Article

Narcissistic vulnerability and the development of PTSD: a prospective study.

Department of Psychiatry, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel.
Journal of Nervous & Mental Disease (Impact Factor: 1.81). 12/2005; 193(11):762-5. DOI: 10.1097/01.nmd.0000185874.31672.a5
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT This study empirically examined the role of narcissistic traits and narcissistic vulnerability in the development of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). One hundred forty-four survivors of a traumatic event were assessed 1 week, 1 month, and 4 months following the event. In the first-week assessment, patients were administered the Narcissistic Vulnerability Scale and self-reported rating scale to assess event severity and symptoms ensuing from the impact of the traumatic event: depression, intrusions, avoidance, and arousal. In the follow-up assessments, subjects were interviewed on the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale and were readministered the self-rating symptoms scale. Survivors who developed acute (1 month) and chronic (4 months) PTSD had significantly higher levels of narcissistic vulnerability in the first-week assessment. Narcissistic Vulnerability Scale scores predicted PTSD status with sensitivity of 81.6% and 85.1% and specificity of 40.4% and 38.6% at the 1-month and 4-month assessments, respectively. Narcissistic vulnerabilities contribute to the occurrence of PTSD.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Arieh Y Shalev, Jun 22, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
323 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The prevalence of personality disorders varies between 0.5% and 2.5% in the general population and it increases drastically in the clinical population [1, 2]. In a psychiatric population, about one half of all patients have pathological personality [3]. Following the multiaxial classification of the Diagnostic Manual of the American Psychiatric Association (DSM-IVTR; [1]), Axis II personality disorders are defined as being stable, inflexible, and pervasive patterns of psychological experiences and behaviors that differ prominently from cultural expectations, and that lead to clinically significant distress or impairment in important areas of functioning. In the DSM-IV-TR, there are 10 distinct personality disorders organized into three clusters. Cluster ″A″ includes three personality disorders considered as odd or eccentric: paranoid, schizoid and schizotypal. Antisocial, borderline, narcissistic and histrionic personality disorders are grouped under Cluster ″B″, which is considered as the dramatic, emotional or erratic cluster. Finally, Cluster ″C″ comprises three anxious or fearful personality disorders: the avoidant personality disorder, the dependent personality disorder and the obsessive-compulsive personality disorder. In the next version of the DSM (DSM-V), the task force is proposing some major changes for Axis II and as per the may 1st 2012 online revision[4], the DSM-V will retain six personality disorder types : schizotypal, antisocial, borderline, narcissistic, avoidant and obsessive-compulsive. The comorbidity between Axis I and Axis II disorders is much documented, and there are some voices in the scientific community that would even question whether or not the distinction between those two axis should be revisited [5-8]. Specifically, Axis II disorders have been found to be strongly associated with anxiety disorders [9, 10] and an increased prevalence of personality disorders has been found in patients with anxiety disorders [11, 12]. Personality disorders are associated to high social cost and mortality, such as crime, disability, underachievement, underemployment, increased need for medical care, institutionalization, suicide attempts, self-injurious behavior, family disruption, child abuse and neglect, poverty, and homelessness [12]. This underlies the importance of finding optimal treatment for this population, and understanding the mechanisms by which personality pathology interferes with other psychiatric disorders, such as anxiety disorders. This chapter presents a comprehensive review of the literature on the co-occurrence of personality and anxiety disorders, and the treatment of the latter when comorbidity occurs. First, the influence of personality pathology on anxiety disorders in general is discussed, with no regard to specific anxiety disorders. Afterwards, the clinical features of each of the major anxiety disorders that are comorbid with personality disorders are examined separately. The influence of personality disorders on anxiety disorder symptomatology and on the course of illness is also discussed in terms of treatment. Emphasis will be on the outcome of cognitive and/or behavioral therapy, since its efficacy has been repeatedly established in the treatment of anxiety disorders. The influence of Axis II diagnosis on the outcome of pharmacological treatment of anxiety disorders is also briefly discussed. Major characteristics of the studies that are reviewed in the present chapter are presented in a table. Finally, future research questions on comorbidity of anxiety disorders in the presence of personality disorders are proposed.
    New Insights into Anxiety Disorders, 01/2013: chapter 12: pages 287-324; , ISBN: ISBN 978-953-51-1053-8
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This book collects the contributions of a number of clinical psychiatrists all over the world, interested in developing basic research about anxiety and in applying it in clinical contexts. It is divided into four sections, covering general issues about anxiety (ethological and developmental ones), basic research issues on specific aspects of anxiety (bioanatomical ones, correlation with personality structure and so on), and new clinical and therapeutical proposals and hypothesis. Each author summarized the clinical importance of his work, underlining the clinical pitfalls of this publication.
    03/2013; InTech., ISBN: 978-953-51-1053-8
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The aim of the present study is to determine whether narcissistic vulnerability can aid in clarifying the debate regarding the relationship between childhood sexual abuse (CSA) and adulthood adjustment to traumatic events. 157 survivors (mean age = 31.1, SD = 10.9) of a traumatic event (war activities and road and work accidents) were assessed 1 week, 1, and 4 months following the event. Of the 157 participants, 15 reported experiencing CSA, and 26 reported experiencing childhood physical abuse (CPA). In the first-week assessment, patients were administered the Narcissistic Vulnerability Scale (NVS) and the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI). In the follow-up assessments, subjects were interviewed on the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale. Narcissistic vulnerability was found, both in 1- and 4-month follow-ups, to increase the likelihood of participants who experienced CSA to develop PTSD symptoms later in their adult life, when exposed to other additional trauma. Narcissistic vulnerability, in both follow-ups, did not increase the likelihood of participants who experienced CPA to develop PTSD symptoms later in their life when exposed to other additional trauma. The NVS predicted the development of PTSD symptoms in the whole sample, both in the 1- and 4-month follow-ups, above and beyond the prediction of the BDI. In other words, narcissistic vulnerability can add additional information above and beyond general negative emotionality. In conclusion, it is recommended to take into consideration the interplay between CSA and the individual's narcissistic vulnerability when assessing the long term effects of CSA such as acute or chronic PTSD.
    Child Psychiatry and Human Development 11/2014; DOI:10.1007/s10578-014-0521-z · 1.93 Impact Factor