Upon coming in into lab, professionals accomplished created informed concur. Members had been seated within a pc and you will requested doing a questionnaire, which included a review away from personality and you may questions evaluating close mate compatibility. As with the previous training, grandiose narcissism are assessed on the Narcissistic Identification Catalog (NPI ? = .86, Yards = , SD = eight.20) and Big Five character traits into Huge Five Collection (BFI) . To own neuroticism, ? = .82; Meters = dos.77, SD = 0.80; to possess extraversion, ? = .84, Meters = 3.46, SD = 0.72; to have openness playing, ? = .75, M = step 3.55, SD = 0.58; getting conscientiousness, ? = .76; Yards = step 3.67, SD = 0.56; as well as agreeableness, ? = .73, Meters = step 3.97, SD = 0.51.
Which survey was not useful data as it are area of protection story. Members were told that the recommendations they offered could be put to fit them up with individuals to your university having equivalent appeal. In the long run, intercourse, decades, and you will matchmaking status was basically reviewed.
Pursuing the techniques detailed from the Parker and you may Burkley , professionals was in fact second found a picture of an objective personal and you can told one according to its prior responses, he’s got “comparable welfare” with this address. The ladies viewed a picture of the male target and males viewed a picture of a woman address. This type of photographs was pre-examined by a ple for their number of attractiveness playing with a beneficial 10-point size, in a way that step 1 = very ugly and you will ten = extremely attractive. The fresh imply get towards male photographs try 6.62 (SD = step 1.86) and imply get to have female images are eight.03 (SD = 1.29). Such as for example Parker and you will Burkley, we as well as asked members a number of questions regarding the fresh participant’s interest in the prospective, but all of our founded variables had been just the products which examined lover poaching particularly. Answers have been made towards 5-section bills in a manner that 1 = very unlikely and you will 5 = more than likely. What exactly was basically an excellent) “Just how probably would you end up being to pursue hi5 log in this person for good dating?” (Meters = 2.43, SD = step one.28), and b) “Just how likely would you be and work out away with this specific individual?” (Yards = dos.38, SD = step one.34). We plus examined the fresh the amount to which new fellow member found the newest target glamorous playing with a great 5-part measure in a fashion that 1 = very unattractive and you may 5 = most attractive (Yards = step three.76, SD = step 1.15).
Efficiency
We first oriented every variables before calculating analyses. We upcoming computed correlations ranging from predictor/control parameters (the big Four variables) and you may benefit variables, being showed inside the Dining table 6. Grandiose narcissism are correlated having a greater probability of making out into target, not having picking out the target glamorous or following the target to own a relationship.
Members have been randomly assigned to a description of target since “single” or “when you look at the a relationship” and you will was upcoming asked to take an initial survey to your number of appeal he has in the target
We following joined parameters to the a good regression design; number 1 variables out of participants’ relationships reputation, target relationships standing, intercourse, and you can NPI score was inserted to the Step one (handling for Huge Four parameters), all of the a couple of-method relationships among first details have been registered into 2, the about three-means interactions certainly first parameters was basically registered towards Step 3, and four-way correspondence certainly one of no. 1 parameters are entered towards Step 4. Given that none of four-method affairs reached analytical value, 3 analyses is actually said within the Table seven.
To get the mark glamorous, just fundamental outcomes getting sex and you can a good participants’ dating updates was indeed extreme. Males were more likely to find the address glamorous than just girls, and you can single people were more likely to find the address glamorous than just attached some body. Grandiose narcissism was not a good predictor of finding the mark glamorous overall (? = -.067, t = -0.913, p = .362) and you may grandiose narcissists did not select attached needs much more attractive than just unattached targets (? = -.052, t = -0.842, p = .401).
