Personality and Individual Differences 202 (2023) 111960

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Personality and Individual Differences

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/paid

Social media use and personality: Beyond self-reports and

trait-level assessments
Lennart Freyth a, *, Bernad Batinic a, Peter K. Jonason b, c
a
Johannes Kepler University Linz, Department of Psychology, Austria
b
University of Padua, Department of General Psychology, Italy
c
University of Cardinal Stefan Wyszyński, Institute of Psychology, Poland

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: We investigated how objective, behavioral data on social media use was correlated with the Dark Tetrad facets
Dark tetrad and the HEXACO traits. We tracked usage time and usage session of social media users (N = 243), considering
HEXACO Instagram to be a visual social medium compared to Facebook and, therefore, to be related to “dark” personality
Instagram
characteristics (i.e., short-term mating, antisocial attitudes). Additional to bivariate correlations, we controlled
Social media
Behavioral data
the Dark Tetrad facets for the HEXACO model and vice versa using partialed correlations, and found that agentic
Facets extraversion, self-entered antagonism, and Machiavellian tactics, but not the HEXACO traits, were correlated
with Instagram usage time and sessions. We observed no personality correlations with Facebook use. In women,
more facets were associated with Instagram use, while in men only boldness was linked to it. We discuss the
findings in the light of short-term mating and antisocial behavior on social media (e.g., niche specialization,
cyberstalking). Disentangling the Dark Tetrad traits helped refine previous findings.

Which personality characteristics drive the 4.7B social media users to mating characteristics, typically associated with the Dark Tetrad traits
spend their time online (Statista, 2022b)? While there is no shortage of (i.e., narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy, sadism) besides anti­
research on the links between personality and the psychology around social manifestations (Furnham, Richards, & Paulhus, 2013; Jonason, Li,
the use of social media applications (Fox & Rooney, 2015; Huang, Webster, & Schmitt, 2009). Individuals high in the dark traits engage in
2019), the research in this area, like that of psychology in general may several forms of deceptive mating tactics (Jonason, Lyons, Baughman, &
have become a science of self-reported behaviors (Baumeister, Vohs, & Vernon, 2014) they likely use on social media too. For instance, in­
Funder, 2007) when there might be ways to capture people's online dividuals high in vulnerable narcissism and Machiavellianism misrep­
behavior more objectively (Appel, Marker, & Gnambs, 2020). Self- resent themselves on Instagram (Geary, March, & Grieve, 2021), as do
reports may underestimate usage time (Jürgens, Stark, & Magin, individuals high in vulnerable narcissism on Facebook (Grieve, March,
2020), and increasingly differ for heavy-users compared to behavioral & Watkinson, 2020).
smartphone data, which show an increase in screen time since the Vulnerable narcissism is one of the characteristics of the trait
beginning of the COVID-19 crisis (Hodes & Thomas, 2021). Facebook narcissism. Referring to the unique facets of the Dark Tetrad traits,
and Instagram are the most used social media platforms (Statista, narcissism consists of agentic extraversion (i.e., immodest, assertive),
2022a). Nonetheless most research using behavioral data is done on antagonism (i.e., entitlement, arrogance), and neuroticism (i.e.,
Twitter (i.e., investigating exported text-blocks), covering as much emotionally vulnerable; Miller, Vize, Crowe, & Lynam, 2019). Machia­
research as Facebook and Instagram together (Singh, Halgamuge, & vellianism includes tactics (i.e., reaching agentic goals) and cynical views
Moses, 2019). Instagram is popular among younger users and concen­ (i.e., exploitative attitudes; Monaghan, Bizumic, Williams, & Sellbom,
trated around user-generated visual content compared to Facebook, 2020). The triarchic model of psychopathy comprises meanness (i.e., lack
initially the most researched social media platform (Marengo, Longo­ of empathy), boldness, (i.e., reckless, impertinent), and disinhibition (i.e.,
bardi, Fabris, & Settanni, 2018). In contrast to text-based platforms like impulsive, Međedović & Damjanović, 2018). Sadism is described as
Twitter, visual-based social media are used to present one's sexual pleasure when hurting others verbally, physically, or indirect (Buckels &
availability and attractiveness (Fox & Rooney, 2015), both short-term Paulhus, 2014). These “dark” traits are associated with more social

* Corresponding author at: Johannes Kepler University Linz, Altenbergerstr. 69, 4040 Linz, Austria.
E-mail address: [email protected] (L. Freyth).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2022.111960
Received 19 May 2022; Received in revised form 17 October 2022; Accepted 24 October 2022
Available online 4 November 2022
0191-8869/© 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
L. Freyth et al. Personality and Individual Differences 202 (2023) 111960

media usage time, although for different purposes. For example, nar­ external accesses (i.e., uninvited users or bots). We received the summed
cissists present themselves, whereas Machiavellians and psychopaths data for the captured time by the company, including both Android and
check their sexual and romantic partners online (Fox & Rooney, 2015; iOS users. We recruited 291 participants, 243 (Men = 138, Women =
Stiff, 2019). Previous interpretations indicate that these associations are 105) aged (M = 42.81, SD = 14.28) who used Instagram and/or Face­
based on grandiose narcissism, Machiavellian tactics, and psychopathic book (56 unique Facebook users, 20 unique Instagram users) and
impulsivity (e.g., Appel et al., 2020; Fox & Rooney, 2015; Freyth & satisfactorily completed the survey which was an adequate amount to
Batinic, 2021). Research on facets and time-intensive social media be­ detect medium-sized effects (f2 = 0.15, α = 0.05; Cohen, 1992). Ethical
haviors (e.g., inauthentic Instagram self-presentations, phubbing) found clearance was obtained by Johannes Kepler University Linz, participants
links with vulnerable narcissism, first (i.e., callousness) psychopathy, were informed of the nature of the study, completed a series of online
second psychopathy (i.e., impulsivity; Geary et al., 2021), and vulner­ questionnaires that were paired by the panel company with the usage
able narcissism (Grieve & March, 2021). Everyday sadism is associated data, debriefed, and thanked for their participation. Part of the ethical
with antisocial online behaviors on top of the Dark Triad traits (e.g., clearance was not to use a forced-choice format of the questions.
cyberstalking, technology facilitated infidelity, cyberbullying; Moor &
Anderson, 2019). Worth mentioning is the differentiation of the time 1.2. Data cleaning
spend on the apps and the number of times the app was opened (e.g., to
check some likes or messages) by relying on objective measures. This is After observing low McDonald's ω for the HEXACO traits (ωraw =
important as people who care less about others more interested in self- 0.50/0.35/0.54/0.20/0.39/0.58), we checked for suspicious response
referential information and feedback tend to check their phone more patterns (i.e., always giving the response overall or in the same block,
frequently (Grieve & March, 2021). missing answers) and decided for a conservative approach. We finally
On other visual, short-term mating oriented social media such as removed 48 participants, improving internal consistency of the HEXACO
dating apps, these dark traits are better predictors of use than the Big traits but slightly decreasing the Dark Tetrad scores, while results
Five traits (Freyth & Batinic, 2021). Here might lie the missing link on remained stable before and after data cleaning. Scores were comparable
inconsistent findings on the Big Five traits and social media use except to those in the scale's publication (de Vries, 2013) likely a result of the
for extraversion (Huang, 2019; Liu & Campbell, 2017): the HEXACO heterogeneity within the item selection (Rammstedt & Beierlein, 2014)
traits, especially honesty-humility, could provide incremental contri­ and therefore provide a broad content coverage (Schmitt, 1996) (further
butions of dark facets beyond standard taxonomies of personality like details in the supplements).
the Big Five (Moshagen, Hilbig, & Zettler, 2018). So, associations with
social media use can be challenged and worked out more precisely 1.3. Design
comparing the two collections of traits. Of note, work on the dark traits
is partly limited because the often-used narrow short scales (Muris, After reporting descriptive statistics, we test our hypotheses using
Merckelbach, Otgaar, & Meijer, 2017) like the Dirty Dozen (Jonason & bivariate correlations. We report zero-order correlations for each sex,
Webster, 2010) and the Short Dark Triad (Jones & Paulhus, 2014), we and then test for moderations by sex as suggested for work on the Dark
overcome by investigating lower-order traits, or facets. Triad/Tetrad traits (Jonason et al., 2009; Jonason & Webster, 2010).
Therefore, we conduct one of the few studies on physical behaviors Then we use partialed correlations to report the overall correlations
on people's Instagram and Facebook use in relation to lower order as­ after removing the shared variance with HEXACO traits from the Dark
pects of the HEXACO and the Dark Tetrad traits. We expect a relation­ Tetrad facets and vice versa. Last, to test for interactional and separate
ship between the Dark Tetrad facets and Instagram use (i.e., time and effects of sex and app use, we run a series of 2 (sex) × 3 (user of Insta­
sessions), but not between the Dark Tetrad traits and Facebook use gram, Facebook, or both) ANOVAs using 17 traits as dependent
because of the visual character of the former (Marengo et al., 2018), variables.
attracting short-term mating-oriented individuals (Fox & Rooney, 2015;
Jonason et al., 2009). Additionally, we expect the same correlations for 1.4. Measures
honesty-humility and extraversion (Liu & Campbell, 2017) with
Instagram-but not Facebook-use yet not to other HEXACO, traits because Social media behaviors were measured usage intensity by app usage
we think that the short-term mating orientation of the dark traits time (i.e., how long was the app opened per day) and sessions (i.e., how
(Jonason et al., 2009), honesty-humility (Moshagen et al., 2018), and often was the app opened per day). Participants had an app installed,
extraversion (Nettle, 2005) is the essential link. In detail, we expect a which captured the active app (full-screen) every second; a session was
relationship between agentic extraversion (H1a), vulnerable narcissism defined as having the app opened for at least 5 s. Usage time in minutes
(H1b), Machiavellian tactics (H2) and Instagram usage time and ses­ (Instagram: M(SD) = 18.22(21.78), Mdn = 8.52, Skew = 1.76, Kurtosis
sions. We expect meanness (H3a) to correlate with usage time (Geary = 2.47; Facebook: M(SD) = 23.68(29.38), Mdn = 16.50, Skew = 4.29,
et al., 2021), while impulsivity (H3b) should be correlated with usage Kurtosis = 29.16) and sessions (Instagram: M(SD) = 8.50(10.16), Mdn =
sessions as people need to check their phone frequently (see phubbing; 4.18, Skew = 1.99, Kurtosis = 3.52; Facebook: M(SD) = 11.23(21.71),
Grieve & March, 2021). We expect indirect sadism (H4) but not verbal or Mdn = 5.13, Skew = 7.01, Kurtosis = 62.33) were positively skewed
physical sadism to be correlated with Instagram usage time and sessions count data leading us to natural log-transform them for analyses.
as antisocial online behaviors do not occur offline, although they might We measured narcissism in three forms (i.e., agentic extraversion,
have offline consequences (Moor & Anderson, 2019). self-centered antagonism, neurotic narcissism; see Crowe, Lynam,
Campbell, & Miller, 2019), of which German, validated versions were
1. Methods available. Participants reported their agreement (1 = totally disagree; 6
= totally agree) with items like “I am great” (i.e., agentic extraversion, 9
1.1. Participants and procedures items, ω = 0.87; Back et al., 2013, subscale admiration), “I want my
rivals to fail” (i.e., self-centered antagonism, 9 items, ω = 0.89; Back
Data was collected by an online-panel (i.e., Respondi) of German- et al., 2013, subscale rivalry), and “When people criticize me, I get
speaking respondents, remunerated for their participation (4€) that embarrassed” (i.e., neurotic narcissism, 4 items, ω = 0.84; Glover,
tracked usage data of Instagram and Facebook of the last three months. Miller, Lynam, Crego, & Widiger, 2012, subscale need for admiration).
Participants were invited via the company's online system using two Items were averaged to build scores.
redirect-links, synchronizing the invitations with the anonymized user We measured two manifestations of Machiavellianism with the 12-
IDs to limit the sample to the invited, tracked users by rejecting all item Two-Dimensional Machiavellianism Scale (Monaghan et al.,

2
L. Freyth et al. Personality and Individual Differences 202 (2023) 111960

2020). Participants reported their agreement (1 = disagree strongly; 7 = Table 1

agree strongly) with items capturing Machiavellian views (e.g., “In my Descriptive statistics for the personality and social media use (N = 243).
opinion, human nature is to be dishonest”, ω = 0.67) and Machiavellian M(SD) ♂M(SD) ♀M(SD) t d
tactics (e.g., “I think that it is OK to be unethical for the greater good”, ω
Agentic extraversion 3.00 3.09 2.89 − 1.67 †
− 0.22
= 0.69). No validated German version of the scale was available at the (0.98) (0.96) (0.99)
time of the study, so three bilingual speakers forward and back trans­ Self-centered 3.09 2.89 3.23 1.94
†
0.25
lated the items. The corresponding items were averaged to create antagonism (0.95) (0.86) (1.04)
indexes. Neurotic narcissism 2.17 2.35 1.94 − 3.02** − 0.39
(1.05) (1.04) (1.02)
Individual differences in psychopathy were measured with a German Machiavellian views 3.44 3.53 3.33 − 1.42 − 0.18
Version (forward and back translated) the Triarchic Psychopathy Scale (1.12) (1.20) (0.99)
(Međedović & Damjanović, 2018). Participants reported how charac­ Machiavellian tactics 2.85 3.00 2.65 − 2.46* − 0.32
teristic (1 = not at all; 4 = very) 15 statements reflected their meanness (1.11) (1.14) (1.06)
Meanness 2.00 2.06 1.92 − 2.06* − 0.27
(e.g., “I don't have much sympathy for people”, ω = 0.51), boldness (e.g.,
(0.51) (0.52) (0.48)
“I'm a born leader”, ω = 0.68), and disinhibition (e.g., “I jump into Boldness 2.38 2.46 2.28 − 2.16* − 0.28
things without thinking.”, ω = 0.73). Items were averaged to build (0.64) (0.61) (0.66)
scores. Disinhibition 1.82 1.91 1.71 − 2.36* − 0.31
We measured individual differences in sadism with the German (0.63) (0.65) (0.60)
Verbal sadism 2.07 2.28 1.80 − 3.77** − 0.49
translation (Voggeser & Göritz, 2020) of the Short Comprehensive (1.02) (1.01) (0.96)
Assessment of Sadistic Tendencies scale (Buckels & Paulhus, 2014). It is Physical sadism 1.40 1.53 1.23 − 2.92** − 0.38
composed of nine items (three per trait). Participants rated their (0.82) (0.94) (0.59)
agreement (1 = disagree strongly, 5 = agree strongly) with statements Indirect sadism 1.59 1.81 1.30 − 4.40** − 0.57
(0.94) (1.01) (0.76)
capturing verbal (e.g., “I was purposely mean to some people in high
Honesty-humility 3.73 3.63 3.87 2.74** 0.35
school.”, ω = 0.83), physical (e.g., “I enjoy tormenting people”, ω = (0.69) (0.66) (0.70)
0.88), and indirect (e.g., “I sometimes replay my favorite scenes from Emotionality 3.20 3.01 3.45 5.42** 0.70
gory slasher films.”, ω = 0.87) sadism. To build indexes the corre­ (0.66) (0.64) (0.60)
sponding items were averaged. Extraversion 3.67 3.62 3.74 1.32 0.17
(0.70) (0.72) (0.66)
To measure the HEXACO traits we used a German version of the Brief
Agreeableness 3.01 3.03 2.98 − 0.67 − 0.09
HEXACO Inventory (de Vries, 2013). It is composed of 24 items (four per (0.60) (0.60) (0.59)
trait) where participants rate their agreement (1 = totally disagree; 7 = Conscientiousness 3.60 3.53 3.70 2.06* 0.27
totally agree) on items capturing honesty-humility (e.g., “I want to be (0.65) (0.70) (0.58)
Openness 3.51 3.61 3.39 − 2.55* − 0.33
famous”, ω = 0.50), emotionality (e.g., “I worry less than others”, ω =
(0.68) (0.66) (0.69)
0.43), extraversion (e.g., “I easily approach strangers”, ω = 0.60), Instragram duration 2.15 1.86 2.52 2.86** 0.48
agreeableness (e.g., “I often express criticism”, ω = 0.45), conscien­ (1.40) (1.28) (1.46)
tiousness (e.g., “I work very precisely”, ω = 0.53), and openness (e.g., “I Instagram sessions 1.57 1.31 1.92 3.61** 0.61
think science is boring”, α = 0.51). The Items were averaged to build (1.04) (0.86) (1.16)
Facebook duration 2.46 2.40 2.54 0.68 0.10
scores.
(1.43) (1.30) (1.59)
Facebook sessions 1.77 1.63 1.96 2.09* 0.32
2. Results (1.05) (1.00) (1.09)

Note. men = 1, women = 0.

We report descriptive statistics in Table 1. Men scored higher in †
p < .10.
neurotic narcissism, Machiavellian tactics, meanness, boldness, disin­ *
p < .05.
hibition, verbal sadism, physical sadism, indirect sadism, and openness **
p < .01.
than women. Women used Instagram longer and more frequently than
men did, used Facebook more frequently, and reported higher honesty- in physical sadism used Facebook for a longer, those high in openness for
humility, emotionality, and conscientiousness than men. a shorter time than men.
Individuals high in self-centered antagonism were associated with Given the correlations between the Dark Tetrad facets and the
more Instagram usage time and sessions (Table 2). Being a man char­ HEXACO traits we removed either the shared variance of the dark traits
acterized by boldness and openness was related to more Instagram usage or the HEXACO traits and report partialed correlations.1 After removing
time, while meanness in men was related to less usage time. Women the shared variance of the HEXACO model, self-centered antagonism,
high in self-centered antagonism, neurotic narcissism, Machiavellian Machiavellian tactics, and boldness were associated with more Insta­
views, Machiavellian tactics, disinhibition, physical and indirect sadism gram usage time and sessions, and agentic extraversion was associated
used Instagram for more time and had more sessions, extraverted with more Instagram usage time.
women had less sessions. Machiavellian views were associated with Last, we ran a series of 2 (sex) × 3 (user of Instagram, Facebook, or
more Facebook sessions overall and in men. Agentic extraversion was both) ANOVAs using 17 traits as dependent variables. We found an
associated with less Facebook usage time among men and with more overall effect for sex (F[1, 242] = 3.47, p < .01, η2p = 0.21), replicating
usage sessions among women. previously reported sex differences (e.g., women higher in honesty-
Next, we tested the correlations for moderation by sex using Fisher's humility, men higher in boldness; for further see Table 1). We found
z-test. Women characterized by high self-centered antagonism, neurotic no overall interactions, but one interaction for emotionality (F[2, 241]
narcissism, Machiavellian views, Machiavellian tactics, meanness, = 3.60, p < .01, η2p = 0.22), indicating that women using Instagram or
disinhibition, physical sadism, and indirect sadism used Instagram for a both apps are higher in emotionality than men, who score lower on
longer time and more frequently than did men. In women verbal sadism emotionality when using only Instagram or both apps instead of
and emotionality was associated with a longer, honesty-humility and
conscientiousness with a shorter Facebook usage time compared to men.
Extraverted women used Instagram more frequently than men did.
Further, women high in agentic extraversion and indirect sadism used 1
Because our sample size was insufficient for using hierarchical regressions
Facebook for a longer time and more frequently than men. Women high (20 individuals per cell; Simmons et al., 2011), we used partialed correlations.

3
L. Freyth et al. Personality and Individual Differences 202 (2023) 111960

Table 2
Correlations for traits and Instagram and Facebook use (sessions and time, both nat-log-transformed) overall (r/rparitaled) and men/women (♂/♀).
Instagram

Time Sessions

Overall (r/rpartialed) ♂/♀ z Overall (r/rpartialed) ♂/♀ z

Agentic extraversion 0.13†/0.17* 0.18/0.14 0.31 0.06/0.08 0.08/0.10 0.15

Self-centered antagonism 0.27**/0.24** 0.05/0.44** − 3.22** 32**/0.29** 0.14/0.42** − 2.34*
Neurotic narcissism 0.01/0.04 − 0.14/0.25* − 3.02** 0.07/0.05 − 0.07/0.29* − 2.81**
Machiavellian views − 0.03/− 0.01 − 0.13/0.18 − 2.38* 0.04/0.01 − 0.05/23† − 2.17*
Machiavellian tactics 0.04/0.13† − 0.10/28* − 2.96** 0.15†/19* 0.05/0.34** − 2.32*
Meanness − 0.11/− 0.07 − 0.25*/0.16 − 3.18** − 0.05/− 0.07 − 0.18/0.18 2.77**
Boldness 0.12/0.18* 0.24*/0.06 1.41 0.11/0.17* 0.27*/0.04 − 0.47
Disinhibition 0.03/0.02 − 0.08/0.22† − 2.32* 0.07/0.04 − 0.02/0.25* − 2.10*
Verbal sadism − 0.06/− 0.04 − 0.19†/23† − 3.25** 0.05/0.05 0.05/0.23† − 1.40
Physical sadism − 0.05/− 0.02 − 0.21†/0.23† − 3.41** <0.01/− 0.01 − 0.14/0.26* − 3.13*
Indirect sadism 0.02/0.12 − 0.05/0.24† − 2.25* 0.06/0.09 − 0.03/0.30* − 2.59**
Honesty-humility 0.07/0.15† 0.18/− 0.08 2.00* − 0.01/0.09 0.01/− 0.08 0.69
Emotionality 0.08/0.05 − 0.17/0.18 − 2.70** 0.11/0.07 − 0.08/0.06 − 1.07
Extraversion − 0.03/− 0.09 0.09/− 0.22† 1.02 − 0.07/0.08 0.10/− 0.31* 3.21**
Agreeableness 0.01/− 0.06 0.07/− 0.14 1.61 − 0.02/− 0.02 − 0.08/− 0.07 − 0.08
Conscientiousness 0.01/0.04 0.10/− 0.15 2.07* − 0.02/0.06 0.02/− 0.12 1.07
Openness 0.16†/0.09 0.31*/0.11 1.60 0.05/0.01 0.12/0.11 0.08

Facebook
Agentic extraversion − 0.09/− 0.07 − 0.22*/0.07 − 2.24* 0.03/0.02 − 0.11/0.23* − 2.63**
Self-centered antagonism − 0.10/− 0.13† − 0.05/− 0.16 0.85 − 0.04/− 0.02 0.04/− 0.17 − 1.00
Neurotic narcissism 0.04/− 0.01 − 0.06/0.17 − 1.77† 0.05/0.04 0.08/0.10 − 0.15
Machiavellian views 0.12/0.06 0.13/0.13 0.00 0.15*/0.13† 0.20*/0.11 0.70
Machiavellian tactics <0.01/− 0.04 − 0.01/04 − 0.38 0.04/<0.01 0.08/0.05 0.23
Meanness 0.14†/0.10 0.05/29* − 1.89† 0.09/0.05 0.10/0.13 − 0.23
Boldness <0.01/0.03 0.01/0.01 0.00 0.09/0.05 0.07/0.15 − 0.62
Disinhibition 0.01/− 0.05 − 0.04/0.08 − 0.92 0.02/<0.01 0.03/0.05 − 0.15
Verbal sadism 0.05/0.01 − 0.05/0.18 − 1.77† 0.06/− 0.03 0.03/0.17 − 1.08
Physical sadism − 0.05/− 0.10 − 0.14/0.13 − 2.07* − 0.04/− 0.08 − 0.10/0.15 − 1.92†
Indirect sadism − 0.04/− 0.09 − 0.16/0.14 − 2.30* − 0.04/− 0.09 − 0.12/0.16 − 2.15*
Honesty-humiliy <0.01/<0.01 0.10/− 0.12 1.68† − 0.06/− 0.03 − 0.02/− 0.15 1.00
Emotionality <0.01/0.04 − 0.09/0.07 − 1.22 − 0.04/0.01 − 0.07/− 0.16 0.70
Extraversion − 0.07/− 0.02 − 0.13/<0.01 − 1.00 0.04/0.08 − 0.02/0.09 − 0.84
Agreeableness − 0.11/− 0.02 − 0.02/− 0.22† 1.55 − 0.11/− 0.03 − 0.09/− 0.11 0.15
Conscientiousness − 0.07/− 0.07 − 0.05/− 0.11 0.46 <0.01/0.01 − 0.09/0.09 − 1.38
Openness − 0.09/− 0.03 0.04/− 0.22† 2.01* − 0.10/− 0.09 − 0.03/− 0.15 0.92

Note. Correlation between time and session rInstagram = 0.80, rFacebook = 0.74; z is Fisher's z to compare independent correlations, calculated online (http://quantpsy.or
g/corrtest/corrtest.htm).
†
p < .10.
*
p < .05.
**
p < .01.

Facebook only. difference of Instagram of a highly visual social media app (Marengo
et al., 2018) when compared to Facebook, which developed into a
3. Discussion general platform with different interactions and more text-based in­
teractions. Indicating, the link between Instagram use and the Dark
Previous research on personality and social media use has at least Tetrad facets supports the assumption of using mating tactics on visual
two shortcomings. It relied mainly on self-reported data of social media social media such as Instagram but not on Facebook. Interestingly, we
use and analyzed either the Dark Triad traits or the Big Five traits, which could not identify an overall link between disinhibition and Instagram
made it hard to uncover exact associations and to compare both. Thus, usage time or sessions (rejecting H3, limiting H3b to women). Probably
we correlated behavioral data of the two largest social net­ our outcome markers did not match with previous ones, or objective
works—Instagram and Facebook—with the Dark Tetrad facets and the Instagram data did not match the concrete behavior (e.g., phubbing;
HEXACO traits instead of the Dark Triad and the Big Five traits to refine Grieve & March, 2021). What we could find was a relationship between
previous research. Instagram use and indirect sadism, but only in women. This might be a
In general, the Dark Tetrad facets—but not the HEXACO traits—were consequence of antisocial online behaviors (Moor & Anderson, 2019),
associated with Instagram use. Whereas both taxonomies were almost or-more specific-a result of intimate partner cyberstalking, a mating
completely uncorrelated with Facebook use. These findings were strategy to avoid mating mistakes (March, Szymczak, Di Rago, & Jon­
underlined by the partialed correlations, confirming H1 partially (i.e., ason, 2022).
agentic extraversion, neurotic narcissism; H1a for time but not for ses­ Relationships between personality and social media usage intensity
sions) and H2 (i.e., Machiavellian tactics), but not H3 (i.e., meanness, were almost completely limited to the Dark Tetrad facets. Probably,
disinhibition) and H4 (i.e., indirect sadism). We observed a different because high-scoring individuals are looking for mating purposes online
pattern among women in whom numerous dark facets showed stronger (Fox & Rooney, 2015) and prefer the environment because of more
associations with Instagram usage time and particularly sessions- possible mating success there (i.e., better fitness pay-offs, niche
confirming H1b, H2, H3b, and H4 only for women, whereas only bold specialization; Penke & Jokela, 2016). Remarkable, exploitative, callous
men used Instagram longer and more frequently. This supports the men (i.e., meanness; Jonason et al., 2009) spend less time online, while

4
L. Freyth et al. Personality and Individual Differences 202 (2023) 111960

mild (i.e., boldness) psychopathic tactics (Jonason et al., 2014) are Appendix A. Supplementary data
associated with more time spent and sessions on Instagram. Along with
this, highly emotional women, use Instagram for a longer time than men, Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.
highlighting potential tactics used in this visual social media. Note­ org/10.1016/j.paid.2022.111960.
worthy, several facets were only linked to increased usage in women (e.
g., self-centered antagonism), a finding that could be interpreted as References
mating tactics in modern, liberal societies with smaller sex differences.
Particularly as we provide a German and not Anglo-American sample Appel, M., Marker, C., & Gnambs, T. (2020). Are social media ruining our lives?: areview
of meta-analytic evidence. Rev. Gen. Psychol., 24, 60–74.
(Schmitt, 2005). Future researchers should investigate if visual social Back, M. D., Küfner, A. C. P., Dufner, M., Gerlach, T. M., Rauthmann, J. F., &
media might provide a safe environment for women to engage in (more) Denissen, J. J. A. (2013). Narcissistic admiration and rivalry: disentangling the
short-term mating (Baranowski & Hecht, 2015). These and general, bright and dark sides of narcissism. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol., 105, 1013–1037.
Baranowski, A. M., & Hecht, H. (2015). Gender differences and similarities in receptivity
upcoming challenges for society might emerge as usage time increases to sexual invitations: effects of location and risk perception. Arch. Sex. Behav., 44,
(Hodes & Thomas, 2021). 2257–2265.
Baumeister, R. F., Vohs, K. D., & Funder, D. C. (2007). Psychology as the science of self-
reports and finger movements: whatever happened to actual behavior? Perspect.
Psychol. Sci., 2, 396–403.
3.1. Limitations and conclusions
Buckels, E. E., & Paulhus, D. L. (2014). Comprehensive assessment of sadistic tendencies
(CAST). University of British Columbia: Unpublished instrument.
Despite our use of a tracked sample of sufficient size, our study has Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psycho. Bull., 112(1), 155–159. https://doi.org/
several limitations. Different Dark Tetrad facets could be chosen, yet we 10.1037/14805-018
Crowe, M. L., Lynam, D. R., Campbell, W. K., & Miller, J. D. (2019). Exploring the
consider the ones picked best for an independent and holistic view of the structure of narcissism: toward an integrated solution. J. Pers., 87, 1151–1169.
taxonomy. This way, we could refine results on everyday sadism (Moor de Vries, R. E. (2013). The 24-item brief HEXACO inventory (BHI). J. Res. Pers., 47,
& Anderson, 2019), but the link between Instagram usage times and 871–880.
Fox, J., & Rooney, M. C. (2015). The dark triad and trait self-objectification as predictors
sessions with physical sadism instead of indirect sadism—in women and of men’s use and self-presentation behaviors on social networking sites. Personal.
not in men—needs further investigation. Future research should inves­ Individ. Differ., 76, 161–165.
tigate sex differences in personality and associated objective social Freyth, L., & Batinic, B. (2021). How bright and dark personality traits predict dating app
behavior. Personal. Individ. Differ., 168, Article 110316.
media use with larger sample sizes to clarify our observed tendencies. Furnham, A., Richards, S. C., & Paulhus, D. L. (2013). The dark triad of personality: a10
Low internal consistency scores of the HEXACO traits are common year review: dark triad of personality. Soc. Personal. Psychol. Compass, 7, 199–216.
among short scales, especially when using heterogeneous items Geary, C., March, E., & Grieve, R. (2021). Insta-identity: dark personality traits as
predictors of authentic self-presentation on instagram. Telematics and Inform., 63,
(Rammstedt & Beierlein, 2014) to measure a complex but unidimen­ Article 101669.
sional construct or trait (Schmitt, 1996). However, we would suggest Glover, N., Miller, J. D., Lynam, D. R., Crego, C., & Widiger, T. A. (2012). The five-factor
using long-versions for further research. Last, we only captured usage narcissism inventory: afive-factor measure of narcissistic personality traits. J. Pers.
Assess., 94, 500–512.
intensity objectively, upcoming research should investigate people's
Grieve, R., & March, E. (2021). ‘Just checking’: vulnerable and grandiose narcissism
concrete behaviors on top and combine them with intensity and per­ subtypes as predictors of phubbing. Mobile Media & Communication, 9, 195–209.
sonality for analyses. And those studies should use experimental designs. Grieve, R., March, E., & Watkinson, J. (2020). Inauthentic self-presentation on facebook
We show the importance of disentangling the Dark Tetrad traits as a function of vulnerable narcissism and lower self-esteem. Comput. Hum. Behav.,
102, 144–150.
when trying to understand their role in understanding objective social Hodes, L. N., & Thomas, K. G. F. (2021). Smartphone screen time: inaccuracy of self-
media use. Visual social media was used more intensely by people high reports and influence of psychological and contextual factors. Comput. Hum. Behav.,
in agentic extraversion, self-centered antagonism, and Machiavellian 115, Article 106616.
Huang, C. (2019). Social network site use and big five personality traits: ameta-analysis.
tactics but not by mean or impulsive individuals. Sex differences were Comput. Hum. Behav., 97, 280–290.
not only observed in personality, but manifested in associated usage, Jonason, P. K., Li, N. P., Webster, G. D., & Schmitt, D. P. (2009). The dark triad:
too. While women with high Dark Tetrad facets used Instagram more facilitating a short-term mating strategy in men. Eur. J. Personal., 23, 5–18.
Jonason, P. K., Lyons, M., Baughman, H. M., & Vernon, P. A. (2014). What a tangled web
intensely, only bold men did. The use of Instagram, as a visual social we weave: the dark triad traits and deception. Personal. Individ. Differ., 70, 117–119.
media, differs substantially from Facebook use regarding its users' per­ Jonason, P. K., & Webster, G. D. (2010). The dirty dozen: A concise measure of the dark
sonality characteristics, potentially for mating purposes on top of solely triad. Psychol. Assess., 22, 420–432.
Jones, D. N., & Paulhus, D. L. (2014). Introducing the short dark triad (SD3): abrief
antisocial online behaviors. The findings are consistent with and measure of dark personality traits. Assessment, 21, 28–41. https://doi.org/10.1177/
sharpen previous research as only the Dark Tetrad traits, not the HEX­ 1073191113514105
ACO traits, were associated with visual social media use. Like light at­ Jürgens, P., Stark, B., & Magin, M. (2020). Two half-truths make a whole?: on bias in self-
reports and tracking data. Soc. Sci. Comput. Rev., 38, 600–615.
tracts moths, social media seems to attract antisocial personalities.
Liu, D., & Campbell, W. K. (2017). The big five personality traits, big two metatraits, and
social media: a meta-analysis. J. Res. Pers., 70, 229–240.
Funding March, E., Szymczak, P., Di Rago, M., & Jonason, P. K. (2022). Passive, invasive, and
duplicitous: three forms of intimate partner cyberstalking. Personal. Individ. Differ.,
189, Article 111502.
The third author was partially funded by a grant from the National Marengo, D., Longobardi, C., Fabris, M. A., & Settanni, M. (2018). Highly-visual social
Science Centre (2019/35/B/HS6/00682). media and internalizing symptoms in adolescence: the mediating role of body image
concerns. Comput. Hum. Behav., 82, 63–69.
Međedović, J., & Damjanović, A. (2018). Measuring psychopathy via small sample of
CRediT authorship contribution statement TriPM items. Zbornik Instituta za kriminološka i sociološka istraživanja, 37, 7–22.
Miller, J. D., Vize, C., Crowe, M. L., & Lynam, D. R. (2019). A critical appraisal of the
dark-triad literature and suggestions for moving forward. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci., 28,
Lennart Freyth: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Vali­ 353–360.
dation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Resources, Data curation, Monaghan, C., Bizumic, B., Williams, T., & Sellbom, M. (2020). Two-dimensional
Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing, Visualization. machiavellianism: conceptualization, theory, and measurement of the views and
tactics dimensions. Psychol. Assess., 32, 277–293.
Bernad Batinic: Supervision, Project administration, Funding acquisi­ Moor, L., & Anderson, J. R. (2019). A systematic literature review of the relationship
tion. Peter K. Jonason: Methodology, Data curation, Writing – review between dark personality traits and antisocial online behaviours. Personal. Individ.
& editing, Visualization, Supervision. Differ., 144, 40–55.
Moshagen, M., Hilbig, B. E., & Zettler, I. (2018). The dark core of personality. Psychol.
Rev., 125, 656–688.
Data availability Muris, P., Merckelbach, H., Otgaar, H., & Meijer, E. (2017). The malevolent side of
human nature: A meta-analysis and critical review of the literature on the dark triad
The data that has been used is confidential.

5
L. Freyth et al. Personality and Individual Differences 202 (2023) 111960

(narcissism, machiavellianism, and psychopathy). Perspect. Psychol. Sci., 12, Singh, A., Halgamuge, M. N., & Moses, B. (2019). An analysis of demographic and
183–204. behavior trends using social media: facebook, twitter, and instagram. Soc. Netw.
Nettle, D. (2005). An evolutionary approach to the extraversion continuum. Evol. Human Anal., 87–108.
Behav., 26(4), 363–373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2004.12.004 Statista. (2022). Global social networks ranked by number of users. https://www.statist
Penke, L., & Jokela, M. (2016). The evolutionary genetics of personality revisited. Curr. a.com/statistics/272014/global-social-networks-ranked-by-number-of-users/.
Opin. Psychol., 7, 104–109. Statista. (2022). Social Media-Statistics & Facts. https://www.statista.
Rammstedt, B., & Beierlein, C. (2014). Can’t we make it any shorter?: the limits of com/topics/1164/social-networks/#dossierKeyfigures.
personality assessment and ways to overcome them. J. Individ. Differ., 35, 212–220. Stiff, C. (2019). The dark triad and Facebook surveillance: how machiavellianism,
Schmitt, D. P. (2005). Sociosexuality from Argentina to Zimbabwe: a48-nation study of psychopathy, but not narcissism predict using facebook to spy on others. Comput.
sex, culture, and strategies of human mating. Behav. Brain Sci., 28, 247–275. Hum. Behav., 94, 62–69.
Schmitt, N. (1996). Uses and abuses of coefficient alpha. Psychol. Assess., 8, 350–353. Voggeser, B. J., & Göritz, A. S. (2020). CAST auf deutsch: Übersetzung und validierung
Simmons, J. P., Nelson, L. D., & Simonsohn, U. (2011). False-positive psychology: des comprehensive assessment of sadistic tendencies [CAST in german: translation
Undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as and validation of the comprehensive assessment of sadistic tendencies]. Diagnostica,
significant. Psycho. Sci., 22(11), 1359–1366. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 66, 1–12.
0956797611417632