Susan C. South

Measuring daily romantic relationship quality is important for understanding conflict, support, and satisfaction processes in near real-time. Although there now exists a great deal of research on determinants and outcomes of daily relationship quality, these investigations often rely on several untested assumptions regarding sources of, and consistency in, variability. In this study, we tested the variance components for daily relationship quality, how consistent these measurements are, and whether they are impacted by individual differences in attachment security. Six daily, nonexperimental self-reports of relationship satisfaction and functioning (e.g., conflict) from 101 couples were analyzed using generalizability theory. Results demonstrate a large amount of residual in daily reports of relationship quality, yet significant portions of variance attributable to person- and day-level processes. Variance proportions also changed depending on the index of relationship functioning examined, and individual differences in attachment security moderated these results. Lastly, daily reports of relationship satisfaction are relatively stable when submitted to models using persons as the object of measurement. These findings have implications for planning and interpreting future diary and ecological momentary assessment/experience sampling method studies.

To provide partial support for the "p" factor, Caspi et al. (see record 2026-80066-001) provide meta-analytic and large sample data evidence of assortative mating for various forms of psychopathology. From this, they conclude that assortative mating leads to transdiagnostic risk for symptoms of mental illness in offspring. In this commentary, I focus on why individuals assortatively mate for psychopathology, even in the face of evidence that they do not assort for similarity of personality. Personality is firmly entrenched as a correlate of mental disorders, to the point of being included in structural models of psychopathology. Individuals with different personalities end up in relationships that become distressed and trigger psychopathology; each partner's unique personality traits shape the form of psychopathology they experience. As Caspi et al. argue, interventions for mental illness do need to move beyond the traditional therapist-patient model to incorporate spouses and other family members. There may be a segment of the population, however, because of low socioeconomic status, prone to marital distress and psychopathology and more likely to benefit from financial support than psychological interventions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).

The Five-Factor Obsessive-Compulsive Inventory (FFOCI) provides an assessment of personality traits relevant to obsessive-compulsive personality disorder. Obsessive-compulsive personality disorder is the most prevalent personality disorder within community samples, and the literature marks that some demographic groups are more at risk than others. The FFOCI, however, has never been explored to demonstrate that it assesses these traits in the same way across groups. The current study adds to the literature by evaluating its measurement invariance across gender, education, and age via the alignment method in a sample of 500 U.S. census-matched adults. A novel contribution of the study is the use of the alignment method, which suggested that the FFOCI demonstrated invariance across groups, allowing for mean-level comparison in traits related to overcontrol. Analyses demonstrated that invariance of the FFOCI held across age, gender, and educational level. Mean-level comparisons between groups showed that college-educated individuals were not significantly higher than noncollege-educated on traits relating to overcontrol. There were nuanced differences between men and women, and differences between age groups were more complicated than originally anticipated. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

The Self-Control Scale (SCS) is one of the most widely used measures in the clinical, personality, and social psychology fields. It is often treated as unidimensional, even though no research supports such a unidimensional factor structure. We tested the factor structure in an undergraduate sample as well as a community sample used for additional confirmatory analyses. Factors from the best-fitting confirmatory models were correlated with putatively related and distinct constructs to assess their (dis)similarities. Consistent with hypotheses, the best-fitting factor structure consisted of multiple, correlated factors; however, none of the factor solutions met pre-specified fit criteria. Several additional analyses were conducted beyond the preregistered analyses to find a reasonably fitting factor solution. Ultimately, study findings support a two-factor solution using the items of the Brief Self-Control Scale. Results are discussed for the full 36-item scale as well as the brief, 13-item scale. We conclude with lessons learned from a Registered Report focused on factor analysis.

Insecure attachment and personality pathology are parallel frameworks for representing interpersonal dysfunction. Although research to date has revealed strong bivariate associations between these constructs, the current state of the science is nonspecific and leaves piecemeal guidance for clinical and empirical efforts. The goal of the present study was to determine the magnitude of the associations between attachment and personality pathology across two conceptualizations of maladaptivity and across three waves of time, thereby satisfying repeated calls for empirical innovation in this area. A sample of newlywed heterosexual couples (N = 202 individuals) completed longitudinal assessments of personality pathology and romantic attachment insecurity. Results suggested that the covariation of attachment and personality pathology may be marred by measurement problems related to distress saturation in attachment and personality disorder instruments. Latent curve modeling further suggested that attachment insecurity and personality disorders fluctuate concurrently within persons. Future research should work toward validating unity models of attachment and personality pathology, correcting key measures, and documenting specific mechanisms of association between these constructs. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Objective: The aim of this work was to better understand the role of personality as it relates to psychopathology, with satisfaction as a mediating variable.Background: Personality is an important determinant of many life outcomes including relationship satisfaction and psychopathology. Previous work has demonstrated that broad domains of normal personality have low‐to‐moderate associations with various forms of psychopathology. Research has primarily focused on mechanisms that might explain how common personality traits put one at risk for common forms of psychopathology; this work builds upon existing work in examining relationship satisfaction as one possible mechanism. No study to date has examined whether relationship satisfaction mediates the connection between personality and psychopathology.Method: We utilized multilevel modeling in a longitudinal sample of 100 newlywed couples to test the hypothesis that major domains of personality (positive temperament, negative temperament, disinhibition) have a significant effect on relationship satisfaction which, in turn, is significantly associated with internalizing and externalizing forms of psychopathology.Results: We found no evidence for the mediating role of relationship satisfaction; however, in exploratory analyses, we did find evidence for both between‐person and within‐person effects of personality on psychopathology.Conclusions: This study confirms the role of personality as an important factor in consideration of dyadic processes, though not entirely deterministic for downstream functioning. Thus, separate factors in addition to personality may be worth examining in consideration of how low relationship satisfaction may be associated with psychopathology.

Critical theoretical intersections between adult insecure attachment and personality disorders (PDs) suggest that they may overlap, but a lack of empirical analysis to date has limited further interpretation. The current study used a large sample ( N = 812) of undergraduates ( N = 355) and adults receiving psychological treatment ( N = 457) to test whether a joint hierarchical factor structure of personality pathology and insecure attachment is tenable. Results suggested that attachment and PD indicators load together on latent domains of emotional lability, detachment, and vulnerability, but antagonistic, impulsigenic, and psychosis-spectrum factors do not subsume attachment indicators. This solution was relatively consistent across treatment status but varied across gender, potentially suggesting divergent socialization of interpersonal problems. Although further tests are needed, if attachment and PDs prove to be unitary, combining them has exciting potential for providing an etiologic-developmental substrate to the classification of interpersonal dysfunction.

Historically, researchers have proposed higher-order factors to explicate the structure of psychopathology, including Externalizing, Internalizing, Fear, Distress, Thought Disorder, and a general factor. Despite extensive research in this domain, the underlying structure of psychopathology remains unresolved. Here, we examine several issues in adjudicating among structural models of psychopathology. Using simulations and analyses of the extant literature, we contrast the model-based reliability of alternative structural models of psychopathology and highlight shortcomings of conventional model-fit indices for such adjudication. We propose alternative criteria for evaluating and contrasting competing structural models, including various model characteristics (e.g., the magnitude and consistency of factor loadings and their precision), the consistency and sensitivity of factors to their constituent indicators, and the variance explained in and patterns of associations with relevant variables. Using these criteria as adjuncts to conventional fit indices should become standard practice and will greatly facilitate adjudication among alternative structural models of psychopathology.

Risky sexual behaviors (RSBs) incur large societal and personal costs. Despite widespread prevention efforts, RSBs and associated consequences (e.g., sexually transmitted infections) continue to rise. A proliferation of research has emerged on situational (e.g., alcohol use) and individual difference (e.g., impulsivity) factors to explain this rise, but these approaches assume an unrealistically static mechanism underlying RSB. Because this prior research has resulted in few compelling effects, we sought to innovate by examining the interaction of situation and individual differences in explaining RSBs. A large sample (N = 105) completed baseline reports of psychopathology and 30 daily diary reports of RSBs and associated contexts. These data were submitted to multilevel models including cross-level interactions to test a person-by-situation conceptualization of RSBs. Results suggested that RSBs are most strongly predicted from interactions of person- and situation-level factors in both protective and facilitative directions. These interactions outnumbered main effects and commonly included partner commitment as a central mechanism. These results point to theoretical and clinical gaps in preventing RSB and urge a departure from prior ways of conceptualizing sexual risk as a static outcome.