In 2 diary studies of lying, 77 college students reported telling 2 lies a day, and 70 community members told 1. Participants told more self-centered lies than other-oriented lies, except in dyads involving only women, in which other-oriented lies were as common as self-centered ones. Participants told relatively more self-centered lies to men and relatively more other-oriented lies to women. Consistent with the view of lying as an everyday social interaction process, participants said that they did not regard their lies as serious and did not plan them much or worry about being caught. Still, social interactions in which lies were told were less pleasant and less intimate than those in which no lies were told. Although psychologists of many orientations have had. much to say about lying (DePaulo, Stone, & Lassiter, 1985; Ford, King, & Hollender, 1988; Lewis & Saarni, 1993), the topic is hardly their exclusive domain. Interest in lying transcends most disciplinary, cultural, and historical boundaries. Analyses of lying appear in religious treatises, staid textbooks, and irreverent tabloids. Perspectives on lying are as diverse as their sources. Lying has been described as a threat to the moral fabric of society (Bok, 1978), a predictor of dire life outcomes (Stouthamer-Loeber, 1986), asocial skill (DePaulo & Jordan, 1982;Nyberg, 1993), and an important developmental milestone (deVilliers &deVilliers, 1978). Pronouncements about deceit are staggeringly varied not only because of the nature of the beast, but also because the debate on deceit has in some important ways proceeded virtually unconstrained by data. Many perspectives on deceit rest on assumptions about patterns of lying in everyday life. However, some of the most fundamental questions about everyday lies

The Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI) is a widely used measure of narcissism. However, debates persist about its exact factor structure with researchers proposing solutions ranging from two to seven factors. The present research aimed to clarify the factor structure of the NPI and further illuminate its nomological network. Four studies provided support for a three-factor model consisting of the dimensions of Leadership/Authority, Grandiose Exhibitionism, and Entitlement/Exploitativeness. The Leadership/Authority dimension was generally linked to adaptive outcomes whereas the other two dimensions, particularly Entitlement/Exploitativeness, were generally linked to maladaptive outcomes. These results suggest that researchers interested in the psychological and behavioral outcomes associated with the NPI should examine correlates at the facet level. In light of the findings, we propose a hierarchical model for the structure of the NPI and provide researchers with a scoring scheme for this commonly used instrument.

Guided by attachment theory, a 2-part study was conducted to test how perceptions of relationship-based conflict and support are associated with relationship satisfaction/closeness and future quality. Dating partners completed diaries for 14 days (Part 1) and then were videotaped while discussing a major problem that occurred during the diary study (Part 2). Part 1 reveals that more anxiously attached individuals perceived more conflict with their dating partners and reported a tendency for conflicts to escalate in severity. Perceptions of daily relationship-based conflicts negatively impacted the perceived satisfaction/closeness and relationship futures of highly anxious individuals, whereas perceptions of greater daily support had positive effects. Part 2 reveals that highly anxious individuals appeared more distressed and escalated the severity of conflicts (rated by observers) and reported feeling more distressed. The authors discuss the unique features of attachment anxiety and how changing perceptions of relationship satisfaction/closeness and stability could erode commitment over time.

Data collected from both members of a dyad provide abundant opportunities as well as data analytic challenges. The Actor-Partner Interdependence Model (APIM; Kashy & Kenny, 2000) was developed as a conceptual framework for collecting and analyzing dyadic data, primarily by stressing the importance of considering the interdependence that exists between dyad members. The goal of this paper is to detail how the APIM can be implemented in dyadic research, and how its effects can be estimated using hierarchical linear modeling, including PROC MIXED in SAS and HLM (version 5.04;Raudenbush, Bryk, Cheong, & Congdon, 2001). The paper describes the APIM and illustrates how the data set must be structured to use the data analytic methods proposed. It also presents the syntax needed to estimate the model, indicates how several types of interactions can be tested, and describes how the output can be interpreted.

The authors elaborate the complications and the opportunities inherent in the statistical analysis of small-group data. They begin by discussing nonindependence of group members' scores and then consider standard methods for the analysis of small-group data and determine that these methods do not take into account this nonindependence. A new method is proposed that uses multilevel modeling and allows for negative nonindependence and mutual influence. Finally, the complications of interactions, different group sizes, and differential effects are considered. The authors strongly urge that the analysis model of data from small-group studies should mirror the psychological processes that generate those data.

The multitrait-multimethod (MTMM) matrix permits examination of the convergent and discriminant validity of psychological measures. Estimation using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), the predominant analytical technique, has often resulted in severe difficulties, such as out-of-range estimates and convergence problems. This article shows that an important special case of one of the more frequently advocated CFA models is not identified and is therefore not estimable. Because most MTMM data are likely to conform closely to this special case, resulting analyses suffer from empirical underidentification. Alternative CFA models are discussed.

To illustrate the differing thoughts and emotions involved in guiding habitual and nonhabitual behavior, 2 diary studies were conducted in which participants provided hourly reports of their ongoing experiences. When participants were engaged in habitual behavior, defined as behavior that had been performed almost daily in stable contexts, they were likely to think about issues unrelated to their behavior, presumably because they did not have to consciously guide their actions. When engaged in nonhabitual behavior, or actions performed less often or in shifting contexts, participants' thoughts tended to correspond to their behavior, suggesting that thought was necessary to guide action. Furthermore, the self-regulatory benefits of habits were apparent in the lesser feelings of stress associated with habitual than nonhabitual behavior.

Three very large, nationally representative samples of married couples were used to examine the relative importance of 3 types of personality effects on relationship and life satisfaction: actor effects, partner effects, and similarity effects. Using data sets from Australia (N = 5,278), the United Kingdom (N = 6,554), and Germany (N = 11,418) provided an opportunity to test whether effects replicated across samples. Actor effects accounted for approximately 6% of the variance in relationship satisfaction and between 10% and 15% of the variance in life satisfaction. Partner effects (which were largest for Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, and Emotional Stability) accounted for between 1% and 3% of the variance in relationship satisfaction and between 1% and 2% of the variance in life satisfaction. Couple similarity consistently explained less than .5% of the variance in life and relationship satisfaction after controlling for actor and partner effects.