Psychometric properties of an Arabic Version of the Dark Triad Dirty Dozen Scale

Figures & data

Table 1. Sample characteristics and ANOVA tests.

Variable	n	%	Mean (SD) Mach.	Mean (SD) Psych.	Mean (SD) Narc.
Gender			p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001
Female	795	59.8	8.38 (5.67)	9.30 (5.43)	19.61 (8.92)
Male	534	40.2	10.7 (6.70)	11.83 (5.93)	17.25 (8.42)
Marital Status			p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001
Single	768	57.8	9.01 (6.07)	9.93 (5.57)	19.99 (9.05)
Married	322	24.2	6.77 (4.57)	8.35 (4.77)	16.00 (8.21)
Divorced	159	12	12.85 (6.42)	13.38 (5.70)	18.43 (8.51)
Widowed	80	6	15.47 (5.62)	15.85 (5.84)	17.15 (6.15)
Monthly Income			p = 0.840	p = 0.148	p < 0.001
Less than 5000 SR	405	30.5	9.16 (6.57)	10.75 (6.55)	16.14 (8.93)
5000 - less than 10,000 SR	323	24.3	9.50 (6.26)	10.28 (5.40)	19.48 (8.43)
10000 - less than 15,000 SR	221	16.6	9.51 (6.16)	10.45 (5.53)	18.76 (8.88)
15000 SR and greater	380	28.6	9.22 (5.82)	9.81 (5.32)	20.53 (8.27)

Notes: Mach. = Machiavellianism, Psych. = psychopathy, Narc. = Narcissism, SD = standard deviation.

Figure 1. Scree plot of the exploratory factor analysis.

Table 2. Mean, SD, reliability, and EFA and CFA factor loadings.

	mean	SD	std alpha	Test–retest	EFA Loadings	CFA Loadings
Machiavellianism	9.31	6.21	0.83	0.85
Item 1	2.40	2.00			0.69	0.75
Item 2	2.20	1.70			0.72	0.75
Item 3	2.50	2.00			0.80	0.72
Item 4	2.10	1.90			0.34	0.76
Psychopathy	10.32	5.77	0.70	0.89
Item 5	3.20	2.30			0.34	0.29
Item 6	2.00	1.80			0.84	0.74
Item 7	3.00	2.40			0.32	0.59
Item 8	2.00	1.60			0.65	0.73
Narcissism	18.67	8.80	0.86	0.85
Item 9	5.40	2.70			0.86	0.82
Item 10	4.40	2.50			0.80	0.83
Item 11	5.10	2.80			0.76	0.75
Item 12	3.70	2.50			0.63	0.70

Notes: std alpha = standardised Cronbach’s alpha, EFA = exploratory factor analysis, CFA = confirmatory factor analysis.

Figure 2. Path diagram of the CFA model.

The numbers on the arrows represent the CFA factor loadings and the covariance between the factors.

Table 3. Concurrent and convergent validity.

	Machiavellianism	Psychopathy	Narcissism
Corruption propensity	0.78***	0.76***	0.53***
Moral disengagement
Moral justification	0.61***	0.59***	0.48***
Euphemistic labelling	0.73***	0.68***	0.48***
Advantageous comparison	0.81***	0.76***	0.44***
Displacement of responsibility	0.62***	0.64***	0.45***
Diffusion of responsibility	0.71***	0.70***	0.45***
Distortion of consequences	0.67***	0.65***	0.40***
Dehumanisation	0.47***	0.52***	0.43***
Attribution of blame	0.47***	0.52***	0.45***

Notes: ***p < 0.001.

Data availability statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, upon reasonable request.