Utilizing Filipino Indigenous Lexical Traits in Understanding the Dark Triad ofPersonality




Graduate School, University of Santo Tomas, Manila

Paulhus and Williams (2002) proposed that Machiavellianism, narcissism, and psychopathy are independent-yet-related constructs of the dark triad of personality (DTP). Considering that the nature of the dark triad is an aggregate of complex traits, one can use basic elemental traits to describe the fine-grained trait descriptions of the DTP. However, much of studies in DTP used Western personality models and none has used indigenous models of traits in broadening the nomological net of the dark triad. Using 368 college students, this study explored the psychometric properties and factor structure of Jonas on and Webster's (2010) Dirty Dozen scale as a short measure of the DTP. Further, the utility of a Filipino indigenous model of personality by Church, Katigbak, and Reyes (1996) in elucidating the basic elemental traits of the dark triad is explored. Based on the analysis, the Dirty Dozen is a reliable measure of the three dark traits. Further, there is an acceptable fit for the threefactor structure of the scale instead of a one-factor structure. Correlations with the nine indigenous factors of the PKP were utilized maximally. And these correlations were elaborated more by specific trait descriptors as fine-grained descriptions of the DTP. Overall, the findings suggest that an indigenous model of personality can capture the nomological structure of the DTP.

Keywords: Machiavellianism, narcissism, psychopathy, indigenous traits, Filipino


Despite the growing concern among psychologists to understand human nature in a positive light (Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000), it is non-arguable that the dark side of human nature still dominates the field of psychology. Testament to this is the utility of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders (DSMj American Psychiatric Association, 2004) and the International Classification of Disorders (I CD j W orld Health Organization, 2010) in clinical diagnosis.

* Research paper submitted as partial fulfillment in the requirements of Seminar in Filipino Personality (2nd Semester 2010- 2011) under the supervision of Dr. Rosalia Caballero, Graduate School, University of Santo Tomas, Manila, March 28, 2011.


Moreover) the dark side of human nature has also crossed over from the field of clinical psychology to various psychological fields in explaining why individuals violate social norms and structures and inflict harm to others. Among these dark sides) one of the most promising models is the dark triad of personality (DTP). Originally proposed by Paulhus and Williams (2002)) the DTP is consisted of three independent-yet-related constructs namely Machiavellianism) narcissism, and psychopathy. Characteristics of manipulation and need for power are phenotypic traits that describes Machiavellianism. Narcissism is described as an individual's sense of entitlement and grandiosity. Psychopathy is described as an aggregate of maladaptive trait deficits in the areas of interpersonal) affective and lifestyle domains coupled with social or antisocial deviance. All three constructs share similar histories prominent in the clinical and social-personality psychological literature and popular culture. (We will not present here the specific historical traditions of the three dark traits. Readers are advised to consult Untalan, Mordeno, and Decatoria (2008)). Paulhus and Williams suggest that "all three entail a socially malevolent character with behavior tendencies toward self-promotion) emotional coldness) duplicity) and aggressiveness!! (p. 557). Despite their different origins) the dark triad of constructs is equivalent and replicable in normal samples.

The Relationship of the Dark Triad with Normal Personality Structures

A best way of understanding the uniqueness and differences of the dark triad is thru its nomological structure within the personality framework. According to Harkness (2007)) personality is a classic example of a "best science" in psychology. He suggests that "presenting complaints" and "targets of treatment plan" may often be manifestations or sequallae of personality traits. For example) using the analogy made by Tellegen (Harkness & Lilienfeld, 1997)) (1) extreme levels of personality traits; (2) problematic configuration of personality traits; and (3) extreme (i.e. socially and personality maladaptive) adaptations to personality traits or their configural properties often manifest in the psychopathology continuum. Moreover) the prominence of using personality framework in understanding the DTP is based on the assumption that the DTP are complex and aggregate structures of traits. Using personality models) they can provide basic elemental structures of these complex traits thru fine-grained traits at the lower-order and higher-order level. Such feasibility is based on the current personality models that possess multi-level hierarchical orders and is proven effective in de constructing these constructs at the basic level. For example) Lynam and his colleagues (2010) were able to develop an assessment of psychopathy thru the use of a normal functioning model of personality. Meanwhile) Miller and Campbell (2008) were able to provide a preliminary structure of several narcissism scales using a normal functioning model of personality as well.

In understanding the DTP) several personality models were used such as the Big Five model and HEXACO model of personality (e.g., Ashton & Lee) 2005) 2007j Jacobwitz & Egan) 2006j Lee & Ashton) 2005 j Paulhus & Williams) 2005 j Untalan et al., 2008). Before discussing the summary of these studies) a brief description of these personality models is warranted. The Big Five model is based on the lexical tradition analysis proposing for five common factors of traits across cultures namely neuroticism) extraversion) openness/intellect, agreeableness) and conscientiousness a ohn, Naumann) & Soto, 2008). A considerable literature supports the Big Five model further having several alternative frameworks (see De Raad & Perugini) 2002). Among these frameworks) McCrae and Costa's (2008) five-factor model (FFM) of personality and its measure-the NEO Inventories (Costa & Mcf.rae, 2010)) has achieved popularity in terms of theoretical and clinical utility. Another framework which is rooted in the lexical


tradition is the six-factor model proposed by Ashton and Lee (2007) which they call as the HEXACO model of personality. The HEXACO model is an acronym for the six factors identified by Ashton and Lee namely, honesty-humility, emotionality, extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, and openness to experience. Though the components of the six-factor structure may sound similar to the Big Five model, it is different in several ways. For example, the honesty-humility factor consists of trait terms related, but with small loadings, to agreeableness such as fairness, sincerity, greed avoidance, and modesty. The agreeableness and emotionality factor is different as well compared to its Big Five counterpart. According to Ashton (2007; p. 68), "traits of patience versus irritability belong to the Agreeableness factor and traits of sentimentality versus toughness belong to the Emotionality factor" of the HEXACO model compared to the Big Five. The HEXACO model is best assessed by its measurement developed as well by Lee and Ashton (2004; 2006)-the HEXACO Personality Inventory (HEXACO-PI). Despite different theoretical developments, it can be considered that both models are highly competitive from one another. Ashton (2007) reported that the HEXACO model of personality can account other personality dimensions than the FFM. However, he emphasized as well that the FFM possess advantage considering that many researches are conducted using this personality framework. The Big Five and HEXACO model has been used in the DTP studies and are summarized briefly here.

Using a sample of24S college students, the dark triad was assessed by three separate measures. For narcissism, it was assessed by the Narcissitic Personality Inventory (NPI; Raskin & Terry, 1988). For Machiavellianism, it was assessed by the MACH-IV scale (Christie & Geis, 1970). Lastly, psychopathy was assessed by the Self-Report Psychopathy scale (Paulhus, Hemphil, & Hare, in press). Paulhus and Williams (2002) demonstrated in their preliminary study that the three dark traits are highly distinctive yet correlated constructs. Psychopathy was positively correlated with narcissism, r=.SO, p<.OOI, and Machiavellianism, r=.31, p<.OOl. Narcissism correlated with Machiavellianism as well, r=.2S, p<.OOl. Further, in terms of gender differences, males scored higher in all dark traits. However, correlation matrix reveals no significant gender influences in the relationship among the dark traits. Paulhus and Williams also explored the unique and similar structure of the DTP with a personality model thru the measure of the Big Five Inventory (BFI; John et aL, 2008). The BFI Agreeableness factor is the common trait found among the three with rs ranging from r=-.2S, p<.OS (psychopathy) to r=-.47, p<.OS (Machiavellianism) supporting Paulhus and Williams' emphasis on an antagonistic and aggressive nature of the dark traits. Second, BFI Conscientiousness correlated negatively with psychopathy, r=-.24, p<.OS, and Machiavellianism, r=-.34, p<.OS. BFI Extraversion and Openness correlated positively with psychopathy (r=.34 and .24, p<.OS, respectively) and narcissism (r=.42 and .38, p<.OS, respectively). The BFI Neuroticism correlated negatively with psychopathy, r=-.34, p<.OS, which supports the affective deficit component of psychopathy (Hare, 2003).

Jacobwitz and Egan (2006) conducted a study of the DTP using several alternatives in measuring the Big Five and psychopathy. Instead of using the BFI as a measure of the Big Five, they have utilized the revised NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI-R; McCrae & Costa, 2004). Similarly, rather than utilizing the SRP-III as a measure of psychopathy, they have utilized the Primary and Secondary Psychopathy Scale (PSPS; Levenson, Kiehl, & Fitzpatrick, 1995). The PSPS assesses the two subtypes of psychopathy proposed by Karpman (as cited in Lykken, 1995) namely the primary psychopath (pp) and secondary psychopathy (SP). The PP pertains to the core interpersonal-affective traits of psychopathy (Hare, 2003) while the SP pertains to a neurotic-type of psychopathy that is easily vulnerable to situations. The correlation between the PP and SP in this study is .49, p<.OI, suggesting


that the two are related, but distinctive, subtypes of psychopathy. Using a smaller sample of 82 subjects, they have showed that PP is positively correlated with Machiavellianism, r=.70, p<.OI, and narcissism, r=.40, p<.Ol. SP correlated positively with Machiavellianism, r=.52, p<.OI, while not significantly with narcissism, r=.18, ns. Meanwhile, Machiavellianism and narcissism was positively correlated, r=.36, p<.Ol. The high correlation between Machiavellianism and psychopathy supports McHoskey et als (1998) proposal that Machiavellianism "is a global measure of psychopathy in non-institutionalized populations" (p. 192). Regarding the relationship between the DTP with the FFM, NEO-FFI-R Extraversion correlated positively with PP, r=.30, p<.OI, SP, r=.47, p<.OI, and Machiavellianism, r=.38, p<.Ol. NEO-FFI-R Agreeableness correlated with all the DTP (rs ranging from -.23 to -.43) while NEO-FFI-R Conscientiousness correlated with Machiavellianism, r=-.27, p<.05, and narcissism, r=-.24, p<.05. Although not significant, the PP, r=-.21, ns, and SP, r=-.19, ns, subscales correlated negatively as well with NEO-FFI-R Conscientiousness. Jacobwitz and Egan's findings support Paulhus and Williams (2002) proposal regarding the negative relationship of the DTP with agreeableness and conscientiousness. Furthermore, an exploratory factor analysis using an oblique rotation was conducted in order to determine a possible factor structure of the DTP with personality variables. Four factors were extracted but only the first two factors have a strong support to DTP-personality structure. The first factor explains a shared variance of 30% (eigenvalue=2.6) consisted of factor loadings of NEO- FFIRAgreeableness (-.69), PP (.80), SP (.54), Machiavellianism (.77), and narcissism (.76). This factor represents the antagonistic characteristic of the DTP which supports the original position of Paulhus and Williams (2002). The second factor explains a shared variance of 20% (eigenvalue=2.6) consisted of factor loadings of NEO-FFI-R Neuroticism (.80), Conscientiousness (-.71), and SP (.52). This second factor represents the emotionally unstable nature of psychopathy as proposed by Karpman.

Lee and Ashton (2005) explored the utility of a new model of personality-the HEXACO modelcompared with the Big Five model in understanding the DTP in a sample of 164 undergraduate students. Instead of utilizing the SRP-III scale to assess psychopathy, they have utilized the primary PP subscale of Levenson et al/s (1995) PSPS. Men scored higher than women on all dark traits, though there were no noticeable sex differences in the relationship between DTP and personality variables after subjecting through a moderated multiple regression analysis. They have showed that PP is correlated positively with Machiavellianism, r=.66, and narcissism, r=.37. The relationship between Machiavellianism and psychopathy supports further the hypothesis proposed by McHoskey et aL's (1998). However, Machiavellianism was not significantly correlated with narcissism, r=.17, unlike the previous report made by Paulhus and Williams (2002). In terms of the correlations with the Big Five, PP and Machiavellianism correlated negatively with BFI Agreeableness, r=-.39 and r=-.44 respectively. Moreover, Machiavellianism correlated negatively with BFI Conscientiousness, r=-.34. Meanwhile, narcissism correlated with BFI Extraversion, r=.46. For the HEXACO model, narcissism correlated positively with HEXACO-PI Extraversion, r=.49, and negatively with HEXACO-PI Honesty-Humility, r=-.53. Machiavellianism and PP correlated negatively with HEXACO-PI Honesty-Humility, r=-.57 and r=-.72 respectively. These correlations are closely similar to the preliminary findings of Ashton, Lee, and Son (2000) in which the Honesty-Humility factor of the HEXACO-PI correlated negatively with Machiavellianism, r=-.40, p<.05, and narcissism, r=-.45, p<.05. Considering that the sixth factor of the HEXACO model correlated significantly with the three dark traits, facet trait analysis was conducted as well. Except for the relationship between narcissism and sincerity, r=-.22, ns, all facet traits of the H factor correlated negatively with all three dark traits. For Machiavellianism, rs ranged from -.31 (Greed


Avoidance) to -.61 (Fairness). For psychopathy, rs ranged from -.49 (Greed Avoidance) to -.75 (Fairness). For narcissism, rs ranged from -.32 (Fairness) to -.62 (Modesty). In order to determine which among the three factor models-the Big Five, the HEXACO, and the Honesty- Humility modelthe covariation matrix produced close approximation of the relationship of the DTP using the HonestyHumility model instead of the Big Five model concluding an "exploratory value ... can be derived from the measurement oflower-Ievel traits in the personality hierarchy" (p. 1579j Lee & Ashton, 2005).

In a local study, Untalan and his colleagues (2008) replicated the Paulhus and Williams' study of the DTP in a sample of 200 Filipino college students. Based on their analysis, narcissism was positively related to Machiavellianism, r=.17, p<.05, and psychopathy, r=.39, p<.Ol. Meanwhile, Machiavellianism was positively, though not significantly, related to psychopathy, r=.02. In terms of the relationship of the DTP with the Big Five, as assessed by the BFI (john et al., 2008), narcissism was positively correlated with extraversion, r=.51, p<.Ol, openness, r=.19, p<.Ol, and conscientiousness, r=.19, p<.Ol. Psychopathy on the other hand was positively related to extraversion, r=.24, p<.Ol, and negatively related to agreeableness, r=-.28, p<.Ol, and conscientiousness, r=-.19, p<.Ol. Unfortunately, Machiavellianism was not significantly related to any Big Five domains. Among the significant relationships suggesting that the three are distinct-yet-related in the Filipino culture, an emphasis was made by Untalan et al. regarding the positive correlation between narcissism and conscientiousness. Theoretically, narcissism exudes impulsivity and reflects lack of plan, discipline, and organization. However, their findings present an alternative relationship and explain this by the "we-self" constellation present among Filipinos. In a culture where relational selves are far more important and valued than an individuated self, it is more likely that such argument is plausible supporting Vazire and Funder's (2006) claim that such relationship between narcissism and impulsivity may vary across cultures.

Philippine Indigenous Models of Personality

Despite the ample literature of relating the DTP with general models of personality, majority relies in utilizing the Western frameworks of personality. None has used to tap the nomological structure of the DTP within indigenous models of personality. Considering the historical background of the Philippines with its high need to indigenize psychology, Filipino psychologists emphasize the utility of indigenous frameworks in understanding and explaining psychological phenomenon (Church & Katigbak, 2002j Enriquez, 1992). Church (1987) reviewed that there is a long history of studying personality in the Philippines and several Filipino psychologists were able to develop and build an indigenous framework of personality thru the development of psychological tests such as the Panukat ng Ugali at Pagkatao (PUPj Enriquez & Guanzon-Lapeiia, 2001) and the Panukat ng Pagkataong Pilipino (pPPj Carlota, 1995). In 1996, Church and his colleagues attempted to study the lexical trait terms of Filipinos using a dictionary ending up with a nine-factor structure and a trait adjective inventory-the Panukat ng mga Katangian ng Personalidad (PKP). Using various methods and analysis (Church, Katigbak, & Reyes, 1996j 1998), the nine-factor structure that best fits the 253 trait adjectives identified is subsumed within makakapwa versus makasarili (concern for others versus geocentricism), disiplinado ( conscientiousness), relihiyoso (religious), sumpungin ( temperamentalness), tiwala sa sarili (selfassurance), pagiging matalino (intellect), pagiging kalog (gregariousness), mga katangiang kanais-nais (positive valence), and mga katangiang 'di kanais-nais (negative valence). The disiplinado and relihiyoso scales can also be combined in order to achieve a higher structure of conscientiousness. Meanwhile, the two valences were extracted because of the evaluative terms in the Filipino language.



Hypothesized Convergence of Conseructs FroDl Four Indigenous Measures

Panukar rIg Pag/wta''''8 Pilipino (PPP)

Student Research Form (SRF)

Panukat "8 UgaJi a' Pagk(lt"u (PUP)

Philippine Trait Rating Form (PTRF)

Surgeney/exteevcrstoe domain Pagkapakilwlbtgan (sociability) Pag~ldal (socfal curiousity)

Agreeableness domain Pagknm<ull<>i<>hanin (thoughtfulness)

Paglcmnaga/<mg' (respectfulness) Fagl<amatuu",ginb (helpfulness) Fagkamopagkumbaba" (humility) Pagkamaunawain

(capacity for understanding) Pagkamatapa: (honesty)

Conscientiousness domain Pagkaresponsable" (responsibleness) Paglcmnatiyaga" (patience) Pagkamnpagsapaiaran" (risk taking) Pagkamasunurin" (obedience) Pagkamasilwp (achievement orientation) Pagkamaayos (orderly)

Emotional stability domain Paglwmahinahon' (emotional stability)

Paglcmnaramdami'" (sensitiveness)

Pagkamasayahin (cheerfulness)

Intellect/openness domain Pagkamatalino (intelligence)

Paglcmnalildwin • (creativity)

Pagigmg~kalog (gregarious)

Lakas ng Loob (guts/daring) Pagkamahiyain (shyness/timidity) Ambisyon (ambition) Pagkasunud-sunuran

(excessive conformity)

1iwaia sa Sari Ii (self-assured)

Social potency

~(Jgki:unagtllanga lrespectfulness) Pagkamaculungin (helpfulne ss ) Pagkamapagkumbab,,' (humiLity)

Mu.lmkapwa veruS Makasarili (concerned for others vs. egotistical)

Concern. for others

Pagkamapagbigay (generosity) Pagkapalaaway (aggression) Hirap ktlwapin

(coyness/unapprcachebilrty) Pagkanulpunahin (criticalness)

Pagkaresponsable" (responsiblene ss ) Pagkanulriyag,,' (perseverance) Pagkasigurisl/1' (non-risk taking) TIgGS «e ulo' (stubbornness)

Disipunado (conscientious)

Responsibi liry

Katipiran. (thriftiness) Pagkasalawahan (flcklemindedness)

Pagkamapagtimpi: SU"'P""gi" (temperamental)

(self -control/restraint) Pagkanulrcmuiam;,,' (sensitivene ss ) Pagkapikon: (low tolerance for teasing) Sumpong (mood)

Emotional control

Affective well-being

MataUn" (intellect)

Pagkamausisa (inquisitiveru:$$) Pagknmaa/alaJranin/Pag/wpalaisip (ret1ecti ve, thoughtful) Pagkanullik.hainb (creativity)


NOTE: Indigenous scales have been organized under the Big Five domains based on conceptual and empirical considerations (see text).

a. Matched pairs of scales that have been found to be significantly correlated.

b. Matched pairs of scales that have failed to be significantly correlated,

Adapted in pages 252-253 from Guanzon- Lapena, Church, Carlota, & Katigbak (1998).

Guanzon-Laperia and her colleagues (1998) have showed that the indigenous models presented by the PPP, PUP, and PKP have strong convergences from another. Moreover, the three indigenous models of personality can capture the FFM (Guanzon- Laperia, 2008). The PKP pagiging kalog and tiwala sa sarili consists the FFM surgency / extraversion domain. Agreeableness is described by the PKP makakapwa vs. makasarili domain while conscientiousness is described by the PKP disiplinado scale. The emotional stability/neuroticism domain is explained by the PKP sumpungin. Meanwhile, the fifth domain-intellect or openness to experience-is described by the PKP matalino trait. To empirically test these hypothetical structures, Katigbak and her colleagues (2002) conducted a multi-trait multifactor analysis using the PPP, NEO-PI-R, and the PKP. Based on their analysis, the PKP disiplinado scale loaded with FFM conscientiousness. The PKP makakapwa vs. makasarili and relihiyoeo scales loaded with the FFM agreeableness factor while PKP pagiging kalog loaded with FFM extraversion. The remaining PKP scales loaded with FFM neuroticism namely sumpungin, tiwala sa sarili( -), pagiging


matalino( -), mga katangiang kanais-nais( -), and mga katangiang 'di kanais-nais( -). Although the pagiging matalino did not correlate with openness to experience, an earlier study conducted by Church et aL (1998) shows that this PKP subscale is correlated with Big Five adjective scales and NEO-FFI scale of openness to experience. Katigbak et al. (2002) explains that the absence of relationship between pagiging matalino and openness to experience is accounted by the shared relationship of the PKP subscale with another PKP scale-mga katangiang kanais-nais.

The Present Study

In this study, the factor structure and psychometric properties of the DTP is explored using a new measure developed by Jonason and Webster (201O)-the Dirty Dozen. A particular problem of the DTP is that it is usually assessed by three separate measures and the proponents of the Dirty Dozen (D 12) scale proposes to assess the three interrelated-but-independent constructs thru brevity of the factors and treat it as a composite. The D 12 scale has a unique advantage in terms of assessing the three traits for time efficiency, financial economy, and measurement burdensome, particularly when other instruments are given as welL Unlike in previous researches of the DTP, only Jonason and Webster have approached the model as a possible single composite reasoning that it can be "thought of as a short-term, agentic, exploitative social strategy that may have evolved to enable exploitation when conspecifics are likely to avoid or punish defectors" (p. 420) on the premise that there is a latent variable formed by the three dark traits. Empirical studies conducted by Jonason and his colleagues (as cited in Jonason & Webster, 2010) validates their three-factor and single, composite structure of the D 12 as an assessment oftheDTP.

Further, this study explores the nomological structure of the DTP D 12 using a Filipino indigenous model of personality as assessed by the PKP. Considering that the PKP has been researched as well with the FFM, it can be safe to subsume that the PKP not only captures the "indigenous" but also represents a universal dimension of traits within the FFM. In particular, the interest of this study is to inspect specific traits and factor composite relationships with the DTP. For example, in order to identify basic, elemental structures of the DTP with PKP, all of the 253 lexical terms will be subjected to regression analysis, according to their factors, in order to identify which particular trait can determine a unique or similar structure of the DTP. The relationship and prediction of the nine PKP factors is also explored with the DTP. The goodness of the PKP is that it is both represented by adaptive/positive and maladaptive/negative lexical terms that are considered as trait descriptions by Filipinos. It is expected that negative evaluative terms and extreme positive evaluative terms will serve as fine-grained descriptors of the DTP. The flexibility of the PKP provides a good avenue of explaining the DTP within the gradient and factor order of indigenous traits which can fill the missing gap in the DTP literature.



Three-hundred-and-sixty-eight college students from three universities (two from the Metro Manila namely, the Colegio de Sanjuan de Letran and De La Salle Araneta University: and one from a province


north of Manila, the Angeles University Foundation of Pam pang a) participated in this study. Fifteen of the participants did not have a complete response of the measures and four protocols were deemed inappropriate missing more than ten items hence were removed leaving 349 protocols for further analysis. Age ranges from 16 to 27 years old with a mean age of 18.45 (SD=1.52) with seven failing to report their age. Seventy-four per cent (n=258) were females while 26% (n=91) were males. All students represent the four various levels of college education and were majoring different courses in social and liberal arts (psychology, and communication arts and broadcasting) and medical-allied sciences (nursing and pharmacy). Majority of the participants were Filipino-Tagalog speakers and fluent while the remaining were Kapampangan, Ilokano, Tsabakano, and Hiligaynon speakers.


Dirty Dozen (D12) Scale. Developed by Jonason and Webster (2010), the Dirty Dozen scale consists of 12 items measuring the three dark traits separately and as a single composite index of the dark triad. Each scale consists of four items and is answerable in a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Preliminary report on the coefficient alpha of the D12 composite is .83 while indices of the three dark traits are from .72 to .77 for Machiavellianism, from .85 to .78 for narcissism, and from .66 to .69 for psychopathy. The scale is written in the English language.

Panukat ng mga Katangian ng Personalidad (PKP). Derived from the lexical analysis of Filipino trait adjectives (Church, Katigbak, & Reyes, 1996j 1998), the PKP is a measure of nine aggregate traits deemed relevant to the Filipinos. It is consisted of253 Filipino trait terms and is answerable in an eightpoint Likert scale ranging from 1 (talagang-talagang hindi sang-ayon) to 8 (talagang-talagang sang-ayon). In a study reported by Katigbak and her colleagues (2002), the coefficient alpha of the PKP ranges from .81 (Mga Katangiang Kana is-Na is ) to .92 (Disiplinado) with a mean a of .88.


Participation of the students was collected as part of course requirement and all were given a waiver/ consent form regarding the study's goal. Convenient sampling procedure was used in this study to collect the participants. Reliability analysis was computed using the Cronbach's alpha (a). Descriptive statistics (mean and standard deviation) was utilized to describe the scores of the respondents. Inferential analysis was tested using repeated measures of analysis of variance (ANOVA), Pearson product moment correlation (r), and simultaneous regression analysis (SMR). These statistical analyses were conducted using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 17.

Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted in order to test the item-factor structure of the D12 scale using the EQS software (Bentler, 2004). An evaluation of the assumptions about multivariate normality and linearity were first observed. Using the Mardia-based kappa (k), an acceptable k should be less than 0.5 in order to utilize the maximum likelihood (ML) analysis. If the k is higher than the value, the robust method should be used and the Satorra-Bentler and Bentler-Bonett indices should be reported. Eleven fit indices were used in this study and several rules were used in order to conclude that the model is of acceptable or good fit (Weston & Gore, 2006). The chi-square C() model should not be significant. In some cases, the chi-square model is highly sensitive and is dependent on the sample size (Byrne,2001). The ratio of chi-square values to the degrees of freedom (t / df) should be less than 2.0


to be of good fit or at values of 2.0 to 3.0 for it to be an acceptable fit. The root mean square error approximation (RMSEA) should be .06 or less to be of an acceptable fit or .00 to be of good fit. The standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) should be .08 or less to be an acceptable fit or .00 to be of good fit. The comparative fit index (CFI) and non-normed fit index (NNFI) should have a value of .95 to be of an acceptable fit or .97 and above to be of good fit. For the adjusted goodness of fit (AGFI») an acceptable fit value is .85 and a good fit value is .90. For the normed fit index (NFl») goodness of fit index (GFI») and incremental fit index (IFI») an acceptable fit value is .90 and a good fit value is .95 and above.


Descriptive Statistics and Correlation Analysis of the Dark Triad. Reliability analysis suggests that the overall index of the D12 is satisfactory with a Cronbach's alpha of .81. For the three dark traits) the coefficient alpha is .56) .70) and .71 for Machiavellianism (MAC») narcissism (NAR») and psychopathy (PSY) respectively. Using a repeated measures ANOVA) there is a significant difference on the responses of the participants on the three dark traits) F(l) 348)=7521.70) 112=.96) p<.OO1. There was a high endorsement of narcissism trait and a least endorsement of psychopathy. In between is the endorsement of the Machiavellianism trait.

Table 1

Internal consistencies) descriptive statistics (mean and standard deviation), and inter-scale correlation of the Dirty Dozen Scale

Subscale/Index a M SD 1 2 3 4
1. Machiavellianism .56 2.54 0.66
2. Narcissism .70 3.02 0.74 .36
3. Psychopathy .71 2.53 0.76 .49 .56
4. Dirty Dozen Index .81 2.70 0.58 .75 .80 .86
Note: n=349. All is significant at .01 level (two-tailed). a = Cronbach's alpha. Considering the unequal distribution of gender participants) a nonparametric test using the MannWhitney U Test was conducted in order to analyze the differences of males and females within the D 12 Scale. Based on the analysis) only the D12 MAC scale achieved statistical significance) U=9370.50) p<.01. Male college students (M=2.70) SD=O.64) endorsed higher manipulative characteristics than females (M=2.49) SD=0.66) supporting previous studies of DTP. Subjecting thru Pearson correlation analysis) significant correlations were found among the three dark traits ranging from .36 (MAC*NAR) to .56 (NAR*PSY) with a mean r of .47. These significant but low correlations suggest that the three dark traits are related yet distinct from one another supporting literature from the West and the Filipinos (see Untalan et al., 2008).


Table 2

Goodness-of-fit indices for the one-factor versus three-factor structure of the Dirty Dozen Scale

One-factor 209.73 54 4.11 .091 .788 .794 .831 .903 .861 .833 .067
Three-factor 150.81 51 2.96 .075 .847 .860 .900 .933 .898 .902 .057
Note: one-factor = D12 Composite, three-factor = Machiavellianism, narcissism, and psychopathy. Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the Dirty Dozen. Two CFA was conducted inspecting the one-factor and three-factor structure of the D 12 Scale. The multivariate normality and linearity of the two CF A was satisfactory, k=0.177. Hence, analysis of the ML is used as shown in Table 2. For the one-factor model of the D 12 Scale as a composite scale was not at an acceptable or good fit using the indices. Only the GFl index was at an acceptable fit indicating that the one-factor structure of the dark triad is not of good fit among the Filipino data. For the three-factor model, the chi-square model of the item-factor structure of the D12 is significant, t(51)=150.81, p<.OOI, and the tldf ratio is 2.96. Despite the significant chi-square model, the other goodness-of-fit indices were used. All indices were at an acceptable fit except for the NFl and NNFl indices which is marginally lower to the acceptable fit value. This suggests that the three-factor structure of the D 12 scale is of acceptable fit in the Filipino data. The D12 Scale assesses three independent-yet-related constructs and a composite of the DTP. The Filipino data supports the three dark traits proposed by Paulhus and Williams (2002) instead of the composite structure proposed by J onason and Webster (2010). The analysis suggests that the D 12 Scale should be used as assessing three different factors-Machiavellianism, narcissism, and psychopathy-instead of looking at it as a whole composite among Filipinos.

Table 3

Internal consistencies and descriptive statistics (mean and standard deviation) of the PKP and their correlations with the Dirty Dozen Scale

PKP Factors a M SD MAC NAR PSY D12
Makakapwa vs. Makasarili .84 2.24 0.66 -AI" -.35" -.53" -.54"
Disiplinado .79 0.23 0.82 -.36" -.27" -047" -046"
Relihiyoso .92 6.24 1.30 -.22" .01 -.20" -.17"
Pagiging Kalog .86 2.98 0.75 .15" .21" .24" .25"
Tiwala sa Sarili .81 2.97 0.64 -.12" -.04 -.12 , -.11 ,
Sumpungin .89 3.07 1.01 .30" .33" 040" 043"
Matalino .82 6.13 0.75 -.08 .10 .01 .02
Mga Katangiang 'Di Kanais- N ais .84 2.00 0.83 042" .17" .34" .38"
Mga Katangiang Kanais- N ais .83 6.17 0.95 -.08 .14" .07 .07
Note: n=349. *=p<.05 (two-tailed). **=p<.OI (two-tailed). PKP = Panukat ng mga Katangian ng Personalidad,

The Dark Triad of Personality and the Philippine Indigenous Model of Personality. A multi-correlation analysis was conducted in order to identify which factors of the PKP can predict the D 12 subscales and composite as shown in Table 3. For the D12 composite, all PKP factors correlated significantly except for PKP Matalino and Mga Kataningang Kanais-Nais. Correlations ranged from -.11 (PKP Tiwala sa Sarili) to -.54 (PKP Makakapwa vs. Makasarili}. For the three dark traits, rs ranged from -.12 (D12 MAC*PKP Tiwala sa Sarili) to -.53 (D12 PSY*PKP Makakapwa vs. Makasarili). The D12 index, MAC, and PSY subscales have similar correlations with the nine factors of the PKP.

The Dark Triad of Personality and PKP Makakapwa vs. Makasarili Traits. Forty-nine traits of the PKP Makakapwa vs. Makasarili scale were entered as significant predictors of the D12 subs cales and index. The internally consistency of the scale is acceptable with a coefficient alpha of .S4. At the D 12 composite level, the R model was significant, R=.6S, Adj R2=.3S, F( 4S,300 )=5,45, p<.OOl. Four traits were found significant predictors of the D12 index namely magalang (~=-.12, t=-2.09, p<.05), mapagmarunong (~=-.15, t=2.12, p<.05), madaya (~=.14, t=-2.33, p<.05), and mapagpanggap (~=.13, t=- 2.04, p<.05). The R model for the prediction of Machiavellianism was significant, R=.59, Adj R2=.20, F( 4S,300 )=2.S6, p<.OOl. Three traits significantly predicted Machiavellianism namely mapagmagaling (~=-.14, t=-1.99, p<.05), mapagmarunong (~=.IS, t=2,43, p<.05), and mapagpanggap (~=.IS, t=2,4S, p<.05). Despite the R model for the prediction of narcissism was significant, R=.59, Adj R2=.24, F( 4S,300 )=3.33, p<.OO I, no specific traits were found as significant predictors. For psychopathy, the R model was significant as well, R=.67, Adj R2=.37, F(4S,300)=5.22, p<.OOI. Out of the 49 traits, only four traits were found as significant predictors namely magalang (~=-.12, t=-2.01, p<.05), mapagmarunong (~=.14, t=2.05, p<.05), mapagmataas (~=.16, t=2.3S, p<.05), and madaya (~=.14, t=2.21, p<.05).

The Dark Triad of Personality and the PKP Disiplinado Traits. Composed of 42 items, the coefficient alpha of the PKP Disiplinado scale is .79. The R model of the D 12 composite prediction was significant, R=.60, Adj R2=.27, F( 42,306)=4.0S, p<.OOl. Two conscientious traits were found significant namely malisyoso (~=.16, t=2.64, p<.OI) and mapaghanap (~=.11, t=2.15, p<.05). For Machiavellianism, the R model was significant, R=.51, Adj R2=.16, F( 42,306)=2.55, p<.OOl. There were also two traits found as significant predictors namely masigasig (~=-.16, t=-2.61, p<.oI) and batugan (~=-.15, t=-2.17, p<.05). For narcissism, the R model was significant, R=.51, Adj R2=.16, F( 42,306)=2.62, p<.OOl. Out of 42 items, three traits were significant predictors namely mapaghanda (~=.14, t=2.07, p<.05), masistema (~=.14, t=2.07, p<.05), and malisyoso (~=.20, t=3.23, p<.ooI). Lastly, the R model for predicting psychopathy was significant, R=.60, Adj R2=.2S, F( 42,306)=4.1S, p<.OOl. Three trait predictors were found significant as well namely masigasig (~=.11, t=2.04, p<.05), bulakbol (~=.14, t=2.09, p<.05), and malisyoso (~=.14, t=2,49, p<.05).

The Dark Triad of Personality and the PKP Relihiyoso Traits. Consisted of seven items, the PKP Relihiyoso scale obtained a coefficient alpha of .92. For the D 12 composite, the R model was significant, R=.21, Adj R2=.03, F(7,341)=2.32, p<.05, however no specific religious traits were found. Such trend is also found with Machiavellianism, R=.24, Adj R2=.04, F(7,34I)=3.02, p<.OI, and psychopathy, R=.25, Adj R2=.04, F(7,34I)=3.13, p<.Ol. Meanwhile, the R model for predicting narcissism was not significant, R=.17, Adj R2=.0I, F(7,341)=1.3S.


The Dark Triad of Personality and the PKP Pagiging Kalog Traits. The PKP Pagiging Kalog scale is consisted of 39 traits and the coefficient alpha obtained for this scale is .S6. The R model of predicting the D12 index was significant, R=.S9, Adj R2=.27, F(39,309)=4.29, p<.OO1. Six traits were found as significant predictors namely palatawa (~=-.20, t=-2.S6, p<.OS), palabati (~=-.20, t=-3.2l, p<.OOl), mapanukso (~=.17, t=2.92, p<.Ol), maingay (~=-.17, t=-2.3S, p<.OS), malungkutin (~=.17, t=2.Sl, p<.Ol), and palausap (~=.13, t=2.0S, p<.OS). For Machiavellianism, the R model was significant, R=.S3, Adj R2=.19, F(39,309)=3.13, p<.OO1. Eight traits were found as significant predictors namely palabati (~=-.19, t=-3.04, p<.Ol), daldalero (~=.17, t=2.l9, p<.OS), ngisi (~=.lS, t=2.63, p<.Ol), malungkutin (~=.lS, t=2.24, p<.OS), magalaw (~=.14, t=2.3S, p<.OS), mapanukso (~=.14, t=2.3S, p<.OS), tahimik (~=.13, t=-2.0l, p<.OS), and tamlayin (~=.13, t=2.07, p<.OS). For narcissism, the R model was significant, R=,49, Adj R2=.lS, F(39,309)=2.S3, p<.OO1. Three traits significantly predicted narcissism namely palatawa (~=-.2S, t=-2.94, p<.o1), malungkutin (~=.19, t=2.9l, p<.Ol), and palabati (~=-.16, t=-2.S6, p<.OS). For psychopathy, the R model was also significant, R=.S6, Adj R2=.23, F(39,309)=3.70, p<.OO1. The gregarious traits of mapanukso (~=.19, t=3.24, p<.OOl), daldalero (~=.17, t=2.l7, p<.OS), and maingay (~=-.17, t=-2.27, p<.OS) significantly predicted psychopathy.

The Dark Triad of Personality and the PKP Tiwala sa Sarili Traits. There are 47 items that consists the PKP Tiwala sa Sarili scale. The coefficient alpha for this scale is .Sl. The R model for the prediction of the D12 composite was significant, R=.SS, Adj R2=.23, F( 47,301)=3.26, p<.OO1. Seven self-assurance traits were found significant namely walang kusa (~=.19, t=3.2S, p<.OOl), agresibo (~=.17, t=3.06, p<.Ol), may katwiran (~=.lS, t=2,4S, p<.OS), pabagu-bago (~=.lS, t=2.67, p<.Ol), matapang (~=.14, t=1.99, p<.OS), maagap (~=-.12, t=-2.04, p<.OS), and prangko (~=.12, t=2.02, p<.OS). For Machiavellianism, the R model was significant, R=.Sl, Adj R2=.14, F( 47, 301)=2.2S, p<.OO1. There were seven significant trait predictors namely pabagu-bago (~=.17, t=2.79, p<.Ol), matapang (~=.lS, t=2.00, p<.OS), alerto (~=-.lS, t=-2.03, p<.OS), may isang desisyon (~=.14, t=2.00, p<.OS), may sa riling pag-iisip (~=-.13, t=-2.l7, p<.OS), prangko (~=.12, t=2.0l, p<.OS), and walang kusa (~=.12, t=2.00, p<.OS). For narcissism, the R model was significant, R=,47, Adj R2=.1O, F(47, 301)=1.7S, p<.01. Three selfassurance traits were found significant namely agresibo (~=.17, t=2.7S, p<.Ol), may katwiran (~=.14, t=2.1O, p<.OS), and walang kusa (~=.13, t=1.99, p<.OS). Lastly, the R model for predicting psychopathy was significant as well, R=.S9, Adj R2=.24, F( 4 7, 301)=3.39, p<.OO 1. Seven significant traits predicted psychopathy namely may katwiran (~=.20, t=3.29, p<.OOl), walang kusa (~=.20, t=3.SS, p<.OOl), agresibo (~=.14, t=2.S9, p<.Ol), prangko (~=.13, t=2.3l, p<.OS), walang atras (~=.13, t=2.lS, p<.OS), maagap (~=-.13, t=-2.3S, p<.OS), and pabagu-bago (~=.11, t=2.0l, p<.OS).

The Dark Triad of Personality and the PKP Sumpungin Traits. Consisted of 2S items, the coefficient alpha for the PKP Sumpungin scale is .S9. The R model for predicting the D12 composite was significant, R=.SS, Adj R2=.2S, F(2S,320)=S.SS, p<.OO1. Six traits of the temperamental scale were found significant namely manisin (~=.22, t=2.Sl, p<.Ol), iritable (~=.19, t=2.6S, p<.Ol), mainiiin ang ulo (~=-.17, t=-2.S4, p<.OS), suplado (~=.13, t=2.0S, p<.OS), maproblema (~=.12, t=2.11, p<.OS), and palasigaw (~=.11, t= 1.9S, p<.OS). For Machiavellianism, the R model was significant, R=,4 7, Adj R2=.16, F(2S,320)=3.3l, p<.OO1. Two significant trait predictors were found namely mainipin (~=.13, t=2.l6, p<.OS) and maproblema (~=.13, t=2.20, p<.OS). For narcissism, the R model was significant, R=.49, Adj


R2=.17, F(28,320 )=3.5 I, p<.OO 1. There were four significant trait predictors for narcissism: mainisin (~=.24, t=2.92, p<.01), mainitin ang ulo (~=-.22, t=-3.00, p<.ol), bugnutin (~=-.16, t=-2.21, p<.OS), and mareklamo (~=.16, t=2.24, p<.OS). For psychopathy, the R model was significant as well, R=.SS, Adj R2=.24, F(28,320)=4.91, p<.OO1. Three significant temperamental traits predicted psychopathy namely iritable (~=.20, t=2.7S, p<.Ol), suplado (~=.13, t=2.03, p<.OS), and mahinahon (~=-.12, t=-2.03, p<.OS).

The Dark Triad of Personality and the PKP Matalino Traits. Sixteen trait items composes the PKP Matalino scale and the coefficient alpha is .82. The R model for predicting the D 12 composite, R=.2S, Adj R2=.02, F(16,332)=1.42, Machiavellianism, R=.2S, Adj R2=.02, F(16,332)=1.3S, and psychopathy, R=.21, Adj R2=-.01, F(16,332)=0.94, was not significant. Only the R model of predicting narcissism was significant, R=.30, Adj R2=.OS, F(16,332)=2.11, p<.01. Three intelligent traits were found significant namely magaling (~=-.22, t=-2.97, p<.ol), matalino (~=.22, t=2.78, p<.ol), and magaling magsalita (~=.18, t=2.90, p<.ol).

The Dark Triad of Personality and the PKP Mga Katangiang 'Di Kanais-Nais Traits. The PKP Mga Katangiang 'Di Kanais-Nais is consisted of 15 items and the coefficient alpha of the scale is .84. The overall D 12 composite R model was significant, R=.44, Adj R2=.16, F(1S,333 )=5.33, p<.OO 1. Out of the 15 negative valence traits, two were found as significant predictors namely basag-ulero (~=.17, t=2.43, p<.OS) and buwaya (~=.16, t=2.9S, p<.Ol). For the Machiavellianism sub scale, the R model was significant, R=.47, Adj R2=.19, F(1S,333)=6.30, p<.OO1. The basag-ulero (~=.20, t=2.90, p<.01) and lasenggo (~=.lS, t=2.48, p<.OS) were found as significant predictors. In terms of narcissism, the R model was not significant, R=.26, Adj R2=.03, F(1S,333 )=1.59, ns. Lastly, the R model for the prediction of psychopathy was significant, R=.42, Adj R2=.14, F(1S,333 )=4.87, p<.OO1. Three traits were found significant namely lapastangan (~=.19, t=3.06, p<.Ol), buwaya (~=.14, t=2.S3, p<.OS), and tanga (~=.12, t=1.99, p<.OS).

The Dark Triad of Personality and PKP Mga Katangiang Kanais-Nais. There are 10 items that consists the PKP Mga Katangiang Kanais-Nais scale and the coefficient alpha is .83. The R model for the prediction of the D 12 composite, R=.23, Adj R2=.02, F( 10,338)= 1.84, and Machiavellianism, R=.20, Adj R2=.0 I, F( 39,309)= 1.40, was not significant. Meanwhile, the R model for narcissism, R=.24, Adj R2=.03, F(39,309)=2.11, p<.OS, and psychopathy, R=.24, Adj R2=.03, F(39,309)=2.04, p<.OS, was significant. However, no specific trait indicators were statistically significant.


This study investigated the structure of the dark triad of personality using a new measure, the Dirty Dozen scale, and its nomological structure within a Filipino indigenous trait model of personality. Based on our findings, the three dark traits are modestly correlated with one another suggesting that they are distinctive-yet-related constructs supporting Paulhus and Williams' (2002) hypothesis. It's replicability in normal populations suggest the generalizability of the model and university across various populations. The latent trait-the Dark Triad-as proposed by the single, composite measure of the


Dirty Dozen scale is highly correlated with the three dark traits supporting Jonason and Webster's (2010) proposal. Internal consistencies of the scale were at an acceptable level except for the Machiavellianism subscale which achieved a low level of alpha. However, considering the brevity of this sub scale, it can be considered that the measure is acceptable considering that the item-total correlation values of the four-items of the Machiavellian subscale were above the acceptable limit. Further, the factor structure of the Dirty Dozen was investigated as well. To our knowledge, this is the first time that the scale is applied in a non-Western culture hence we conducted a CFA in order to explore the goodness-of-fit of the one-factor and three-factor structure proposed in the Dirty Dozen. Based on our analysis, the three-factor model of the scale is of an acceptable fit than the one-factor model. This suggests that the Dirty Dozen is best viewed as a measure of the three interrelated-yet-distinctive dark traits than a single composite measure.

Correlation analysis reveals that within the framework of indigenous personality, Machiavellianism, psychopathy, and the dark triad composite share common features of traits. First, they were all correlated negatively with PKP Makakapwa vs. Makasarili, Disiplinado, Relihiyoso, and Tiwala sa Sarili. Further, the dark triad and its composite were positively related with Pagiging Kalog and Mga Katangiang 'Di Kanais-Nais. The PKP Matalino and Mga Katangiang Kanais-Nais were not significantly related to the dimensions of the dark triad and it's composite. Meanwhile, the narcissism trait correlated has no association with PKP Relihiyoso and Tiwala sa Sarili, but has a positive relationship with PKP Mga Katangiang Kanais-Nais. The analysis suggest that the indigenous traits of concern for others vs. egocentrism and conscientiousness replicates Paulhus and Williams' (2002) proposal that the three dark traits are negatively related with agreeableness and conscientiousness trait. In addition, the negative valence of the PKP provides an additional analysis of negative evaluative traits in identifying the DTP traits and composite. The indigenous model of personality provided by the PKP captures as well the dark triad-personality structure appropriately. The addition of the two valence traits and religiosity trait adds further in the prediction. In a culture where positive traits are valued such as religiosity and positive valence, this adds in the understanding of the DTP in a non-Western culture.

However, despite the utility of these positive valued traits, they do not provide specific, fine-grained lexical trait descriptions unlike the other seven PKP traits as summarized in Table 4. Traits from the PKP Tiwala sa Sarili, Sumpungin, Pagiging Kalog, and Makakapwa vs. Makasarili provides a rich interpretation of the specific trait descriptions of the DTP at the specific trait level. Despite the PKP Matalino factor failed to correlate significantly with the DTP, several traits were found as specific trait descriptors of narcissism suggesting that the utility of the openness/intellect factor is valuable in understanding the DTP. A careful scrutiny of the specific traits would reveal that majority are negative evaluative trait terms. Examples are agresibo (aggressive), lapastangan (treacherous), buwaya (greedy), madaya (cheater), malisyoso (malicious), pabagu-bago (ficklemindedness}. This suggests that abnormal trait terms have more value in describing the nomological structure of the DTP. It supports the view and call of several researchers to look at clinical constructs from the maladaptive or abnormal view of personality (Clark, 1993j Livesley & Jackson, 2010j Lynam et al., 2010). Further, several positive evaluative terms were also found as significant descriptors. This suggests as well that excessive and extreme valuing of positive terms can also lead to a chronic behavior. For example, may katwiran (being righteous), prangko (straightforward) and magaling magsalita (good speaker) can also be used as a deceptive strategy to lure and inflict harm towards others. Surprisingly, despite the negative relationship between narcissism and disiplinado which shows strong support to the narcissism-lack of


conscientiousness relationship by Paulhus and Williams (2002), specific traits show positive trait term associations (e.g., mapaghanda (being prepared) and masistema (systematic)). The latter finding still supports Vazire & Funder's (2006) position that there might be cultural variation on the existing relationship between narcissism and impulsivity.

Table 4

Summary Table of Significant Trait Predictors of the Dark Triad of Personality

Makakapwa vs. mapagmagaling( - ) magalang( - ) magalang( - )
Makasarili mapagmarunong mapagmarunong mapagmarunong( - )
( Concern for Others mapagpanggap mapagmataas madaya
vs. Egocentrism) madaya mapagpanggap
Disiplinado masigasig( -) mapaghanda masigasig malisyoso
( Conscientious) batugan(- ) masistema bulakbol mapaghanap
malisyoso malisyoso
Pagiging Kalog palabati( -) palatawa( - ) mapanukso palatawa( - )
( Gregarious) daldalero malungkutin daldalero palabati (- )
ngisi palabati( -) maingay(-) mapanukso
malungkutin maingayt-)
magalaw malungkutin
mapanukso palausap
Tiwala sa Sarili pabagu-bago agresibo walangkusa walangkusa
(Self-Assurance) matapang may katwiran may katwiran agresibo
alerto( -) walangkusa agresibo may katwiran
may sariling desisyon prangko pabagu-bago
may sariling pag-iisip( -) walang atras matapang
prangko maagap(-) maagap(-)
walangkusa pabagu-bago prangko
Sumpungin mainitin mainisin iritable mainisin
(Temperamental) map rob lema mainitin ang ulo( -) suplado iritable
bugnutin( -) mahinahon( -) mainitin ang ulo( -)
mareklamo map rob lema
Matalino magaling( -)
(Intelligent) matalino
magaling magsalita
Mga Katangiang basag-ulero lapastangan basag-ulero
'Di Kanais-Nais lasenggo buwaya buwaya
(Negative Valence) tanga
Mga Katangiang
(Positive Valence) CHING, DELA CRUZ, HERNANDEZ, SIERRA & UNTALAN (2011)/16

The present study has several limitations as well. First and foremost) because the study only utilized the PKP as a sole description of basic traits of the DTP) it still cannot be said that the indigenous trait model is superior to Western trait models. In a study made by Katigbak et al. (2002)) they have found out that there is little incremental validity added by indigenous trait models in the prediction of human behaviors before or after the inclusion of a Western trait model of personality. Despite such small incremental validity and the empirically supported relationship with the FFM) identifying specific trait descriptions using the cultural lexical jargon helps in expounding the nomological structure of the DTP in cultures where such characteristics are non-valued. This study supports alternatives being advanced by several researchers to link culture) personality) and psychopathology altogether (Church) 2000; Krueger & Tackett) 2006; Markus & Kitayama, 1998). Future researches may want to investigate the superiority of these local indigenous measures (such as the PUP and ppp) in predicting the DTP and compare these models with Western measures (e.g., FFM NEO- PI and the HEXACO- PI).

Second) it would be of best interest to establish the existing relationship of the D 12 scale with other measures of the dark triad such as the NPI) MACH) and SRP-III. Although Jonason and Webster (2010) were able to demonstrate the convergent validity of the D 12 with these three separate measures of the dark triad) it is also of best interest to explore their convergences using the Filipino samples. More so) there are other indices of the dark traits that can also be investigated depending on the need of a unidimensionality or multidimensionality of these dark traits. For example) several researchers are being observant that the NPI measures the overt form of narcissism and the pathological form is less explored (Clark) 1993; Livesley & Jackson) 2010; Pincus) Ansell) Pimentel) Cain) Wright) & Levy) 2009). Recent developments on the MAC suggest the psychometric flaw of Christie and Geis' scale and a recent group of researchers developed a new scale that would tap several domains of a manipulative personality (Dahling, Whitaker) & Levy) 2009).

Lastly) considering that the data is taken from a cross-sectional and convenient sampling procedure from three particular areas in the Philippines and with preponderance of using the emerging adult population) it cannot be said that the population represents heterogeneity of Filipinos. Ultimately) a geographical representation of Filipinos would provide a culturally-representative conclusion than our findings. In addition) our findings can be strengthened by extending our findings in criminal and clinical populations. Moreover) with the almost 75% of the participants were female) it would be best to have equal distribution of gender in order to examine gender differences.

Despite these limitations) our findings provide preliminary analysis of utilizing an indigenous model of personality in understanding the DTP. Broadening the search of the nomological net within the personality framework thru indigenous models helps in deconstructing these dark side of human behavior into a more culturally-appropriate and culturally-sensitive application. It also provides future researchers whose interest is to integrate a cultural trait psychology perspective (Church) 2000) in their analysis of a clinically- and social-personality oriented constructs such as the dark triad of personality.


American Psychiatric Association (2004). Diagnostic and statistical manual for mental disorders) fourth edition-text revised (DSM-IV-TR). Washington) DC: Author.


Ashton, M. C. (2007). Individual differences and personality. Amsterdam: Elsevier-Academic.

Ashton, M. c., & Lee, K. (2005). Honesty-humility, the Big Five, and the five-factor model. Journal of Personality, 73, 1321-1353.

Ashton, L., & Lee, K. (2007). Empirical, theoretical, and practical advantages of the HEXACO model of personality structure. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 11 (2), 150-166.

Ashton, M. c., Lee, K., & Son, C. (2000). Honesty as the sixth factor of personality: Correlations with Machiavellianism, primary psychopathy, and social adroitness. European Journal of Personality, 14, 359-368.

Bentler, P. M. (2004). EQS structural equations modeling manual. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software. Byrne, B. M. (2001). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Carlota, A. ]. (1995). Panukat ng Pagkataong Pilipino (ppp). Philippine Journal of Educational Measurement, 6(1), 82-90.

Christie, R., & Geis, F. L. (1970). Studies in Machiavellianism. New York: Academic.

Church, A. T. (1987). Personality research in a non-Western culture: The Philippines. Psychological Bulletin, 102,272-292.

Church, A. T. (2000). Culture and personality: Towards an integrated cultural trait psychology. Journal of Personality, 68(6),651-703.

Church, A. T., & Katigbak, M. S. (2002). Indigenization of psychology in the Philippines. International Journal of Psych 0 logy, 37(3),129-148.

Church, A. T., Katigbak, M. S., & Reyes, ]. A. S. (1996). Toward a taxonomy of trait adjectives in Filipinos: Comparing personality lexicons across cultures. European Journal of Personality, 10,3-24.

Church, A. T., Katigbak, M. S., & Reyes,]. A. S. (1998). Further exploration of Filipino personality structure using the lexical approach: Do the big-five or big-seven dimensions emerge? European Journal of Personality, 12,249-269.

Clark, L. A. (1993). Schedule of Nonadaptive and Adaptive Personality manual. Minneapolis, MN:

University of Minnesota Press.

Costa, P. T.,Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (2010). NEO Inventories projessional manual. Lutz, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.

Dahling, ]. ]., Whitaker, B. G., & Levy, P. E. (2009). The development and validation of a new Machiavellianism scale. Journal of Management, 3S (2), 219-257.

De Raad, B., & Perugini, M. (Eds.) (2002). Bigfive assessment. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Hogrefe & Huber.

Enriquez, V. G. (1992). From colonial to liberation psychology: The Philippine experience. Quezon City:

University of the Philippines Press.

Enriquez, V. G., & Guanzon-Lapeiia, M. A. (2001). Panukat ng Ugali at Pagkatao manual. Quezon City:

Philippine Psychology Research and Training House.

Guanzon-Laperia, M. A. (2007). Personality. In L. A. Teh & M. E. ]. Macapagal (Eds.), General psychology for Filipino college students (pp. 235-257). Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila University Press.

Guanzon-Laperia, M. A., Church, A. T., Carlota, A.]., & Katigbak, M. S. (1998). Indigenous personality measures: Philippine example. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 29( 1),249-270.


Hare, R. D. (2003). Hare Psychopathy Checklist-Revised, second edition (PCL-R 2nd ed.), user's manual.

Toronto, Canada: Multi-Health Systems.

Harkness, A R. (2007). Personality traits are essential for a complete clinical science. In S. O. Lilienfeld & W. T. O'Donohue (Eds.), The great ideas of clinical science: 17 principles that every mental health professional should understand (pp. 263-290). NY: Routledge.

Harkness, A R., & Lilienfeld, S. O. (1997). Individual differences science for treatment planning:

Personality traits. Psychological Assessment, 9, 349-360.

J acobwitz, S., & Egan, V. (2006). The dark triad and normal personality traits. Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 331-339.

John, O. P., Naumann, L. P., & Soto, C. ]. (2008). Paradigm shift to the integrative big five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and conceptual issues. In L. A Pervin, R. W. Robins, & O. P. John (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (3rd ed., pp. 114-158). New York: Guilford.

Jonason, P. K, & Webster, G. D. (2010). The dirty dozen: A concise measure of the dark triad.

Psychological Assessment, 22(2), 420-432.

Katigbak, M. S., Church, AT., Guanzon-Lapeiia, M. A, Carlota, A]., & del Pilar, G. H. (2002). Are indigenous personality dimensions culture specific? Philippine inventories and the five-factor model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82( 1),89-101.

Krueger, R. F., & Tackett,]. L. (Eds). (2006). Personality and psychopathology. New York: Guilford.

Lee, K, & Ashton, M. C. (2004). Psychometric properties of the HEXACO Personality Inventory.

Multivariate Behavioral Research, 39, 329-358.

Lee, K, & Ashton, M. C. (2005). Psychopathy, Machiavellianism, and narcissism in the five-factor and the HEXACO model of personality structure. Personality and Individual Differences, 38, 1571-1582.

Lee, K., & Ashton, M. C. (2006). Further assessment of the HEXACO Personality Inventory: Two new facet scales and an observer report form. Psychological Assessment, 18, 182-191.

Levenson, M. R., Kiehl, K A, & Fitzpatrick, C. M. (1995). Assessing psychopathic attributes in a noninstitutionalized population. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 151-158.

Livesley, W. ]., & Jackson, D. N. (2010). Dimensional assessment of personality pathology-basic questionnaire manual. Port Huron, MI: Sigma Assessment Systems.

Lykken, D. T. (1995). The antisocial personalities. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Lynam, D. R., Gaughan, E. T., Miller,]. D., Miller, D.]., Mullins-Sweatt, S., & Widiger, T. A (2010).

Assessing the basic traits associated with psychopathy: Development and validation of the Elemental Psychopathy Assessment. Psychological Assessment. doi:l0.l037/a0021146.

Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1998). The cultural psychology of personality. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 29(1), 63-87.

McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T., Jr. (2008). The five-factor theory of personality. In O. P. John, R. W.

Robins, & L. A Pervin (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (3rd ed., pp. 159-181). New York: Guilford.

McHosekey,]. W., Worzel, W., & Szyarto, C. (1998). Machiavellianism and psychopathy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 192-210.

Miller,]. D., & Campbell, W. K. (2008). Comparing clinical and social-personality conceptualizations of narcissism. Journal of Personality , 76(3),449-476.

Paulhus, D. L., Hemphil, ]. D., & Hare, R. D. (in press). Self-Report Psychopathy Scale (SRP-III).

Toronto/Buffalo: Multi-Health Systems.


Paulhus, D. L., & Williams, K. M. (2002). The dark triad of personality: Narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy. Journal of Research in Personality, 36, 556-563.

Pincus, A L., Ansell, E. B., Pimentel, C. A, Cain, N. M., Wright, A G. c., & Levy, K N. (2009). The initial construction and validation of the Pathological Narcissism Inventory. Psychological Assessment, 21 (3),365-379.

Raskin, R., & Terry, H. (1988). A principal-components analysis of the Narcissistic Personality Inventory and further evidence of its construct validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(5),890-902.

Seligman, M. P., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology: An introduction. American Psychologist, 55(1), 5-14.

Untalan, J. H. c., Mordeno, 1. G., & Decatoria, J. B. (2008). Exploring the dark triad of personality in Filipino culture: Preliminary findings. Philippine Journal of Psych 0 logy, 41 (2),33-54.

Vazire, S., & Funder, D. C. (2006). Impulsivity and the self-defeating behaviors of narcissists. Personality and Social Psychology Review, io; 1), 154-165.

Weston, R., & Gore, P. A, Jr. (2006). A brief guide to structural equation modeling. The Counseling Psychologist, 34(5), 719-751.

World Health Organization (2010). International classification of disorders, u: edition (ICD-l1).

Geneva, Switzerland: Author.


Victoria DM. Ching, Graduate School, University of Santo Tomas, Manila. Carifiez P. dela Cruz, College of Arts, Sciences, and Technology, De La Salle Araneta University, Malabon City. Christopher P. Hernandez, Department of Psychology, Colegio de San Juan de Letran, Intramuros, Manila. Ryan Ross C. Sierra, Department of Psychology, Angeles University Foundation, Inc. John Hermes C. Untalan, Graduate School, University of Santo Tomas, Manila.

Authors are arranged alphabetically and not on the degree of contribution. We would like to acknowledge Prof. Golda Aira Crisostomo, Research Director, Colegio de San Juan de Letran, for allowing us conduct our research at the academic institution. Gratitude to Ms. Daphne Via De Vera for the encoding of data.

Correspondence regarding this paper should be addressed to: Mr. John Hermes C. Untalan, UST Graduate School Psychotrauma Clinic, Thomas Aquinas Research Complex, University of Santo Tomas, Espana, Manila 1008 or email to:jh_untalan@yahoo.com. Mobile no.: +632-949-411-0729 or TeL No.: +632-406-1611 local 4012.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful