Cited by 61Personality Traits and PsychologyPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual OffendingPsychometric Methodologies and Testing

The Dark Triad: Specific or general sources of variance? A bifactor exploratory structural equation modeling approach

McLarnon, Matthew J.W., Tarraf, Rima C.·2017·Personality and Individual Differences

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.paid.2017.02.049

Cites

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
McLarnon, M. J. W., & Tarraf, R. C.
Affiliations
  • Oakland University (US)
  • Western University (CA)
Corresponding author
McLarnon, Matthew J.W.
Venue
Personality and Individual Differences
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-07
Volume
112
Pages
67-73
ISSN
0191-8869 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2591731482
Cited by
61
References
23
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 4
FWCI
8.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Personality and Individual Differences (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
Keywords
Dark Triad, Machiavellianism, narcissism, psychopathy, bifactor exploratory structural equation modeling, factor structure, criterion validity, personality assessment

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review