» Articles » PMID: 35737564

Moderation Effects in Personality Disorder Research

Overview
Journal Personal Disord
Specialty Psychology
Date 2022 Jun 23
PMID 35737564
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Tests of statistical interactions (or tests of moderation effects) in personality disorder research are a common way for researchers to examine nuanced hypotheses relevant to personality pathology. However, the nature of statistical interactions makes them difficult to reliably detect in many research scenarios. The present study used a flexible, simulation-based approach to estimate statistical power to detect trait-by-trait interactions common to psychopathy research using the Triarchic model of Psychopathy and the Psychopathic Personality Inventory. Our results show that even above-average sample sizes in these literatures (e.g., = 428) provide inadequate power to reliably detect trait-by-trait interactions, and the sample sizes needed to detect interaction effect sizes in realistic scenarios are extremely large, ranging from 1,300 to 5,200. The implications for trait-by-trait interactions in psychopathy are discussed, as well as how the present findings might generalize to other areas of personality disorder research. We provide recommendations for how to design research studies that can provide informative tests of interactions in personality disorder research, but also highlight that a more realistic option is to abandon the traditional approach when testing for interaction effects and adopt alternative approaches that may be more productive. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Citing Articles

Positive parenting moderates associations between childhood stress and corticolimbic structure.

Kahhale I, Barry K, Hanson J PNAS Nexus. 2023; 2(6):pgad145.

PMID: 37325028 PMC: 10263262. DOI: 10.1093/pnasnexus/pgad145.

References
1.
Vize C, Miller J, Collison K, Lynam D . Untangling the Relation Between Narcissistic Traits and Behavioral Aggression Following Provocation Using an FFM Framework. J Pers Disord. 2020; 35(2):299-318. DOI: 10.1521/pedi_2020_34_321. View

2.
Gelman A, Carlin J . Beyond Power Calculations: Assessing Type S (Sign) and Type M (Magnitude) Errors. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2015; 9(6):641-51. DOI: 10.1177/1745691614551642. View

3.
Haliczer L, Dixon-Gordon K, Law K, Anestis M, Rosenthal M, Chapman A . Emotion regulation difficulties and borderline personality disorder: The moderating role of race. Personal Disord. 2019; 11(4):280-289. DOI: 10.1037/per0000355. View

4.
Miller J, Lynam D, Hyatt C, Campbell W . Controversies in Narcissism. Annu Rev Clin Psychol. 2017; 13:291-315. DOI: 10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-032816-045244. View

5.
Lynam D, Gaughan E, Miller J, Miller D, Mullins-Sweatt S, Widiger T . Assessing the basic traits associated with psychopathy: development and validation of the Elemental Psychopathy Assessment. Psychol Assess. 2010; 23(1):108-24. DOI: 10.1037/a0021146. View