Abstract
The aim of this study was to investigate trends in research related to the Dark Triad using a bibliometric analysis. Four main clusters were recognized on author keywords: Dark Triad traits (Machiavellianism, narcissism, and psychopathy, along with terms such are life history theory, mating, and morality), measurement (short Dark Triad measures and terms related to psychometrics), personality models (Big Five, Five Factor Model, HEXACO, and terms related to sadism and aggression), and mainly gender differences cluster. The measurement and personality models clusters gathered the latest research, but specifically studies containing terms related to short Dark Triad measures and sadism. Analysis of the indexed keywords revealed a similar organization of the clusters, but with a great prominence of clinical studies and methodological terms. The map of bibliographic coupling showed several relatively separated groups of authors with different focus in cited references, with Jonason, P.K. in the central position. However, a map of co-citation of authors revealed closeness of these separated groups, with Jonason, P.K. and Paulhus, D.L. with nearly equal number of citations.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bertl, B., Pietschnig, J., Tran, U. S., Stieger, S., & Voracek, M. (2017). More or less than the sum of its parts? Mapping the dark triad of personality onto a single dark Core. Personality and Individual Differences, 114, 140–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.04.002.
Book, A., Visser, B. A., & Volk, A. A. (2015). Unpacking “evil”: Claiming the core of the dark triad. Personality and Individual Differences, 73, 29–38.
Book, A., Visser, B. A., Blais, J., Hosker-Field, A., Methot-Jones, T., Gauthier, N. Y., et al. (2016). Unpacking more “evil”: What is at the core of the dark tetrad? Personality and Individual Differences, 90, 269–272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.11.009.
Boonroungrut, C., & Oo, T. (2017). Dark triad trends in personality studies: Systematic review with bibliometric network analysis. Journal of Humanity and Social Sciences Masharkham University, 36(6), 63–76.
Buckels, E. E., Trapnell, P. D., & Paulhus, D. L. (2014). Trolls just want to have fun. Personality and Individual Differences, 67, 97–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.01.016.
Burnham, J. F. (2006). Scopus database: A review. Biomedical digital libraries, 3(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1186/1742-5581-3-1.
Cecchino, N. J. (2010). Google scholar. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 98(4), 320–321. https://doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.98.4.016.
Chabrol, H., Van Leeuwen, N., Rodgers, R., & Séjourné, N. (2009). Contributions of psychopathic, narcissistic, Machiavellian, and sadistic personality traits to juvenile delinquency. Personality and Individual Differences, 47, 734–739. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2009.06.020.
D'Souza, M. F., & Jones, D. N. (2017). Taxonomy of the scientifc network of the dark triad: Revelations in the business and accounting context. Revista de Educação e Pesquisa em Contabilidade (REPeC) [Journal of Education and Research in Accounting], 11(3), 290–306. https://doi.org/10.17524/repec.v11i3.1588.
Furnham, A., Richards, S. C., & Paulhus, D. L. (2013). The dark triad of personality: A 10 year review. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 7(3), 199–216. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12018.
Harzing, A. W., & Alakangas, S. (2016). Google scholar, Scopus and the web of science: A longitudinal and cross-disciplinary comparison. Scientometrics, 106(2), 787–804. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1798-9.
Hodson, G., Hogg, S. M., & MacInnis, C. C. (2009). The role of “dark personalities” (narcissism, machiavellianism, psychopathy), big five personality factors, and ideology in explaining prejudice. Journal of Research in Personality, 43, 686–690. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2009.02.005.
Jevremov, T. (2013). Razlike između mapa naučnih disciplina formiranih na osnovu koincidencije deskriptora nastalih kognitivnom obradom informacija i mapa proizvedenih primenom statističkih algoritama [differences between maps of scientific disciplines based on coincidence of descriptors generated by cognitive information processing and maps produced by using statistical algorithms]. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Novi Sad, Serbia.
Jonason, P. K., & Webster, G. D. (2010). The dirty dozen: A concise measure of the dark triad. Psychological Assessment, 22(2), 420–432. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019265.
Jones, D. N., & Figueredo, A. J. (2013). The core of darkness: Uncovering the heart of the dark triad. European Journal of Personality, 27, 521–531. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.1893.
Jones, D. N., & Paulhus, D. L. (2014). Introducing the short dark triad (SD3): A brief measure of dark personality trait. Assessment, 21(1), 28–41. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191113514105.
Joshi, A. (2016). Comparison between SCOPUS & ISI web of science. Journal Global Values, 7(1), 1–11. Retrieved from http://anubooks.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/2016-7-JVG-No.-1-1.pdf. Accessed 15 Jan 2019.
Karakus, M. (2018). Psychological capital research in social sciences: A bibliometric analysis. Electronic International Journal of Education, Arts, and Science (EIJEAS), 4(8), 39–58.
Klavans, R., & Boyack, K. W. (2006). Quantitative evaluation of large maps of science. Scientometrics, 68(3), 475–499. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-006-0125-x.
Leydesdorff, L., & Zaal, R. (1988). Co-words and citations: Relations between document sets and environments. In L. Egghe & R. Rousseau (Eds.), Informetrics 87–88 (pp. 105–119). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Leydesdorff, L., & Rafols, I. (2012). Interactive overlays: A new method for generating global journal maps from web-of-science data. Journal of Informetrics, 6(2), 318–332. Retreived from https://arxiv.org/abs/1301.1013. Accessed 15 Jan 2019.
Marcus, D. K., & Zeigler-Hill, V. (2015). A big tent of dark personality traits. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 9(8), 434–446. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12185.
Miller, J. D., Gaughan, E. T., Maples, J., & Price, J. (2011). A comparison of agreeableness scores from the big five inventoryand the NEO PI-R: Consequences for the study of narcissismand psychopathy. Assessment, 18, 335–339. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191111411671.
Miller, J. D., Hyatt, C. S., Maples-Keller, J. L., Carter, N. T., & Lynam, D. R. (2016). Psychopathy and Machiavellianism: A distinction without a difference? Journal of Personality, 85(4), 439–453. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12251.
Murphy, L.S., Reinsch, S., Najm, W.I., Dickerson, V.M., Seffinger, M.A., Adams, A., & Mishra, S.I. (2003). Searching biomedical databases on complementary medicine: The use of controlled vocabulary among authors, indexers and investigators. BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine, 3(3), 1–13. Published online 2003 Jul 7. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6882-3-3.
Noack, A. (2009). Modularity clustering is force-directed layout. Physical Review. E, Statistical, Nonlinear, and Soft Matter Physics, 79(2 Pt 2), 026102. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.79.026102.
Noruzi, A. (2005). Google scholar: The new generation of citation indexes. Libri, 55(4), 170–180. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10760/7179. Accessed 15 Jan 2019.
O’Meara, A., Davies, J., & Hammond, S. (2011). The psychometric properties and utility of the short sadistic impulse scale (SSIS). Psychological Assessment, 23, 523–531. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022400.
Paulhus, D. L., & Williams, K. M. (2002). The dark triad 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.
Perianes-Rodriguez, A., Waltman, L., & Van Eck, N. J. (2016). Constructing bibliometric networks: A comparison between full and fractional counting. Journal of Informetrics, 10(4), 1178–1195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2016.10.006.
Rafferty, P., & Hidderly, R. (2007). Flickr and democratic indexing: Dialog approaches to indexing. Aslib Proceedings: New Information Perspectives, 59(4/5), 397–410.
Rafols, I., Porter, A. L., & Leydesdorff, L. (2010). Science overlay maps: A new tool for research policy and library management. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(9), 1871–1887.
Sa’ed, H. Z., Sweileh, W. M., Awang, R., & Al-Jabi, S. W. (2018). Global trends in research related to social media in psychology: Mapping and bibliometric analysis. International Journal of Mental Health Systems, 12(4), 4. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13033-018-0182-6.
Sleep, C. E., Lynam, D. R., Hyatt, C. S., & Miller, J. D. (2017). Perils of partialing redux: The case of the dark triad. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 126, 939–950. https://doi.org/10.1037/abn0000278.
Van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2009). How to normalize cooccurrence data? An analysis of some well-known similarity measures. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(8), 1635–1651 https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21075.
Van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2014). Visualizing bibliometric networks. In Y. Ding, R. Rousseau, & D. Wolfram (Eds.), Measuring scholarly impact: Methods and practice (pp. 285–320). Switzerland: Springer.
Vize, C. E., Lynam, D. R., Collison, K. L., & Miller, J. D. (2016). Differences among dark triad components: A meta–analytic investigation. Personality disorders: Theory, research, and treatment, 9(2), 101–111. https://doi.org/10.1037/per0000222.
Zhao, D., & Strotmann, A. (2014). The knowledge base and research front of information science 2006–2010: An author cocitation and bibliographic coupling analysis. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(5), 995–1006. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23027.
Acknowledgements
This study was partially supported by the Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development of the Republic of Serbia [Grant ON179006].
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.
Ethical Statement
Authors state that the research meets all ethical requirements, and is adherent to the legal requirements of the Institutional Review Board which are in agreement with the Declaration of Helsinki.
Additional information
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Electronic supplementary material
ESM 1
(DOC 5029 kb)
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Dinić, B.M., Jevremov, T. Trends in research related to the Dark Triad: A bibliometric analysis. Curr Psychol 40, 3206–3215 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-019-00250-9
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-019-00250-9