APA Citation
McAdams, D. (2016). The Mind of Donald Trump. *The Atlantic*.
Summary
Personality psychologist Dan McAdams applies established personality science to analyze Donald Trump's psychology. Drawing on the Big Five traits and narrative identity theory, McAdams identifies Trump's defining characteristics: sky-high extroversion combined with very low agreeableness, creating an assertive, dominant, combative style. McAdams also notes Trump's narrative identity centers on winning and dominance, with limited capacity for reflection or redemption themes. The analysis demonstrates how personality psychology can illuminate public figures without requiring clinical diagnosis.
Why This Matters for Survivors
McAdams's analysis demonstrates how personality science can help understand narcissistic individuals without armchair diagnosis. The framework—examining traits like extroversion and agreeableness, and narrative themes like winning versus growth—provides tools for understanding narcissistic people in your own life. The analysis also illustrates how certain personality configurations can be effective in some contexts while creating chaos in relationships.
What This Research Establishes
Personality traits can illuminate behavior patterns. The Big Five framework—extroversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, neuroticism, openness—provides tools for understanding individuals without clinical diagnosis.
Trait combinations matter. High extroversion creates energy and assertiveness; combined with low agreeableness, it creates dominant antagonism. The combination, not single traits, predicts interpersonal patterns.
Narrative identity reveals psychological orientation. Whether someone’s life story emphasizes winning/losing or growth/redemption reveals their psychological framework and capacity for reflection.
Leadership selection and leadership quality differ. Traits that help achieve power (dominance, combativeness) may undermine effective use of power (requiring collaboration, empathy, compromise).
Why This Matters for Survivors
Framework for understanding. Personality psychology provides language for what you observed: the combination of attention-seeking dominance with lack of empathy and antagonism toward others.
Beyond diagnosis. You don’t need to diagnose someone clinically to understand their patterns. Trait frameworks describe what you experienced without requiring clinical labels.
Understanding appeal and harm. The same traits that made them captivating (high energy, dominance, confidence) created problems (low empathy, antagonism, need to win at others’ expense).
Narrative patterns. Notice whether their life story involves growth and learning, or just winning and losing. Narcissists often lack redemption themes—they don’t see struggles as opportunities for growth.
Clinical Implications
Use trait frameworks in assessment. Big Five traits provide useful clinical information without necessarily diagnosing personality disorder.
Assess narrative identity. Explore clients’ life stories for themes of growth versus winning, redemption versus stagnation. This reveals psychological resources and limitations.
Help patients understand using traits. Patients trying to understand narcissistic individuals may find trait language more accessible than diagnostic categories.
Consider trait-situation interactions. Same traits can be adaptive or maladaptive depending on context. Help patients understand how traits functioned in their specific situation.
How This Research Is Used in the Book
McAdams’s personality psychology framework appears in chapters on understanding narcissistic personalities:
“Personality psychologist Dan McAdams demonstrates how established frameworks can illuminate narcissistic patterns without clinical diagnosis. Key features: extremely high extroversion (the energy, assertiveness, and attention-seeking you found captivating) combined with extremely low agreeableness (the lack of empathy, antagonism, and need to win that caused harm). This combination—dominance without warmth—describes what you lived with. Notice too whether their life story involves growth and redemption or just winning and losing. Narcissists rarely tell stories of learning from failure.”
Historical Context
This 2016 Atlantic article appeared during a presidential campaign, offering personality psychology analysis as an alternative to clinical speculation. The piece demonstrated how established scientific frameworks could illuminate public figures’ behavior without the ethical complications of remote diagnosis.
McAdams’s approach influenced subsequent discussions about analyzing public figures—emphasizing that personality psychology offers rigorous tools that don’t require clinical labels. The framework also helps ordinary people understand narcissistic individuals they encounter personally.
Further Reading
- McAdams, D.P. (2006). The Redemptive Self: Stories Americans Live By. Oxford University Press.
- McAdams, D.P., & Pals, J.L. (2006). A new Big Five: Fundamental principles for an integrative science of personality. American Psychologist, 61(3), 204-217.
- Costa, P.T., & McCrae, R.R. (1992). NEO PI-R Professional Manual. Psychological Assessment Resources.
- Ozer, D.J., & Benet-Martínez, V. (2006). Personality and the prediction of consequential outcomes. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 401-421.
About the Author
Dan P. McAdams, PhD is Henry Wade Rogers Professor of Psychology at Northwestern University and a leading researcher on personality and life narratives. He is author of numerous books on personality psychology and has received the Henry Murray Award for distinguished contributions to personality psychology.
McAdams's analysis applied rigorous personality science rather than clinical speculation, providing a model for understanding public figures through established frameworks.
Historical Context
Published in The Atlantic in June 2016 during the presidential campaign, this analysis drew on established personality science to examine a candidate's psychology. It appeared before the debates about whether mental health professionals should comment on public figures, offering a personality psychology (rather than clinical) approach.
Frequently Asked Questions
McAdams focuses on extremely high extroversion (assertiveness, energy, attention-seeking) combined with extremely low agreeableness (antagonism, combativeness, low empathy). This combination creates a dominant, aggressive interpersonal style oriented toward winning rather than cooperation.
McAdams explicitly avoids clinical diagnosis, instead using personality psychology frameworks (Big Five traits, narrative identity) that don't require assumptions about mental disorder. This approach describes personality patterns without pathologizing.
Narrative identity refers to the internalized life story people construct to make meaning of their lives. McAdams notes that some narratives emphasize growth and redemption (struggles leading to positive outcomes) while others emphasize winning/losing without transformation.
Agreeableness involves warmth, cooperativeness, empathy, and concern for others. Low agreeableness means being antagonistic, competitive, suspicious of others' motives, and unconcerned with others' feelings. It doesn't necessarily mean cruelty—but does mean prioritizing self over others.
The framework helps identify key features: high extroversion (attention-seeking, dominance) plus low agreeableness (low empathy, antagonism) creates recognizable patterns. Looking at narrative themes—whether someone sees life as winning/losing versus growth/redemption—also reveals psychological orientation.
Traits provide probabilistic predictions—high extroversion with low agreeableness makes certain behaviors more likely (dominance-seeking, low empathy) but doesn't determine specific actions. Context and situation also matter.
No. Extroversion combined with high agreeableness produces warmth and sociability. It's the combination with low agreeableness that creates problems—dominance without warmth, attention-seeking without empathy.
Certain personality configurations may be effective for achieving leadership positions (dominance, assertiveness, willingness to fight) while creating problems once in leadership (low empathy, antagonism, inability to collaborate). Success in gaining power doesn't equal success in using it well.