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 47(11), 961–973. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2009.07.013
40.
NunnallyJ. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
41.
PatilP.PengR. D.LeekJ. T. (2016). What should researchers expect when they replicate studies? A statistical view of replicability in psychological science. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 11(4), 539–544. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691616646366
42.
PatrickC.FowlesD.KruegerR. (2009). Triarchic conceptualization of psychopathy: Developmental origins of disinhibition, boldness, and meanness. Development and Psychopathology, 21(3), 913–938. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579409000492
43.
PaulhusD. L.WilliamsK. M. (2002). The DT of personality: Narcissism, machiavellianism, and psychopathy. Journal of Research in Personality, 36(6), 556–563. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-6566(02)00505-6
44.
PodsakoffP. M.MacKenzieS. B.LeeJ.-Y.PodsakoffN. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879
45.
PodsakoffP. M.MacKenzieS. B.PodsakoffN. P. (2012). Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it. Annual Review of Psychology, 63(1), 539–569. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100452
RauthmannJ. F. (2012). The DT and interpersonal perception: Similarities and differences in the social consequences of narcissism, machiavellianism, and psychopathy. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 3(4), 487–496. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550611427608
48.
RussellJ. A.CarrollJ. M. (1999). On the bipolarity of positive and negative affect. Psychological Bulletin, 125(1), 3–30. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.125.1.3
49.
SatorraA.BentlerP. M. (2010). Ensuring positiveness of the scaled difference chi-square test statistic. Psychometrika, 75(2), 243–248. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-009-9135-y
50.
SeredaY.DembitskyiS. (2016). Validity assessment of the symptom checklist SCL-90-R and shortened versions for the general population in Ukraine. BMC Psychiatry, 16. Article 300. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-016-1014-3
51.
SiddawayA. P.TaylorP. J.WoodA. M. (2018). Reconceptualizing anxiety as a continuum that ranges from high calmness to high anxiety: The joint importance of reducing distress and increasing well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 114(2), e1–e11. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000128
52.
SoygütG.KaraosmanoğluA.CakirZ. (2009). Assessment of early maladaptive schemas: A psychometric study of the Turkish young schema questionnaire-short form-3. Turkish Journal of Psychiatry, 20(1), 75–84.
53.
TabachnickB. G.FidellL. S. (2012). Using multivariate statistics (6th ed). Pearson Education.
54.
TanY. M.LeeC. W.AverbeckL. E.Brand-de WildeO.FarrellJ.FassbinderE.JacobG. A.MartiusD.WastiauxS.ZarbockG.ArntzA. (2018). Schema therapy for borderline personality disorder: A qualitative study of patients’ perceptions. Plos One, 13(11), Article e0206039. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0206039
55.
TaylorC.ArntzA. (2016). Schema therapy. In WoodA.JohnsonJ. (Eds.), The Wiley handbook of positive clinical psychology (pp. 461–476). John Wiley & Sons.
56.
WallerG.MeyerC.OhanianV. (2001). Psychometric properties of the long and short versions of the young schema questionnaire: Core beliefs among bulimic and comparison women. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 25(2), 137–147. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026487018110
57.
WangC. E.HalvorsenM.EisemannM.WaterlooK. (2010). Stability of dysfunctional attitudes and early maladaptive schemas: A 9-year follow-up study of clinically depressed subjects. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 41(4), 389–396. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbtep.2010.04.002
58.
WilliamsK. M.PaulhusD. L.HareR. D. (2007). Capturing the four-factor structure of psychopathy in college students via self-report. Journal of Personality Assessment, 88(2), 205–219. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223890701268074
59.
WirthR. J.EdwardsM. C. (2007). Item factor analysis: Current approaches and future directions. Psychological Methods, 12(1), 58–79. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.12.1.58
60.
YoungJ. E.BrownG. (2005). Young schema questionnaire: Short version 3. Cognitive Therapy Centre of.
61.
YoungJ. E.KloskoJ. S.WeishaarM. (2003). ST: A practitioner’s guide. Guilford Publications.
62.
Zeigler-HillV.MarcusD. K. (2016). The dark side of personality: Science and practice in social, personality, and clinical psychology. American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/14854-000.
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.
