ArticlePDF Available

An Emerging Epidemic of Narcissism or Much Ado About Nothing?



We evaluated secular increases in narcissism in light of issues raised by Twenge and Foster (2008) [Twenge and Foster (2008). Mapping the scale of the narcissism epidemic: Increases in narcissism 2002–2007 within ethnic groups. Journal of Research in Personality]. Year of data collection (1996–2008) and narcissism scores were weakly correlated in a sample of 30,073 participants (rs ranged from 0.019 to 0.044). The effect sizes were well below the conventional threshold for a “small” effect. Based on these and previous findings, we concluded that there is little evidence of a secular increase in narcissism in our datasets.
Brief Report
An emerging epidemic of narcissism or much ado about nothing?
M. Brent Donnellan
, Kali H. Trzesniewski
, Richard W. Robins
Department of Psychology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48823, United States
Department of Psychology, The University of Western Ontario, Canada
Department of Psychology, University of California, Davis, CA 95616-8686, United States
article info
Article history:
Available online 27 December 2008
Generational changes
Generation Me
We evaluated secular increases in narcissism in light of issues raised by Twenge and Foster (2008)
[Twenge and Foster (2008). Mapping the scale of the narcissism epidemic: Increases in narcissism
2002–2007 within ethnic groups. Journal of Research in Personality]. Year of data collection (1996–
2008) and narcissism scores were weakly correlated in a sample of 30,073 participants (rs ranged from
0.019 to 0.044). The effect sizes were well below the conventional threshold for a ‘‘small” effect. Based
on these and previous findings, we concluded that there is little evidence of a secular increase in narcis-
sism in our datasets.
Ó2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
0. Introduction
Twenge and colleagues have recently raised concerns about an
epidemic of narcissism among today’s college students and
Twenge (2006) has argued that this increase is an unintended ef-
fect of the self-esteem movement. In fact, Twenge (2006) has sug-
gested that, ‘‘the self-esteem movement has created an army of
little narcissists” (p. 223). In a series of articles, including a recent
one entitled, ‘‘Mapping the Scale of the Narcissism Epidemic”
(Twenge & Foster, 2008), Twenge and colleagues claim that narcis-
sism levels have been rising dramatically over the past decade or
two (Twenge, 2008; Twenge, Konrath, Foster, Campbell, & Bush-
man, 2008a; Twenge, Konrath, Foster, Campbell, & Bushman,
2008b). However, the evidentiary basis of this claim has been the
subject of much controversy within the scientific literature (Trzes-
niewski, Donnellan, & Robins, 2008a; Trzesniewski, Donnellan, &
Robins, 2008b) as well as in the popular media (e.g., Associated
Press, February 27, 2007; Rosenbloom, January 17, 2008). The
aim of this brief report is to re-examine the evidence for secular in-
creases in narcissism in light of the issues, criticisms, and findings
presented in Twenge and Foster (2008).
1. Previous research on secular changes in narcissism
In a previous article (Trzesniewski et al., 2008a), we presented
data that failed to support Twenge’s (2006) assertion that ‘‘narcis-
sism is much more common in recent generations” (p. 69). Specif-
ically, we found nearly the same average score on the 40-item
Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI; Raskin & Terry, 1988) for
data collected on large samples of college students: (a) from
1979 to 1985 at the University of California (UC) Berkeley and
UC Santa Cruz; (b) in 1996 at UC Berkeley; and (c) from 2002–
2007 at UC Davis. In a response to Trzesniewski et al. (2008a);
Twenge et al. (2008b) re-analyzed secular trends in their meta-
analytic database after restricting their analyses to the seven sam-
ples from California universities (all but one sample were from UC
campuses) and replicated our original finding that college students
in California have not shown an increase in narcissism. In an at-
tempt to explain this null result, Twenge and Foster (2008) specu-
lated that the secular increase in narcissism that they believe is
occurring in society as a whole has been obscured at California uni-
versities because of countervailing increases in the proportion of
Asian–American students, who tend to score lower on measures
of narcissism than White students.
Whether secular trends vary across racial/ethnic groups is an
important question, albeit one that has been largely ignored by
all of the participants in this debate (e.g., Twenge et al. 2008a)
did not evaluate ethnicity as a moderator of secular trends in their
meta-analysis). In Trzesniewski et al. (2008a), we reported that
Asian–Americans students scored lower on the NPI than White stu-
dents, but we found no evidence that ethnicity moderated the sec-
ular trends. However, based on a reanalysis of our UC Davis data
(the only data for which ethnicity was available to them), Twenge
and Foster (2008) concluded that narcissism levels actually in-
creased from 2002 to 2007 for Whites and Asian Americans (but
not African Americans or Latinos/as). They interpreted this result
as supporting their contention that there is an epidemic of narcis-
sism among today’s college students.
The goal of this brief report is to revisit this question of whether
there is an epidemic of narcissism among today’s youth by
0092-6566/$ - see front matter Ó2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
*Corresponding author.
E-mail address: (M.B. Donnellan).
The first and second authors contributed equally to this article.
Journal of Research in Personality 43 (2009) 498–501
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Journal of Research in Personality
journal homepage:
examining changes in narcissism from 1996 to 2008 as a function
of ethnicity using potentially more meaningful and easier to
understand effect size measures. In addition, we examined
whether any observed trends held across gender and across several
specific facets of narcissism.
2. Method
NPI scores were drawn from prescreening sessions conducted
at U.C. Berkeley in 1996 and at U.C. Davis from 2002 to 2008.
We restricted the analyses to the 30,073 participants between
18 and 24 years of age who completed the NPI and self-identi-
fied their racial/ethnic background. The dataset used for some
of these analyses differs from the dataset analyzed by Twenge
and Foster (2008) with additional data collected in 2007
(n= 2025) and 2008 (n= 2405) and with ethnicity data analyzed
for the 1996 sample (n= 571).
Given the number of comparisons
and the large sample sizes we set the alpha level to 0.01 to eval-
uate statistical significance.
3. Results
There are two general ways to analyze secular trends in nar-
cissism. First, mean scores can be computed each year and then
correlated with year of data collection. This analysis produces
what is referred to as an ‘‘ecological correlation” (the Nin these
analyses is the number of years that data were collected). Sec-
ond, the individual participants’ scores can be correlated with
the year each score was collected (the Nin these analyses is
the number of participants). This kind of analysis produces the
kind of correlation coefficient that is commonly used in person-
ality research (i.e. the unit of analysis is individual scores rather
than yearly averages). Both approaches presumably reflect the
degree of association between narcissism levels and year of
assessment, and thus tell us something about secular trends.
As we will show, however, the two approaches produce dramat-
ically different effect sizes.
The method that Twenge and Foster (2008) used to obtain
their most impressive effects sizes was the ecological approach.
Specifically, to test their assumption that ethnicity confounds
the general trend, they predicted yearly means broken down
by ethnicity from the 6 years of data collection (2002–2007) re-
ported in Trzesniewski et al. (2008a). From this analysis, they re-
ported large standardized regression coefficients (i.e.
correlations) for each ethnic group (b= 0.96, 0.68, 0.72, and
0.56 for Whites, Asian Americans, Latinos/as, and African Amer-
icans, respectively). One problem with the ecological approach is
that the effect size can be quite large because individual-level
variability is not factored into the standardization of the regres-
sion weight.
When individual–level effects were computed using the second
approach, the resulting standarized coefficients (i.e., correlations)
were considerably smaller (b= 0.045, 0.002, 0.021, and 0.048 for
Whites, Asian Americans, Latino/a, and African Americans, respec-
In contrast to Twenge and Foster’s analysis of the same data,
these coefficients suggest that little secular change has occurred,
even when the trends were analyzed within ethnic groups. Twenge
and Foster (2008) suggest that these small effects could amount to
potentially substantial changes if they played out at the same rate
over 24 or so years. However, such an extrapolation might be unwar-
ranted given the restricted time frame moreover, it is unclear from a
‘‘generational change” perspective why college students in 2002 or
2003 should be much different from college students in 2006 or
Based on these concerns, we evaluated within-group secular
changes in narcissism by extending the sample analyzed by
Twenge and Foster (2008) to include data from 1996, Fall 2007,
and Winter and Spring of 2008. Specifically, our goal was to exam-
ine secular trends within ethnic group, within gender, and across
the NPI subscales for this longer interval. Table 1 displays mean
NPI scores as a function of ethnicity and year of data collection.
Averages were based on a 0–40 metric for scoring the NPI. To quan-
tify changes over time, we calculated the individual–level correla-
tions between NPI scores and year (1996–2008). This information
is reported in row labeled r
. For example, the association be-
tween individual scores for Whites and year of data collection was
0.019 (p= 0.067) and the correlation between year of data collec-
tion and NPI score in the total sample was 0.024 (p< 0.01). These
correlations between year and NPI scores were quite small
(range = 0.019–0.044) and they provided little indication of a
meaningful secular increase in narcissism from 1996 to 2008.
We next analyzed the trends separately for men and women of
each ethnicity. This is an instructive analysis because Twenge et al.
(2008a) found that only women showed a statistically significant
increase in NPI scores. The correlations for women are reported
in the row labeled r
and the correlations for men are reported
in the row labeled r
For example, the correlation between indi-
vidual scores for White women and year of data collection was
0.021 (p= 0.111), whereas the corresponding correlation for White
men was 0.024 (p= 0.184). All of the correlations were small and
none exceeded 0.10, the conventional threshold for a ‘‘small” ef-
fect. As another illustration of the magnitude of the effect, year
of data collection accounted for 0.1% of the variance, whereas gen-
der accounted for 1.2% (i.e., 12 times as much) in a regression anal-
ysis predicting NPI scores.
It is possible that only certain facets of narcissism have been
increasing over time. To explore this possibility, we computed
correlations between the seven NPI subscales (Raskin & Terry,
1988) and year of data collection, separately in the total sample
and for each ethnic group. The vast majority of the 42 correla-
tions were below 0.05 (median r= 0.017) and none were above
0.10 (see Table 2). Of note, the weakest correlations, hovering
around zero (e.g., r= 0.005 in the total sample, p= 0.351), were
found for the Entitlement subscale. Konrath, Bushman, and
Campbell (2006) identified Entitlement as the best predictor of
laboratory aggression, even outperforming the overall NPI score.
Thus, this particularly socially toxic aspect of narcissism showed
no increase from 1996–2008, contrary to the characterization of
the current generation of college students as ‘‘Generation Me”
(e.g., Twenge, 2006).
The 1996 data were not included in the Twenge and Foster (2008) analysis
because ethnicity information was not readily available when requested by Dr. Foster
in February of 2008. We tracked these down in light of the Twenge and Foster (2008)
analysis and provided them to their team in September of 2008.
We are not claiming the Twenge and her colleagues are committing the ecological
fallacy with these analyses (i.e., the error of assuming that effects at an aggregated
level generalize to a lower level). Rather, we are pointing out that correlating two
variables at an aggregated level yields an effect size that is quite different from the
traditional correlation used in personality research, which is based on individual level
data (see Robinson, 1950; Rosenthal, Rosnow, & Rubin, 2000, p. 2). Ecological
correlations are typically much larger than individual-level correlations (and can even
reverse signs) and it is not clear how personality researchers should interpret the
magnitude of these effects.
These results are based on analyses conducted using the exact same set of data
analyzed by Twenge and Foster (2008), which consists of the 20,627 participants
between 18 to 24 years of age who completed the NPI between 2002 and Spring of
2007 and self-identified their racial/ethnic background as African American (n= 553),
Asian American (n= 9969), Latino/Latina (n= 2,358), or White (n= 7,747). These
regression results were also provided to Dr. Twenge in Spring of 2008.
M.B. Donnellan et al. / Journal of Research in Personality 43 (2009) 498–501 499
4. Discussion
Based on the overall pattern of results in this report, we are not
convinced that there has been either a widespread or a substantial
secular increase in narcissism. All of the effect sizes were well be-
low the conventional threshold for a ‘‘small” effect and, even in our
very large sample, there was no statistically detectable increase for
men (p= 0.105) or for Latinos and African Americans (p= 0.252 and
p= 0.253, respectively). Although very small effects can be highly
meaningful in some contexts, in the present context, we prefer to
follow recommendations by Hyde (2005) who has argued that Co-
hen’s criteria (1988) (e.g., 1988) for ‘‘small” (r= 0.10), ‘‘medium”
(r= 0.30), and ‘‘large” (r= 0.50) effects are reasonable for interpret-
ing contentious findings such as the presence of gender differences
(see pp. 586–587). In this case, the observed correlations are even
smaller than ‘‘small,” which argues for erring on the side of caution
before making pronouncements about an entire generation of
young adults.
Moreover, it is occasionally overlooked that the secular increase
in narcissism reported by Twenge et al. (2008a) held only for wo-
men; the association between year and mean NPI scores was not
statistically detectable for men whereas it was statistically detect-
able for women based on their sub-analyses of the 44 studies that
had information separately reported by gender (out of 85 total
studies). The present analyses further hinted at this gender differ-
ence, although the trend was miniscule even for women. Thus,
even if we were to accept Twenge et al.’s claim that narcissism lev-
els are rising, this trend seems to be restricted to women. Such an
apparent boundary condition raises questions about how to best
interpret the reported secular effect as scores on the NPI can reflect
heightened social potency as well as more socially toxic aspects of
personality (see Trzesniewski et al. 2008b).
Finally, we emphasize that there is nothing in any of these data
that suggests an epidemic of narcissism. Why? The NPI is mea-
sured on an arbitrary metric (e.g., Blanton & Jaccard, 2006) and
there is no basis for declaring when an average score indicates
‘‘excessively” high levels of the characteristic in question. In fact,
even in the most recent time point (2008), when the epidemic
was presumably raging, participants on average endorsed fewer
than half (about 40%) of the narcissistic responses; whether this
value should be considered high or low in an absolute sense is
impossible to determine with the arbitrary metric of the NPI. In-
deed, claims about an ‘‘epidemic of narcissism” essentially boil
down to quite small changes over a fairly restricted range of scores
all of which typically average below the midpoint of the scale.
Based on these considerations, we do not believe that ‘‘epidemic”
is an appropriate adjective in this context.
5. Conclusion
We continue to believe that a conservative approach is war-
ranted with respect to the empirical status of generational in-
creases in narcissism. Our extensive analyses of data from over
30,000 participants showed uniformly small secular trends, which
failed to reach statistical significance for men, for two of the four
ethnic groups, and for three of the facets of narcissism. Moreover,
all of the existing NPI evidence is based on convenience (i.e., non-
probability) samples, and such samples are highly problematic for
making inferences about trends in the general population. Thus,
evidence for an increase in narcissism is far from clear-cut and
there are good reasons why researchers should be wary of labeling
any apparent changes in this multifaceted dimension of personal-
ity as evidence of an epidemic.
Associated Press. (2007). College students think they’re so special. from <http://> Retrieved 10.05.2007.
Blanton, H., & Jaccard, J. (2006). Arbitrary metrics in psychology. American
Psychologist, 61, 27–41.
Table 1
Means, standard deviations, and correlations of NPI Scores with year of data collection (1996–2008), separately for each ethnic group.
Year African–American Asian–American Latino/a White ‘‘Other” Total sample
1996 18.24 5.98 28 13.53 6.84 254 15.82 6.22 82 17.78 6.71 163 14.12 5.84 44 15.35 6.86
2002 17.38 6.55 70 13.26 6.67 1133 15.51 6.82 252 15.30 6.59 1107 16.64 7.03 535 14.85 6.84
2003 17.38 6.89 109 13.79 6.92 1818 16.32 6.65 420 15.58 6.66 1644 16.57 6.93 817 15.18 6.90
2004 17.99 7.30 92 13.64 6.87 1884 16.23 6.70 438 15.64 6.88 1505 16.54 6.90 830 15.10 6.98
2005 18.58 6.23 92 13.96 6.84 1769 16.12 6.89 437 15.96 6.87 1332 16.45 7.03 777 15.31 6.97
2006 18.24 6.48 119 13.70 6.77 2080 16.17 6.61 487 15.97 6.96 1348 16.48 6.86 924 15.19 6.94
2007 18.57 6.47 125 14.34 6.98 2171 16.40 6.61 528 16.56 7.15 1287 16.76 7.11 967 15.68 7.10
2008 18.65 5.92 48 14.33 6.73 1049 16.32 6.69 267 16.00 7.00 585 17.18 6.81 456 15.58 6.89
Overall 18.12 6.56 683 13.87 6.85 12158 16.18 6.68 2911 15.88 6.87 8971 16.61 6.95 5350 15.27 6.96
African–American Asian–American Latino/a White ‘‘Other” Total sample
0.044 0.036
0.021 .019 0.027 0.024
0.073 0.039
0.015 .021 0.042 0.030
0.001 0.028 0.047 .024 0.013 0.016
Note: r
is the correlation for both men and women, whereas r
is the correlation for women and r
is the correlation for men.
p< 0.01.
Table 2
Correlations of NPI sub-scales with year of data collection (1996–2008), separately for each ethnic group.
Authority Exhibitionism Superiority Entitlement Exploitativeness Self-sufficiency Vanity
African–American 0.053 0.029 0.038 0.017 0.008 0.070 0.004
Asian–American 0.017 0.016 0.044
0.006 0.029
Latino/a 0.002 0.003 0.056
0.003 0.012 0.039 0.002
White 0.011 0.013 0.022 0.008 0.037
0.007 0.026
Other 0.021 0.003 0.040
0.002 0.017 0.026 0.029
Total sample 0.010 0.009 0.031
0.005 0.024
p< 0.01.
500 M.B. Donnellan et al. / Journal of Research in Personality 43 (2009) 498–501
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.).
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Hyde, J. S. (2005). The gender similarities hypothesis. American Psychologist, 60, 581–592.
Konrath, S., Bushman, B. J., & Campbell, W. K. (2006). Attenuating the link between
threatened egotism and aggression. Psychological Science, 17, 995–1001.
Raskin, R., & Terry, H. (1988). A principal-components analysis of the Narcissistic
Personality Inventory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 890–902.
Robinson, W. S. (1950). Ecological correlations and the behavior of individuals.
American Sociological Review, 15, 351–357.
Rosenbloom, S. (2008). Generation me vs. you revisited.<
2008/01/17/fashion/17narcissism.html?fta=y&pagewanted=all> Retrieved
Rosenthal, R., Rosnow, R. L., & Rubin, D. B. (2000). Contrasts and effect sizes in
research: A correlational approach. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Trzesniewski, K. H., Donnellan, M. B., & Robins, R. W. (2008a). Do today’s young
people really think they are so extraordinary? An examination of secular
changes in narcissism and self-enhancement. Psychological Science, 19,
Trzesniewski, K. H., Donnellan, M. B., & Robins, R. W. (2008b). Is ‘‘Generation Me”
really more narcissistic than previous generations? Journal of Personality, 76,
Twenge, J. M. (2006). Generation Me: Why today’s young Americans are more
confident, assertive, entitled–and more miserable than ever before. New York: Free
Twenge, J. M. (2008). Generation Me, the origins of birth cohort differences in
personality traits, and cross-temporal meta-analysis. Social and Personality
Psychology Compass.
Twenge, J. M., & Foster, J. D. (2008). Mapping the scale of the narcissism epidemic:
Increases in narcissism 2002-2007 within ethnic groups. Journal of Research in
Personality, 42, 1619–1622.
Twenge, J. M., Konrath, S., Foster, J. D., Campbell, W. K., & Bushman, B. J. (2008a).
Egos inflating over time: a cross-temporal meta-analysis of the Narcissistic
Personality Inventory. Journal of Personality, 76, 875–901.
Twenge, J. M., Konrath, S., Foster, J. D., Campbell, W. K., & Bushman, B. J. (2008b).
Further evidence of an increase in narcissism among college students. Journal of
Personality, 76, 919–927.
M.B. Donnellan et al. / Journal of Research in Personality 43 (2009) 498–501 501
... Trzesniewski and Donnellan (2010) argued, however, the interpretations from the results thus may not be applicable to individual-level associations between psychological trait and time of measurement (e.g., an individual's score on anxiety in 2000)-a problem known as ecological fallacy. A major issue at hand is that correlations based on aggregated scores can be larger or smaller (i.e., bias in the opposite direction) than correlations based on individual scores (see also Donnellan, Trzesniewski, & Robins, 2009;Trzesniewski, Donnellan, & Robins, 2008). ...
Full-text available
Recently, the concept of “generation” has received considerable commentary in academic and popular circles. Millennials—ages 24 to 39 on Election Day 2020—have gained particular attention due to the generation’s size (more than 75 million), spending power (about $1.3 trillion per year), and growing political influence. Accordingly, a host of studies from disciplines such as business, education, political science, and psychology have investigated the nature and possible distinctiveness of Millennials’ beliefs and behaviors. Only limited research, however, has been undertaken exploring the possible effects of generational membership on crime and criminal justice issues. This dissertation seeks to help close this void in the literature. This omission in the research is consequential considering the impact that Millennials’ public opinion might have on the future of the U.S. criminal justice system. Notably, American corrections is in the midst of a historic policy turning point from offender exclusion to offender inclusion. For four decades, the United States was enmeshed in a punitive era during which offenders were removed and/or ostracized from society through exclusionary policies (e.g., mass incarceration, punitive laws, expansion of debilitating collateral sanctions). Beginning around 2010, however, a paradigmatic shift occurred marked by a halt in the growth of prison populations and the spread of inclusionary policies (e.g., prisoner reentry programs, criminal record expungement). In this context, one way to prognosticate if the current changes are likely to continue into the future is to examine Millennials’ views on corrections. If this large generation is supportive of offender inclusion, then its members are likely to be political force favoring progressive policies and reforms as they proceed across their life course. Based on a 2017 opt-in internet panel survey conducted by YouGov (N = 1,000), this dissertation assesses the nature of Millennials’ correctional policy opinions and compares these to the views of other generations. The levels of support for 13 correctional policies are reported, and generational differences are estimated through multivariate analyses. Three correctional themes are explored: (1) public support for punitiveness (the death penalty, court harshness, and punishment as the goal of prisons); (2) offender rehabilitation, reentry, and reintegration (restoration of civil rights, fair-chance hiring, reducing collateral sanctions, expungement of criminal records, general attitudes toward expungement, having the FBI review criminal records); and (3) offender redemption (formal redemption rituals, redeemability). As a result, this study presents the most comprehensive assessment of what Millennials think about American corrections. The main findings of this dissertation are twofold. First, as a generation in and of themselves, Millennials are only modestly punitive but clearly supportive of progressive policies. Millennials favor a rehabilitative correctional orientation, believe in offender redeemability, and prefer policies that reduce exclusion and increase inclusion. Second, generational differences in public support for correctional policies are limited. Regardless of generation, the respondents tend to embrace inclusionary policies. Thus, in the future, Millennials will likely seek to transform the current correctional turning point into a lengthy era of progressive reform—a project that will be similarly endorsed by Americans of all generations.
... Popular writings such as Jean Twenge's (2006) "Generation Me" or Twenge and Campbell's (2009) "Narcissism Epidemic" render a rather pessimistic picture of western societies becoming increasingly self-focused and entitled, while being less bound to social and moral norms. Large-scale studies of trait changes initiated a lively scientific debate on whether narcissism scores increase in western cultures (Barry & Lee-Rowland, 2015;Donnellan, Trzesniewski, & Robins, 2009;Twenge, Konrath, Foster, Campbell, & Bushman, 2008;Wetzel et al., 2017) and are dependent on cultural orientation (Jauk, Breyer, Kanske, & Wakabayashi, 2021;Vater et al., 2018). The strong interest in the past decades also fueled a thorough research program on what exactly constitutes narcissism as a personality trait and as a clinical disorder, what are its antecedents, and its personal and interpersonal consequences. ...
Full-text available
Narcissism is a Janusian personality construct, associated with both grandiose self-assuredness and dominance, as well as vulnerable insecurity and reactivity. Central questions of intra-and interpersonal functioning in narcissism are still a matter of debate. Neuroscience could help to understand the paradoxical patterns of experience and behavior beyond the limitations of self-reports. We provide a systematic review of 34 neuroscience studies on grandiose, vulnerable, pathological narcissism, and Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD), spanning experimental investigations of intra-and interpersonal mechanisms, research on neurophysiological and neuroendocrine aspects of baseline function, and brain structural correlates. While neurosci-ence has scarcely directly studied vulnerable narcissism, grandiose narcissism is associated with heightened vigilance to ego threat and stress responses following ego threat, as well as heightened stress indicators in baseline measures. Such responses are not commonly observed in self-reports, highlighting the potential of neuroscience to augment our understanding of self-regulatory dynamics in narcissism. Interpersonal functioning is characterized by deficits in social-affective processes. Both involve altered activity within the salience network, pointing to a double dissociation regarding the expression of narcissism and self/other oriented situa-tional focus. Findings are summarized in an integrative model providing testable hypotheses for future research along with methodological recommendations.
... The concept of narcissism is clearly rooted in Western cultures: originating in Greek mythology 2000 years ago, it was picked up by psychodynamic theorists in central Europe at the beginning of the twentieth century (e.g., Freud, 1914), and listed as a mental disorder in the United States in 1980(American Psychiatric Association, 1980. In the past decades, a lively debate flourished on the question whether and how (grandiose) narcissism is tied to cultural changes in Western countries (e.g., Donnellan et al., 2009) or different sociopolitical systems within the Western world (Vater et al., 2018). While this research highlights that the individual is situated in a cultural context, and changes in this context also echo in individual personality (Vater et al., 2018), there is to date little research investigating narcissism across fundamentally different cultures, thereby also stepping beyond the cultural context in which the concept originated. ...
Full-text available
Narcissism can manifest in a grandiose form-admiration-seeking, exhibitionism, and dominance-or a vulnerable form-anxiety, withdrawal, and hypersensitivity. While grandiose narcissism is conceptually in line with an independent self-construal, as prevalent in Western countries, the vulnerable form can be assumed to relate more to an interdependent self-construal, as prevalent in Eastern countries. We studied both forms of narcissism in Germany and Japan (Ns = 258, 280), which differ fundamentally in their independent and interdependent self-construal, yet are similar regarding global developmental standards. We tested whether (1) mean differences in both narcissism forms would conform to the predominant self-construal, (2) self-construal would explain variance in narcissism beyond broad personality traits, and (3) there would be stronger mental health tradeoffs for culturally incongruent forms of narcissism. Our results largely confirm these expectations for vulnerable narcissism, which is (1) more prevalent in Japan than Germany, (2) related to self-construal beyond broad traits, and, (3) more strongly related to mental health problems in Germany than Japan. For grandiose narcissism, data analyses indicated that construct equivalence can only be assumed for the entitlement factor, and internal structure and nomological networks differ substantially between cultural contexts.
... Quilley, for example, believes that societal collapse is likely, and that the new society must emerge on the basis of reorganizing the released resources into an entirely new system based on a gifting and livelihood economy-which is an economy engrained in family and kin relationships, greater dependence on the community, and is rooted in place-bound networks. This deemphasizes personal identity and in favor of community wellbeing [88][89][90][91][92]. Channeling Naess [93], Spash favors a more philosophical and culture-oriented "deep ecological economics" that emphasizes ethical conduct and environmental values as primary indicators and motivators for economic wellbeing. ...
Full-text available
As a discipline, ecological economics is at a turning point and there is a need to develop a new research agenda for ecological economics that will contribute to the creation and adoption of new economic institutions. There are still considerable environmental issues and a new generation of scholars ready to tackle them. In this paper and Special Issue, we highlight the voices of emerging scholars in ecological economics who put social justice squarely at the center of ecological economic research. The papers in this issue remain true to the central focus of economic downscaling while calling for greater emphasis on culture and society. We acknowledge that methodological and intellectual pluralism inherently entail tensions but strive to find shared normative foundations to collectively work toward socio-ecological transformations. In this editorial, we emphasize the need for further attention to social aspects of ecological economics and evolutionary approaches to further strengthen cooperation.
W przedstawionym artykule przybliżam teoretyczne ramy Projektu Bohaterskiej Wyobraźni (ang. Heroic Imagination Project – HIP), jego charakter i specyfikę – zmieniających oblicze edukacji – interwencji odnoszących się do procesów psychologicznych, powiązanych z motywacją i osiągnięciami młodzieży szkolnej (Dickerson, Wilkins i Zimbardo, 2013). Na bazie przeprowadzonego we wrześniu 2013 roku wywiadu z profesorem Zimbardo wyjaśniam naturę heroizmu wkomponowaną w założenia programu Rozumienie Ludzkiej Natury (ang. Understanding Human Nature – UHN) oraz jego znaczenie dla indywidualnej, społecznej i kulturowej rzeczywistości, w której funkcjonują uczniowie polskich szkół.
Full-text available
Researchers, theorists, and practitioners have expressed a renewed interest in the longitudinal dynamics of personality characteristics in adulthood, including organic life span trajectories and their amenability to volitional change. However, this research has apparently not yet expanded to include the Dark Triad (psychopathy, narcissism, Machiavellianism), despite approximately 2 decades of research that has thoroughly examined other important issues related to construct validity and interpersonal behavior. We argue that researchers in postsecondary, occupational, and community‐based settings are in a unique position to study the important phenomenon of Dark Triad malleability, as they are less hindered by obstacles in clinical and forensic contexts that have generated largely inconclusive results. In this article, we discuss several examples of methods for evaluating, quantifying, and interpreting Dark Triad malleability, examples of relevant extant training programs, possibilities for developing new programs, and factors that may moderate training efficacy, including Dark Triad levels themselves. Beyond addressing a fundamental question regarding the nature of these traits, the Dark Triad's destructive tendencies suggest that efforts to reduce them would provide myriad societal benefits and could propel Dark Triad research in an important new direction.
Objective: Otto F. Kernberg pioneered the description, understanding, and treatment of pathological narcissism. Narcissism has emerged as a clinical construct of considerable interest in clinical psychology, psychiatry, and psychoanalysis and has often been featured in the literature on personality and social psychology. Considerable discussion in recent years has focused on whether levels of narcissism seen among young adults have been increasing. Nearly all of that discussion has been focused on changes in successive cohorts in normative (normal-range) expressions of narcissism. No direct prospective longitudinal study of the same individuals has assessed for pathological narcissism during college, the period that has been the specific focus of such lively debate. This study aimed to fill that gap in the literature. Methods: This multiwave, longitudinal study explored pathological narcissism during college by enrolling first-year undergraduate students (N=250) from the Longitudinal Study of Personality Disorders and by using individual growth curve (IGC) analysis. Participants were assigned to either a possible personality disorder or no personality disorder group, according to results from the International Personality Disorder Examination. Results: By the third wave of assessments, 16% of the sample received a probable or definite diagnosis of at least one axis II personality disorder. IGC analysis revealed that pathological narcissism declined across the first 4 years of college. Personality predictors of this pattern of change are also discussed. Conclusions: This study highlights the need for a fine-grained prospective study of the same participants over time to illuminate patterns of change in narcissism.
With the formal modern work organisation having taken birth about 100 years ago, we today have a workforce that has representation from many generations. This has led to a need to have an empathic view to the needs of this generationally diverse workforce in terms of culture, benefits, workflows, technology and organisational design. Some researchers have argued that every successive generation is becoming more narcissistic than the previous ones. Does this finding also apply to the organisational context? Is narcissism becoming rampant in organisations, how different generations of employees deal with it? This study is a novel attempt to address these questions.
The Millennial Generation is frequently identified with narcissistic behavior. However, less work has examined the narcissism of the subsequent generational cohort, Generation Z. In this article, we review the literature on the relationship between narcissism and undergraduate academic major in a college of business, campus involvement, and several demographic variables. We then conduct a study ( N = 660) to evaluate subclinical narcissism and its relationship to those choices and traits among contemporary undergraduate business college students using the Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI) and the Single Item Narcissism Scale (SINS). Results reveal one of the highest mean NPI scores in the literature, corroborating prior findings concerning elevated narcissism among business students and providing a piece of evidence concerning intergenerational narcissism. Then, using a set of regression models, we find that NPI scores are higher among finance majors, leaders of student organizations, males, younger students, extrinsically religious students, and non-White students. The SINS is supported as a valid measure of subclinical narcissism. We then discuss how these findings have influenced our approach to course policy and classroom management, and we outline directions for future research based on this exploratory study of Generation Z college students.
Cambridge Core - Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology - Social Factors in the Personality Disorders - by Joel Paris
Full-text available
Many psychological tests have arbitrary metrics but are appropriate for testing psychological theories. Metric arbitrariness is a concern, however, when researchers wish to draw inferences about the true, absolute standing of a group or individual on the latent psychological dimension being measured. The authors illustrate this in the context of 2 case studies in which psychologists need to develop inventories with nonarbitrary metrics. One example comes from social psychology, where researchers have begun using the Implicit Association Test to provide the lay public with feedback about their "hidden biases" via popular Internet Web pages. The other example comes from clinical psychology, where researchers often wish to evaluate the real-world importance of interventions. As the authors show, both pursuits require researchers to conduct formal research that makes their metrics nonarbitrary by linking test scores to meaningful real-world events.
Contrasts are statistical procedures for asking focused questions of data. Compared to diffuse or omnibus questions, focused questions are characterized by greater conceptual clarity and greater statistical power when examining those focused questions. If an effect truly exists, we are more likely to discover it and to believe it to be real when asking focused questions rather than omnibus ones. Researchers, teachers of research methods and graduate students will be familiar with the principles and procedures of contrast analysis, but will also be introduced to a series of newly developed concepts, measures, and indices that permit a wider and more useful application of contrast analysis. This volume takes on this new approach by introducing a family of correlational effect size estimates.
Birth cohort, or generation, differences in personality include views of the self (increases in self-esteem, narcissism, assertiveness, and agentic traits, leading to the label ‘Generation Me’) and mental health (externality in locus of control, increases in depressive symptoms). The origins of these trends lie in culture, including changes in women's roles, parenting, media, and social connections. Birth cohort should be considered as an environmental influence on individual personality traits. Challenges to cross-temporal meta-analysis are discussed, including response bias, changes in college populations, data from the University of California campuses with major confounds, sampling issues, and the misperception that the ecological fallacy is committed.
[Twenge, J. M., Konrath, S., Foster, J. D., Campbell, W. K., & Bushman, B. J. (2008a). Egos inflating over time: A cross-temporal meta-analysis of the Narcissistic Personality Inventory. Journal of Personality, 76, 875–901.] found that Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI) scores increased between 1982 and 2006 among college students nationwide, but [Trzesniewski, K. H., Donnellan, M. B., & Robins, R. W. (2008). Do today’s young people really think they are so extraordinary? An examination of secular changes in narcissism and self-enhancement. Psychological Science, 19, 181–188.] found that NPI scores remained unchanged over that time in samples from the University of California (UC) campuses. The increasing numbers of Asian-Americans at the UCs over time may have masked changes in narcissism, as Asian-Americans score lower on the NPI. When examined within ethnic groups, Trzesniewski et al.’s data show that NPI scores increased significantly between 2002 and 2007 at twice the rate of the yearly change found over 24 years in Twenge et al. (2008a). The overall means also show a significant increase 2002–2007. Thus the available evidence suggests that college students are endorsing progressively more narcissistic personality traits over the generations.
We examined the internal and external validity of the Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI). Study 1 explored the internal structure of the NPI responses of 1,018 subjects. Using principal-components analysis, we analyzed the tetrachoric correlations among the NPI item responses and found evidence for a general construct of narcissism as well as seven first-order components, identified as Authority, Exhibitionism, Superiority, Vanity, Exploitativeness, Entitlement, and Self-Sufficiency. Study 2 explored the NPI's construct validity with respect to a variety of indexes derived from observational and self-report data in a sample of 57 subjects. Study 3 investigated the NPI's construct validity with respect to 128 subject's self and ideal self-descriptions, and their congruency, on the Leary Interpersonal Check List. The results from Studies 2 and 3 tend to support the construct validity of the full-scale NPI and its component scales.
The differences model, which argues that males and females are vastly different psychologically, dominates the popular media. Here, the author advances a very different view, the gender similarities hypothesis, which holds that males and females are similar on most, but not all, psychological variables. Results from a review of 46 meta-analyses support the gender similarities hypothesis. Gender differences can vary substantially in magnitude at different ages and depend on the context in which measurement occurs. Overinflated claims of gender differences carry substantial costs in areas such as the workplace and relationships.