No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Comparing the construct validity of scales derived from the Narcissistic Personality Inventory: A reply to Rosenthal and Hooley (2010)
Abstract
Rosenthal and Hooley (2010) suggested that the Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI) includes items that are tangential to narcissism. They demonstrated that the removal of these items resulted in scores that are not confounded by self-esteem. We tested whether NPI scales derived from Rosenthal and Hooley’s included (NPI-N) and excluded (NPI-X) items manifest divergent relations with self-esteem, entitlement, distress, NPD, and general traits in two samples of undergraduates. The scales generated similar patterns of correlations, although the NPI-N items were more strongly related to (dis)Agreeableness, whereas the NPI-X items were more strongly related to Extraversion. Ultimately, the NPI-X items bore significant relations to constructs central to grandiose narcissism and do not seem to have caused problems in the assessment of narcissism.
... For example, aside from being negatively related to agree-ableness, narcissism was also positively related to openness and extraversion, but unrelated to conscientiousness (Paulhus & Williams, 2002;Vernon et al., 2008). Some studies have found similar results with samples of undergraduate students (negative correlation with agreeableness, positive correlations with extraversion and no significant correlation with conscientiousness); however, they found that narcissism was also negatively correlated with neuroticism (Bradlee & Emmons, 1992;Miller, Maples, & Campbell, 2011). All of these studies were conducted with student populations. ...
... We found, that narcissism was positively related to extraversion and negatively related to agreeableness; confirming the statement made about narcissists being ''disagreeable extraverts'' (Paulhus, 2001). In fact, the only two FFM traits that were significantly related to narcis-sism in all of the student sample-based studies we found were agreeableness and extraversion (Bradlee & Emmons, 1992;Miller et al., 2011;Paulhus & Williams, 2002;Vernon et al., 2008). Furthermore, some of these previous studies had found significant associations between narcissism and openness (Paulhus & Williams, 2002;Vernon et al., 2008); our results showed the same significant relationship. ...
Narcissism has been studied in relation to leadership and productivity in the workplace. However, few studies have been conducted on how narcissism influences work attitudes. The first goal of this study is to measure the association between narcissism and the five factor model (FFM) of personality in an organizational sample. The second goal is to measure the influence of narcissism on job satisfaction when controlling for FFM traits. A total of 224 employees from a public organization have filled out self-rating measures of job satisfaction, FFM traits and a measure of narcissism. Results indicated that narcissism was positively correlated with FFM extraversion and openness to experience and negatively correlated with agreeableness. Narcissism had a significant influence on job satisfaction, even when controlling for FFM traits. We believe that these results stress the importance of better understanding the role of narcissism in employee attitudes in order to weigh the pros and cons of hiring or promoting narcissistic employees. (c) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
... The two experimental and control groups' comparisons are illustrated in Table 1. Self-Absorption/Self-Admiration, Superiority/Arrogance, and Explo-itativeness/Entitlement, a scale that is highly correlated with pathological narcissism [30]- [36]. ...
... There is considerable evidence demonstrating its validity as a measure of narcissism (e.g., Miller et al., 2011). For example, several studies have reported that total scores on the NPI are moderately to strongly related to interviewbased ratings of narcissistic PD (Fossati et al., 2009;Krusemark et al., 2018;Miller et al., 2009). ...
We examined the validity of self-report measures of narcissism and mania by relating them to interview-based ratings of psychopathology. Narcissism scales were taken from the Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI), the Personality Diagnostic Questionnaire–4+, and the Short Dark Triad. Mania measures included the Altman Self-Rated Mania Scale (ASRM) and scales taken from the Hypomanic Personality Scale (HPS) and Expanded Version of the Inventory of Depression and Anxiety Symptoms. Our analyses addressed two key issues. The first issue was whether these scales demonstrated significant criterion validity (e.g., whether the HPS scales correlated significantly with interview ratings of mania). The second issue was whether they displayed specificity to their target constructs (e.g., whether the NPI scales correlated more strongly with ratings of narcissistic personality disorder than with other forms of psychopathology). All of the narcissism scales—including all three NPI subscales—correlated significantly with interview ratings of narcissistic personality disorder and showed considerable evidence of diagnostic specificity. Most of the mania scales also displayed good criterion validity and diagnostic specificity. However, two measures—the ASRM and the HPS Social Vitality subscale—had weak, nonsignificant associations with interview ratings of manic episodes; these findings raise concerns regarding their validity as specific indicators of mania.
... Although significant advances have been made in articulating the empirical network of narcissism, there remain important and fundamental disagreements as to the conceptualization and assessment of narcissism (Brown, Budzek, & Tamborski, 2009;Cain, Pincus, & Ansell, 2008;Miller, Maples, & Campbell, 2011;Rosenthal & Hooley, 2010). Some of this confusion is likely the result of a previous failure in the literature to distinguish between grandiose and vulnerable narcissism (Dickinson & Pincus, 2003;Miller & Campbell, 2008;Wink, 1991). ...
The Narcissistic Grandiosity Scale (NGS) is a short adjective-based measure of narcissistic grandiosity (Rosenthal, Hooley, & Steshenko, 2007). The NGS has already shown promise as a measure of grandiose narcissism, but it has never been the subject of a formal validation study. In the current study (N = 870 across 3 samples), the factor structure of NGS was examined and item response theory analyses were used to generate abbreviated versions of the scale. The NGS scales' relations to measures of grandiose and vulnerable narcissism, the five-factor model (FFM), the interpersonal circumplex, self-esteem, and the Personality Inventory of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders-Fifth Edition (DSM-5, PID-5) were assessed. The correlation profile of the NGS was also correlated with expert ratings of prototypical cases of narcissistic personality disorder using both the FFM and PID-5 trait profiles. Overall, the NGS was found to be a unidimensional measure of narcissistic grandiosity with good convergent, discriminant, and criterion validity. The abbreviated versions of the NGS manifested strong reliability and associations entirely consistent with the full version. (PsycINFO Database Record
... The Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI; Raskin and Hall 1979;Raskin and Terry 1988) is the most widely used measure of grandiose narcissism. Nevertheless, a variety of psychometric and theoretical limitations of the NPI have been reported in the literature, such as low subscale reliability (Corry et al. 2008;del Rosario and White 2005;Foster and Campbell 2007) and controversial content coverage (Miller et al. 2011;Rosenthal and Hooley 2010;Rosenthal et al. 2011). A third psychometric issue that is the focus of the present research concerns the use of a total NPI score to measure narcissistic personality. ...
The Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI) is the most widely used measure of narcissism in the social-personality psychology literature. It contains 40 items that tap into a variety of traits that theoretically comprise narcissism, such as feelings of superiority and willingness to exploit others. Most researchers focus on the total score produced by the NPI and may logically assume that increments in total NPI score correspond with similar increments in underlying narcissism traits. However, research presented in this article suggests that the traits measured by the NPI do not increment at the same rate. Traits reflecting intrapersonally healthy qualities (e.g., leadership, superiority) increment most rapidly within the lower portions of the NPI total score continuum, whereas traits reflecting interpersonally harmful qualities (e.g., entitlement, exploitativeness) increment most rapidly within the upper portions of the NPI continuum. These differences have implications for the meaning of scores on the NPI and how they correlate with other variables. For example, we demonstrate that lower NPI scores best predict self-esteem and higher NPI scores best predict psychopathy.
... Existing data also confirms that although positive, correlations between Honesty-Humility and narcissism have the smallest magnitude compared to other Dark Triad traits (Lee & Ashton, 2005). Indirectly, the results suggest that, despite the low reliability, the validity of the NPI is unbiased (Miller, Maples, & Campbell, 2011;Miller, Price, & Campbell, 2012) and that it accurately assesses narcissistic traits. However, there is an additional trait that turned to be important in the explanation of the narcissistic traits in a very interesting manner: Grandiose/exhibitionism loaded positively and Entitlement/exploitativeness loaded negatively on the Agreeableness factor. ...
Machiavellianism, narcissism, and psychopathy are personality traits understood to be dispositions toward amoral and antisocial behavior. Recent research has suggested that sadism should also be added to this set of traits. In the present study, we tested a hypothesis proposing that these four traits are expressions of one superordinate construct: The Dark Tetrad. Exploration of the latent space of four “dark” traits suggested that the singular second-order factor which represents the Dark Tetrad can be extracted. Analysis has shown that Dark Tetrad traits can be located in the space of basic personality traits, especially on the negative pole of the Honesty-Humility, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, and Emotionality dimensions. We conclude that sadism behaves in a similar manner as the other dark traits, but it cannot be reduced to them. The results support the concept of “Dark Tetrad.”
... Participants responded to each item presented in a dichotomous True/ False format (e.g., "I am going to be a great person"). This measure has been widely used and shown to have adequate psychometric properties Miller, Maples, & Campbell, 2011;Raskin & Terry, 1988). In the present study Cronbach's alpha for the NPI total was .78. ...
... As we have argued elsewhere, we believe it is beneficial for the study of narcissism that attention is being devoted to the development of alternative assessment strategies outside of the NPI (Miller, Maples, & Campbell, 2011). We also believe, however, that a more cautious approach is warranted when discussing the replacement or obsolescence of the NPI, a well-known and validated assessment of grandiose narcissism, with lesser known and less well-validated instruments such as the NGS, PES, or the grandiose subscales of the PNI. ...
Some scholars have called for the replacement of the Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI) with more narrow scales measuring grandiosity and entitlement instead. In the current study, the authors examined the relations among the NPI and measures of grandiosity and entitlement, as well as in relation to a measure of the Five-Factor Model (FFM). The NPI manifested significant correlations with the alternative scales of entitlement and grandiosity and relatively similar patterns of correlations with the FFM traits. Of note, the NPI manifested significant incremental validity in the prediction of several FFM traits that are central to the conceptualization of narcissism. These findings suggest that some caution must be used before assuming that these lower-order scales can be used to replace the NPI in the assessment of narcissism.
The purpose of this study was to investigate the self-esteem and exploitation of elite and non-elite athletes. This research is applied and descriptive survey method. The statistical population included all 500 elite and non-elite athletes of men and women in East Azarbaijan province. Sample size was calculated on basis of Cochran formula for unlimited society as 384 people, and finally 360 completed questionnaires. Data was collected by Russkin & Terry's (1988) narcissistic questionnaire. Kolmogorov-Smirnov test was used to investigate natural distribution of data. After identifying abnormal data of research, non-parametric U-Mann-Whitney statistical method was used to examine the difference between the variables and to prioritize the variables by Friedman test. The results showed that there is a difference between self-esteem and exploitation in elite and non-elite athletes.
We examined affection-giving, affection-denying, respect-giving, and respect-denying behaviors among men and women in heterosexual relationships. In a pilot study (N = 106 couples), although we had expected the latent variables of affectionate and respectful behaviors to emerge from exploratory factor analyses, we obtained the latent variables of socioemotional rewards and costs instead. In the main study (initial N = 182 couples), we replicated the factor patterns of socioemotional rewards and costs in confirmatory factor analyses. Moreover, we entered (final N = 177 couples) men’s and women’s self-reported narcissism alongside men’s and women’s socioemotional rewards and costs, as reported by partners, into a dyadic model that we tested via covariance structure analyses. Results revealed that, although men and women reciprocated rewards as well as costs (and correlations between individuals’ rewards and costs were negative), narcissism was not reflected in the patterns of reciprocity (men’s and women’s narcissism were positively related.) We discuss implications for studies of relationship processes as two-person group dynamics.
This chapter reviews the current state of the narcissism and NPD literature highlighting areas of progress, points of continued debate, and areas for future research. After a brief review of narcissism’s origins, current conceptualizations of the construct are discussed beginning first with NPD and continuing with narcissism’s grandiose and vulnerable dimensions. Grandiose narcissism represents the prototypical manifestation of the construct, while vulnerable narcissism is more commonly observed in clinical settings. A review of grandiose and vulnerable narcissisms’ nomological networks makes it clear that both manifestations can yield significant impairment, albeit of different forms. Converging evidence for a three-dimensional (i.e., “trifurcated”) model of narcissism, which allows for an integrated understanding of its grandiose and vulnerable dimensions is presented. We argue that general application of the trifurcated model is necessary to provide further clarity to the narcissism literature. The “oscillation hypothesis” (i.e., that narcissistic individuals fluctuate between grandiose and vulnerable presentations) is highlighted as an area of continued debate and emerging measures capable of investigating narcissistic fluctuation are identified. The chapter concludes with a review of self-report measures of narcissism and recommendations using the trifurcated model to guide scale selection decisions.
In recent years, there has been a dramatic increase in the number of measures available to researchers who study grandiose narcissism (GN). The purpose of this chapter is to provide a brief overview of some of the more popular measures of GN. Some of these measures attempt to capture GN as a single dimension, some as a multidimensional construct, and some tap into GN along with other related traits, such as vulnerable narcissism and psychopathy. Finally, some measures may be thought of as "special interest" measures that capture variants of GN, such as communal narcissism, as well as GN in special populations, such as children and adolescents. Although not intended to provide a fully exhaustive review of GN measures, this chapter should provide readers an idea about what is available in terms of GN measurement and best practices for assessing GN in the research context. In particular, researchers are encouraged to use multiple measures of GN whenever possible and employ statistical techniques that take advantage of psychometric diversity, such as structural equation modeling. © Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018.
Objective
Despite decades of work on narcissism there remain many active areas of exploration and debate including a clear and consensual description of its underlying components. Understanding narcissism's factor structure is necessary for precise measurement and investigation of specific psychological and behavioral processes. The aim of the current study was to explore the structure of narcissism by examining it at varying hierarchical levels.
Method
Participants recruited from Amazon's Mechanical Turk (N = 591) completed 303 narcissism items encompassing 46 narcissism scales and subscales. Criterion variables measuring the Five Factor Model, self‐esteem, aggression, and externalizing behavior were also collected.
Results
A series of factor analyses reveal the factor structure of narcissism at a range of specificities. No more than five meaningful factors (i.e., Grandiosity, Neuroticism, Antagonism, Distrustful Self‐reliance, Attention‐seeking) were identified and the most parsimonious model appears to be a three‐factor structure. Narcissism scales that effectively capture each of the identified factors are identified. Factors diverged in their associations with criterion variables.
Conclusions
A three‐factor model (i.e., Agentic Extraversion, Narcissistic Neuroticism, Self‐centered Antagonism) seems to be the most parsimonious conceptualization. Larger factor solutions are discussed, but future research will be necessary to determine the value of these increasingly narrow factors.
This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Objective: Despite decades of work on narcissism there remain many active areas of exploration and debate including a clear and consensual description of its underlying components. Understanding narcissism’s factor structure is necessary for precise measurement and investigation of specific psychological and behavioral processes. The aim of the current study was to explore the structure of narcissism by examining it at varying hierarchical levels. Method: Participants recruited from Amazon’s Mechanical Turk (N = 591) completed 303 narcissism items encompassing 46 narcissism scales and subscales. Criterion variables measuring the Five Factor Model, self-esteem, aggression, and externalizing behavior were also collected. Results: A series of factor analyses reveal the factor structure of narcissism at a range of specificities. No more than five meaningful factors (i.e., Grandiosity, Neuroticism, Antagonism, Distrustful Self-reliance, Attention-seeking) were identified and the most parsimonious model appears to be a three-factor structure. Narcissism scales that effectively capture each of the identified factors are identified. Factors diverged in their associations with criterion variables. Conclusions: A three-factor model (i.e., Agentic Extraversion, Narcissistic Neuroticism, Self-centered Antagonism) seems to be the most parsimonious conceptualization. Larger factor solutions are discussed, but future research will be necessary to determine the value of these increasingly narrow factors.
Researchers agree that there are two narcissism expressions, specifically grandiose and vulnerable narcissism. However, their assessment remains contentious. The Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI; Raskin & Terry, 1988) assesses all aspects of grandiose narcissism for some whereas critics claim it assesses only ‘normal narcissism’. The alternative measure, the Pathological Narcissism Inventory (PNI; Pincus et al., 2009), is proposed to measure all aspects of grandiose and vulnerable narcissism, including that which is clinically-significant, despite inconsistent evidence of the nature of its second-order factors and little empirical validation in clinical populations.
The aim of the research reported in this thesis was to adapt the NPI and the PNI to provide more appropriate measures of grandiose and vulnerable narcissism. This was investigated using four separate samples of university undergraduates. A total of 745 students completed a number of measures, including the NPI and PNI, along with self- esteem and Five-Factor personality measures. Additionally, one sample completed a lexical decision task designed to measure self-esteem indirectly (i.e., implicit self- esteem).
As the focus of studies previously investigating how best to assess narcissistic grandiosity and vulnerability has been on content that distinguishes each, there has been little exploration of which narcissism features are common to these expressions beyond the investigation of entitlement and exploitative tendencies. It is argued in this thesis that comprehensive assessment of the narcissism expressions involves the identification and measurement of both common and unique features of narcissism.
The current research examined the items loading on the subscales of the NPI and PNI before using these adapted subscales to construct new measures of the narcissism expressions. Items measuring common features of narcissism were first identified and distinguished from those assessing unique features of the expressions using factor analyses. The results of these analyses were used to construct new measures. The associations of these measures with proposed correlates of narcissism were compared to those of the PNI grandiosity and vulnerability measures.
Five separate studies were conducted. In Studies 1 and 2, the factor structures of the NPI and PNI were of interest because the results of previous studies have failed to replicate findings. Accordingly, these scales were submitted to exploratory factor analyses. In most cases, the original subscales of these measures reported by Raskin and Terry (1988) and Pincus and colleagues (2009), established using principal components analyses, were found. The NPI and PNI factors, established in Studies 1 and 2, were then used to compare models of grandiose and vulnerable narcissism. One model used PNI subscales alone (i.e., the PNI grandiosity and vulnerabilit y scales), whilst a new model included NPI and PNI subscales to assess both common and unique features of the narcissism expressions. Studies 4 and 5 compared the relationships of both these new measures of grandiose and vulnerable narcissism and the PNI’s second- order grandiosity and vulnerability factors with measures of implicit and explicit self- esteem and the Big-Five domains. The new measures yielded associations consistent with previous research of Five-Factor model personality domains that distinguish the expressions and also support a proposed moderation of explicit self-esteem by implicit self-esteem reflecting the mask model and inverted mask proposition of narcissism. On balance, predicted findings were more consistently found for the new measures than for the PNI grandiosity and vulnerability scales.
Taken together, the results of this research program indicate that the newly-developed measures which consider common features at the core of narcissism are more appropriate measures of grandiosity and vulnerability than the PNI subscales. It is also concluded that both the NPI and the PNI are required to assess both narcissism expressions. Future research could further examine subsets of characteristics that distinguish the expressions within identified common features. For example, previous research (e.g., Besser & Priel, 2010; Raskin, Novacek, & Hogan, 1991b) suggests that the common feature of attention seeking, is expressed as a craving for admiration in narcissistic grandiosity but as a need for approval, in vulnerability. The new measures, using established NPI and PNI subscales, do not currently target such distinctions.
The Five-Factor Narcissism Inventory (FFNI) is a self-report measure of the traits linked to grandiose and vulnerable narcissism, as well as narcissistic personality disorder (NPD), from a five-factor model perspective (FFM). In the current studies, the factor structure of the FFNI was explored and the results supported the extraction of three factors: Antagonism (e.g., Arrogance), Neuroticism (e.g., Need for Admiration), and Agentic Extraversion (e.g., Authoritativeness). In Study 2, the FFNI factors manifested convergent validity with their corresponding Big Five domains and diverging relations with measures of grandiose and vulnerable narcissism, NPD, and selfesteem. Ultimately, the FFNI factors help explicate the differences between various expressions of narcissism such that all are related to Antagonism but differ with regard to Neuroticism (relevant to vulnerable narcissism and NPD) and Agentic Extraversion (relevant to grandiose narcissism and NPD). The results also highlight the complex relation between self-esteem and the traits that comprise narcissism measures.
We examined the relationships between Machiavellianism, narcissism, and psychopathy—the three traits of the Dark Triad (DT)—and the Five Factor Model (FFM) of personality. The review identified 310 independent samples drawn from 215 sources and yielded information pertaining to global trait relationships and facet-level relationships. We used meta-analysis to examine (a) the bivariate relations between the DT and the five global traits and 30 facets of the FFM; (b) the relative importance of each of the FFM global traits in predicting DT; and (c) the relationship between the DT and FFM facets identified in translational models of narcissism and psychopathy. These analyses identified consistent and theoretically meaningful associations between the DT traits and the facets of the FFM. The five traits of the FFM, in a relative importance analysis, accounted for much of the variance in Machiavellianism, narcissism, and psychopathy, respectively, and facet-level analyses identified specific facets of each FFM trait that were consistently associated with narcissism (e.g., angry/hostility, modesty) and psychopathy (e.g., straightforwardness, deliberation). The FFM explained nearly all of the variance in psychopathy (R2c = .88) and a substantial portion of the variance in narcissism (R2c = .42).
Schlüsselwörter ● ▶ Narzissmus ● ▶ NPI-15 ● ▶ Dimensionalität ● ▶ repräsentative Bevölke-rungsstichprobe Keywords ● ▶ narcissism ● ▶ NPI-15 ● ▶ dimensionality ● ▶ representative sample gibt es keinen Konsens darüber, ob normaler und pathologischer Narzissmus die Enden eines Kon-tinuums bilden oder vielmehr 2 distinkte Eigen-schaften darstellen [ 2 ] . Das Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI) Ein weitverbreitetes Verfahren zur Messung von Narzissmus ist das Narcissistic Personality Inven-tory (NPI) [ 1 , 3 , 4 ] . Bei der Entwicklung des NPI standen die Kriterien für Narzisstische Persön-lichkeitsstörung nach DSM-III Pate, sodass das NPI auch den Anspruch erhebt, problematische, d. h. maladaptive, narzisstische Verhaltensweisen zu erfassen [ 4 ] . Die Konstruktvalidität des NPI wurde in den letzten Jahren vermehrt kritisch diskutiert [ 5 – 8 ] . Empirische Befunde zu Kosten und Nutzen von Narzissmus, die den NPI als Ver-fahren benutzen, sind widersprüchlich. Einer-Hintergrund ▼ Narzissmus als Persönlichkeitskonstrukt Neben der Erforschung von Narzissmus im klini-schen Bereich wurde in der sozial-oder persön-lichkeitspsychologischen Forschung Narzissmus in den letzten Jahrzehnten auch als Persönlich-keitseigenschaft konzeptualisiert und untersucht [ 1 ] . Schwierig ist, dass es sowohl zwischen ver-schiedenen Disziplinen als auch innerhalb dieser Unterschiede in der Konzeptualisierung von Nar-zissmus gibt [ 1 , 2 ] . Narzissmus wird verstanden als die Fähigkeit zur Erhaltung eines positiven Selbstbildes (z. B. durch Selbst-oder Aff ektregu-lation). Diese regulatorischen Strategien können sowohl adaptiv als auch maladaptiv sein, sodass zumeist zwischen normalem und pathologi-schem Narzissmus unterschieden wird. Bislang
The growing interest in the study of narcissism has resulted in the development of a number of assessment instruments that manifest only modest to moderate convergence. The present studies adjudicate among these measures with regard to criterion validity. In the 1st study, we compared multiple narcissism measures to expert consensus ratings of the personality traits associated with narcissistic personality disorder (NPD; Study 1; N = 98 community participants receiving psychological/psychiatric treatment) according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed., text rev.; DSM-IV-TR; American Psychiatric Association, 2000) using 5-factor model traits as well as the traits associated with the pathological trait model according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.; American Psychiatric Association, 2013). In Study 2 (N = 274 undergraduates), we tested the criterion validity of an even larger set of narcissism instruments by examining their relations with measures of general and pathological personality, as well as psychopathology, and compared the resultant correlations to the correlations expected by experts for measures of grandiose and vulnerable narcissism. Across studies, the grandiose dimensions from the Five-Factor Narcissism Inventory (FFNI; Glover, Miller, Lynam, Crego, & Widiger, 2012) and the Narcissistic Personality Inventory (Raskin & Terry, 1988) provided the strongest match to expert ratings of DSM-IV-TR NPD and grandiose narcissism, whereas the vulnerable dimensions of the FFNI and the Pathological Narcissism Inventory (Pincus et al., 2009), as well as the Hypersensitive Narcissism Scale (Hendin & Cheek, 1997), provided the best match to expert ratings of vulnerable narcissism. These results should help guide researchers toward the selection of narcissism instruments that are most well suited to capturing different aspects of narcissism.
There exists substantial debate about how to best assess pathological narcissism with a variety of measures designed to assess grandiose and vulnerable narcissism, as well as the DSM-IV and DSM-5 based conceptualizations of narcissistic personality disorder (NPD). Wright and colleagues published correlations between several narcissism measures (Narcissistic Personality Inventory [NPI]; Pathological Narcissism Inventory [PNI]; Personality Diagnostic Questionnaire [PDQ] NPD) with the traits comprising the DSM-5 Section III personality trait model. In the current study, we examine the agreement manifested by Wright and colleagues’ narcissism–DSM-5 trait profiles with expert ratings of the DSM-5 traits most relevant to descriptions of DSM-IV NPD. Despite concerns regarding the NPI’s ability to measure pathological narcissism, its trait profile was strongly correlated with expert ratings, as was PDQ NPD’s profile. Conversely, the trait profiles associated with the PNI were primarily uncorrelated with the expert rated NPD profile. The implications of these findings with regard to the assessment of narcissism are discussed.
To investigate the interpersonally relevant personality dimensions narcissism, psychopathy and Machiavellianism (the „Dark Triad“) three different and extensive questionnaires are currently needed. In three studies (N = 501; N = 828; N = 96) two questionnaires to assess the core aspects of the Dark Triad are presented and validated. The first instrument is a translation of the Dirty Dozen scales (Jonason & Webster, 2010), the second a psychometrically optimized version (the Naugthy Nine). The scales, comprising 4 and 3 items, respectively, show a good structure, internal consistencies, and stability. Moreover the scales show sufficient convergent associations to the standard measures of the Dark Triad, differentiated relations to other relevant personality constructs (e.g. Big Five-facets, aggression, sociosexuality) and predict characteristic behaviors. Implications for the assessment of the Dark Triad in research and applied contexts are discussed.
Some forms of personality dysfunction that are associated with substance use and other externalizing behaviors, such as Narcissistic Personality Disorder, are characterized by low five-factor Agreeableness. Low Agreeableness and high Extraversion are both associated with the Behavioral Approach System in the revised Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory of Personality (RST; McNaughton & Corr, 2008). Meta-analyses examining personality predictors of Substance Use Disorders (Kotov et al., 2010) and Pathological Gambling (MacLaren et al., 2011) have implicated low Agreeableness but not Extraversion. In the present study, we sampled undergraduate students (N = 346) to examine relationships between two aspects of grandiose narcissism measured by the Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI), approach motivation measured by the BIS/BAS scales, and self-reported addictive behaviors. Disagreeable and Extraverted subscales of the NPI were examined for possible mediation of associations between BAS and addictive behaviors. The more disagreeable aspect of narcissism mediated the effects of BAS on drug use, gambling, sex, and maladaptive intimate relationships. These results suggest that one mechanism through which the Behavioral Approach System may promote addictive behavior among grandiose Narcissists is through its association with their aggressive and antagonistic interpersonal style.
The most widely used measure of trait narcissism is the Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI), which can provide both total and subscale scores. However, with a length of 40 items, this measure may not be ideal in settings in which time or participant attention may limit the types of measures that can be administered. In response, Ames, Rose, and Anderson (2006) created the NPI-16, which provides a shorter, unidimensional measure of the construct. In the present research, we examine the reliability and validity of the NPI-16 in conjunction with a new short measure of narcissism, the NPI-13, which provides both a total score and 3 subscale scores (Leadership/Authority; Grandiose Exhibitionism; Entitlement/Exploitativeness). Across 2 studies, we demonstrate that both short measures manifest good convergent and discriminant validity and adequate overall reliability. The NPI-13 may be favored over the NPI-16 because it allows for the extraction of 3 subscales, consistent with the use of its parent measure. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2013 APA, all rights reserved).
The Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI) is a commonly used measure of narcissism. This study administered a 15 item short version of the NPI (NPI-15). Central aims of the present study were to examine its dimensionality, and to provide data on its psychometric properties. NPI-15 and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS-D) were assessed in a representative sample of the German population (N=2,512). According to Scree-plot and model fit, a solution with 2 or 3 factors seemed feasible. Because of factor loadings and item-level associations to depression/anxiety we decided to favour a 2-factor-solution. 2 subscales reflecting different facets of narcissism were compiled (leadership ability/personality [LA/LP], grandiosity [G]). The psychometric properties of these scales were good (LA/LP) respectively unsatisfactory (G). The validity of the NPI-15 needs to be further studied.
Narcissism research is poorly calibrated across fields of study in part due to confusion over how to integrate normal and pathological descriptions of narcissism. We argue that pathological and normal narcissism can be integrated in a single model that organizes around self-regulation mechanisms. We present theoretical and empirical support for this interpretation, and demonstrate that modeling pathological and normal narcissism as 2 dimensions underlying the narcissistic character can help to resolve some of the inconsistencies in the field regarding how to best assess adaptive and maladaptive expressions of narcissism.
The Five-Factor Narcissism Inventory (FFNI) is a new self-report measure that was developed to assess traits associated with grandiose and vulnerable narcissism from a Five-factor model (FFM) perspective. In a sample of undergraduates (N = 283), the relations among the FFNI scales, grandiose and vulnerable dimensions, and an array of relevant criteria were examined including self- and informant reports of the Big Five domains, measures of the Dark Triad, ratings of the interpersonal circumplex, externalizing and internalizing behaviors and symptoms, and romantic and attachment styles. The FFNI grandiose and vulnerable dimensions demonstrated good convergent and criterion validity. The FFNI grandiose and vulnerable dimensions manifested converging (e.g., disagreeableness, low love/communion, psychopathy, Machiavellianism, Ludus/Manic love styles) and diverging (e.g., neuroticism, extraversion, dominance, externalizing, internalizing, attachment anxiety) relations in a manner largely consistent with predictions. The FFNI joins the Pathological Narcissism Inventory as a measure that can simultaneously assess both grandiose and vulnerable dimensions of narcissism.
The Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI) has dominated research on narcissism in the field of social and personality psychology. Surprisingly, it is unclear whether the NPI is useful for identifying pathological narcissism in patients with Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD). The goal of this study was to close this research gap. We used an extreme-group approach by including NPD patients and healthy controls and comparing their narcissism scores. We further investigated whether explicit self-esteem (assessed with the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale) suppressed the relationship between group membership and NPI narcissism. According to our results, NPD patients do not score higher on the NPI in comparison to healthy controls. Analysis of indirect effects revealed that differences in NPI scores are suppressed by NPD patients' low self-esteem. Our results indicate that the NPI is not a valid indicator of NPD, unless one controls for self-esteem. Implications for future research are discussed.
Miller, Maples, and Campbell (this issue) present evidence that Rosenthal and Hooley's (2010) concerns regarding the Narcissistic Personality Inventory's (NPI) relation to psychological health may be unwarranted. To resolve this issue empirically, we conducted a meta-analysis (k = 54, N= 38,932). Meta-analytic results revealed that a subset of NPI items were indeed problematic; items that function poorly at differentiating narcissists from non-narcissists accounted entirely for the NPI's connection to psychological health. These items were also strongly associated with self-esteem, but unrelated to aggression/anger. In contrast, the remaining NPI items were unrelated to psychological health, but associated with aggression/anger. We conclude that although the NPI measures narcissism, its poorest functioning items also link it to outcomes unrelated to narcissism.
Since its publication, the Psychopathic Personality Inventory and its revision (Lilienfeld & Andrews, 1996; Lilienfeld & Widows, 2005) have become increasingly popular such that it is now among the most frequently used self-report inventories for the assessment of psychopathy. The current meta-analysis examined the relations between the two PPI factors (factor 1: Fearless Dominance; factor 2: Self-Centered Impulsivity), as well as their relations with other validated measures of psychopathy, internalizing and externalizing forms of psychopathology, general personality traits, and antisocial personality disorder symptoms. Across 61 samples reported in 49 publications, we found support for the convergent and criterion validity of both PPI factor 2 and the PPI total score. Much weaker validation was found for PPI factor 1, which manifested limited convergent validity and a pattern of correlations with central criterion variables that was inconsistent with many conceptualizations of psychopathy.
A new measure of hypersensitive narcissism was derived by correlating the items of H. A. Murray's (1938) Narcism Scale with an MMPI-based composite measure of covert narcissism. In three samples of college students (total N 403), 10 items formed a reliable measure: the Hypersensitive Narcissism Scale (HSNS). The new HSNS and the MMPI-based composite showed similar patterns of correlations with the Big Five Inventory, and both measures correlated near zero with the Narcissistic Personality Inventory, which assesses overt narcissism. Results support P. Wink's (1991) distinction between covert and overt narcissistic tendencies in the normal range of individual differences and suggest that it would be beneficial for personality researchers to measure both types of narcissism in future studies. (Hendin, H.M., & Cheek, J.M. (1997). Assessing Hypersensitive Narcissism: A Reexamination
of Murray's Narcism Scale. Journal of Research in Personality, 31, 588-599.)
The links among narcissism, explicit (deliberate, controllable) self-esteem, and implicit (automatic, uncontrollable) self-esteem are unclear despite numerous attempts to illuminate these links. Some investigations suggest that narcissism reflects high explicit self-esteem that masks low implicit self-esteem, but other investigations fail to replicate this pattern. Here, we place the ‘mask’ model of narcissism in historical context and review the existing empirical evidence for this model. We then discuss three possible issues that might shed light on the inconsistent findings that have emerged from tests of the mask model. These issues include the unreliability of implicit attitude measures, narcissism's different associations with agentic versus communal self-views, and distinctions between grandiose and vulnerable narcissism subtypes. We also summarize several alternatives to the mask model of narcissism. Throughout, we offer suggestions for improving the study of narcissism and self-esteem and point to directions for future research on this topic.
Of the offensive yet non-pathological personalities in the literature, three are especially prominent: Machiavellianism, subclinical narcissism, and subclinical psychopathy. We evaluated the recent contention that, in normal samples, this ‘Dark Triad’ of constructs are one and the same. In a sample of 245 students, we measured the three constructs with standard measures and examined a variety of laboratory and self-report correlates. The measures were moderately inter-correlated, but certainly were not equivalent. Their only common Big Five correlate was disagreeableness. Subclinical psychopaths were distinguished by low neuroticism; Machiavellians, and psychopaths were low in conscientiousness; narcissism showed small positive associations with cognitive ability. Narcissists and, to a lesser extent, psychopaths exhibited self-enhancement on two objectively scored indexes. We conclude that the Dark Triad of personalities, as currently measured, are overlapping but distinct constructs.
Previous research reveals a substantial degree of variability in the extent to which narcissism (as measured by the Narcissistic Personality Inventory or NPI; Emmons, 1987) and self-esteem (measured using a variety of self-report scales) are associated. Data from 329 college students provided support for the hypothesis that the variability in associations between narcissism and different measures of self-esteem may be explained in part by the degree to which a given self-esteem measure is related to dominance. These results have important implications for research on narcissism and self-esteem, as well as the broader issue of how self-esteem is conceptualized and measured in psychological research.
We review the literature on pathological narcissism and narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) and describe a significant criterion problem related to four inconsistencies in phenotypic descriptions and taxonomic models across clinical theory, research, and practice; psychiatric diagnosis; and social/personality psychology. This impedes scientific synthesis, weakens narcissism's nomological net, and contributes to a discrepancy between low prevalence rates of NPD and higher rates of practitioner-diagnosed pathological narcissism, along with an enormous clinical literature on narcissistic disturbances. Criterion issues must be resolved, including clarification of the nature of normal and pathological narcissism, incorporation of the two broad phenotypic themes of narcissistic grandiosity and narcissistic vulnerability into revised diagnostic criteria and assessment instruments, elimination of references to overt and covert narcissism that reify these modes of expression as distinct narcissistic types, and determination of the appropriate structure for pathological narcissism. Implications for the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders and the science of personality disorders are presented.
The construct of narcissism is inconsistently defined across clinical theory, social-personality psychology, and psychiatric diagnosis. Two problems were identified that impede integration of research and clinical findings regarding narcissistic personality pathology: (a) ambiguity regarding the assessment of pathological narcissism vs. normal narcissism and (b) insufficient scope of existing narcissism measures. Four studies are presented documenting the initial derivation and validation of the Pathological Narcissism Inventory (PNI). The PNI is a 52-item self-report measure assessing 7 dimensions of pathological narcissism spanning problems with narcissistic grandiosity (Entitlement Rage, Exploitativeness, Grandiose Fantasy, Self-sacrificing Self-enhancement) and narcissistic vulnerability (Contingent Self-esteem, Hiding the Self, Devaluing). The PNI structure was validated via confirmatory factor analysis. The PNI correlated negatively with self-esteem and empathy, and positively with shame, interpersonal distress, aggression, and borderline personality organization. Grandiose PNI scales were associated with vindictive, domineering, intrusive, and overly-nurturant interpersonal problems, and vulnerable PNI scales were associated with cold, socially avoidant, and exploitable interpersonal problems. In a small clinical sample, PNI scales exhibited significant associations with parasuicidal behavior, suicide attempts, homicidal ideation, and several aspects of psychotherapy utilization.
For three decades, social-personality research on overt narcissism has relied almost exclusively on the Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI). However, the NPI suffers from a host of psychometric and validity concerns that make composite NPI scores (summed across its subscales) difficult to interpret. The present studies propose that narcissistic characteristics tend to fall under two general clusters: grandiosity and entitlement. The studies show that measures of grandiosity and entitlement interact to predict scores on the NPI, controlling for gender, self-esteem, and basic personality (Study 1), but also that grandiosity and entitlement function independently with respect to mental health (Study 2) and ethical misconduct (Study 3). Together, these results challenge the view of overt narcissism as a unidimensional construct and underscore the importance of distinguishing between grandiose and entitled aspects of the narcissistic self-concept.
Theory and research have suggested that the personality disorders contained within the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV-TR) can be understood as maladaptive variants of the personality traits included within the five-factor model (FFM). The current meta-analysis of FFM personality disorder research both replicated and extended the 2004 work of Saulsman and Page (The five-factor model and personality disorder empirical literature: A meta-analytic review. Clinical Psychology Review, 23, 1055-1085) through a facet level analysis that provides a more specific and nuanced description of each DSM-IV-TR personality disorder. The empirical FFM profiles generated for each personality disorder were generally congruent at the facet level with hypothesized FFM translations of the DSM-IV-TR personality disorders. However, notable exceptions to the hypotheses did occur and even some findings that were consistent with FFM theory could be said to be instrument specific.
The present study examines the lack of strong correlations among existing self-report measures of narcissism. A principal-components analysis of 6 MMPI narcissism scales resulted in 2 orthogonal factors, 1 implying Vulnerability-Sensitivity and the other Grandiosity-Exhibitionism. Although unrelated to each other, these 2 factors were associated with such core features of narcissism as conceit, self-indulgence, and disregard of others. Despite this common core, however, Vulnerability-Sensitivity was associated with introversion, defensiveness, anxiety, and vulnerability to life's traumas, whereas Grandiosity-Exhibitionism was related to extraversion, self-assurance, exhibitionism, and aggression. Three alternative interpretations of these results are considered, and an argument for the distinction between covert and overt narcissism is made.
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.
Lack of a suitable measuring device hampered the empirical study of narcissism until Raskin and Hall (1979) developed the Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI). The NPI possesses desirable psychometric properties, and in this article I used the scale in a variety of studies. Factor analysis of the scale replicated the four-factor solution found by Emmons (1984): Leadership/Authority, Self-Absorption/Self-Admiration, Superiority/Arrogance, and Exploitiveness/Entitlement. The Exploitiveness/Entitlement subscale was found to correlate with measures of pathological narcissism and affective intensity and variability. The relevance of Linville's (1982) theory of self-complexity-affect intensity for understanding aspects of narcissism is outlined. Implications of the study of narcissism for attribution theory and research are discussed.
It has been widely asserted that low self-esteem causes violence, but laboratory evidence is lacking, and some contrary observations have characterized aggressors as having favorable self-opinions. In 2 studies, both simple self-esteem and narcissism were measured, and then individual participants were given an opportunity to aggress against someone who had insulted them or praised them or against an innocent third person. Self-esteem proved irrelevant to aggression. The combination of narcissism and insult led to exceptionally high levels of aggression toward the source of the insult. Neither form of self-regard affected displaced aggression, which was low in general. These findings contradict the popular view that low self-esteem causes aggression and point instead toward threatened egotism as an important cause.
This study sought to extend previous work on the five-factor dimensional model (FFM) of personality disorder (PD) by developing more comprehensive FFM descriptions of prototypic cases. Specifically, the authors asked experts in each of the 10 DSM-IV PDs to rate the prototypic case by using all 30 facets of the FFM. Aggregating across raters of the given disorder generated a prototype for each disorder. In general, there was good agreement among experts and with previous theoretical and empirical FFM translations of DSM diagnostic criteria. Furthermore, the ability of the FFM explanation to reproduce the high comorbidity rates among PDs was demonstrated. The authors concluded that, with the possible exception of schizotypal PD, the DSM PDs can be understood from the dimensional perspective of the FFM. Future directions for research, including the use of the present prototypes to "diagnose" personality disorder, are discussed.
Investigated several possible models to explain the seemingly discrepant relations between self-esteem and conduct problems, as both low self-esteem and exaggerated levels of self-esteem, thought to be captured by narcissism, have been associated with aggressive and antisocial behavior. Our sample consisted of 98 nonreferred children (mean age = 11.9 years; SD = 1.68 years) recruited from public schools to oversample children at risk for severe aggressive and antisocial behavior. Results indicated that certain aspects of narcissism (i.e., those indicating a need to be evaluated well by, and obtain status over, others) were particularly predictive of maladaptive characteristics and outcomes such as low self-esteem, callous-unemotional (CU) traits, and conduct problems. In addition, the relation between narcissism and conduct problems was moderated by self-esteem level, such that children with relatively high levels of narcissism and low self-esteem showed the highest rates of conduct-problem symptoms.
Many studies have indicated close convergence of the DSM-IV personality disorders and the five-factor model (FFM) of personality functioning. However, questions have been raised concerning the ability of clinicians to describe personality disorders in terms of the FFM. This study developed a FFM description by practicing clinicians of each DSM-IV personality disorder. Clinicians rated a prototypic case of each DSM-IV personality disorder in terms of the FFM. These ratings, which achieved excellent reliability, were then averaged to produce a consensus FFM profile for each personality disorder. The consensus ratings showed good agreement with previous research that examined both researchers' and clinicians' application of the FFM to prototypic cases of personality disorders. These results suggest that clinicians can conceptualize and apply the FFM to personality disorders in a consistent way. The results further suggest that the FFM may provide a richer and more comprehensive description of personality difficulties than the current DSM-IV personality disorder categories.
Nine studies were conducted with the goal of developing a self-report measure of psychological entitlement and assessing its interpersonal consequences. The Psychological Entitlement Scale (PES) was found to be reliable and valid (Study 1, 2), not associated with social desirability (Study 2), stable across time (Study 3), and correlated negatively with two of the Big Five factors: agreeableness and emotional stability (Study 4). The validity of the PES was confirmed in studies that assessed willingness to take candy designated for children (Study 5) and reported deservingness of pay in a hypothetical employment setting (Study 6). Finally, the PES was linked to important interpersonal consequences including competitive choices in a commons dilemma (Study 7), selfish approaches to romantic relationships (Study 8), and aggression following ego threat (Study 9). Psychological entitlement has a pervasive and largely unconstructive impact on social behavior.
The unique effects of level of self-esteem, narcissism, and contingencies of self-worth assessed prior to college on alcohol use during the freshman year were examined in a longitudinal study of 620 college students. Narcissism predicted alcohol use, but level of self-esteem did not. Basing self-worth on appearance predicted more alcohol use, whereas the virtue, God's love, and academic competence contingencies predicted less alcohol use, independent of other personality measures and joining a sorority or a fraternity. Further, the virtue and academic competence contingencies were associated with decreases in alcohol use from the 1st to the 2nd semester.
Although a powerful technique, the partialling of independent variables from one another in the context of multiple regression analysis poses certain perils. The present article argues that the most important and underappreciated peril is the difficulty in knowing what construct an independent variable represents once the variance shared with other independent variables is removed. The present article presents illustrative analyses in a large sample of inmates (n =696) using three measures from the psychopathy and aggression fields. Results indicate that in terms of relations among items on a single scale and relations between scales, the raw and residualized scores bore little resemblance to one another. It is argued that researchers must decide to which construct—the one represented by the original scale or the one represented by the residualized scale—conclusions are meant to apply. Difficulties in applying the conclusions to the residualized scale are highlighted and best practices suggested.
This study examined the construct validity of narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) by examining the relations between NPD and measures of psychologic distress and functional impairment both concurrently and prospectively across 2 samples. In particular, the goal was to address whether NPD typically "meets" criterion C of the DSM-IV definition of Personality Disorder, which requires that the symptoms lead to clinically significant distress or impairment in functioning. Sample 1 (n = 152) was composed of individuals receiving psychiatric treatment, whereas sample 2 (n = 151) was composed of both psychiatric patients (46%) and individuals from the community. Narcissistic personality disorder was linked to ratings of depression, anxiety, and several measures of impairment both concurrently and at 6-month follow-up. However, the relations between NPD and psychologic distress were (a) small, especially in concurrent measurements, and (b) largely mediated by impaired functioning. Narcissistic personality disorder was most strongly related to causing pain and suffering to others, and this relationship was significant even when other Cluster B personality disorders were controlled. These findings suggest that NPD is a maladaptive personality style which primarily causes dysfunction and distress in interpersonal domains. The behavior of narcissistic individuals ultimately leads to problems and distress for the narcissistic individuals and for those with whom they interact.
This article demonstrates the validity and utility of conceptualizing narcissistic personality in terms of relative approach-avoidance motivation. Across three studies (N = 1,319), narcissism predicted high approach and low avoidance motivation. That is, narcissists reported being strongly motivated to approach desirable outcomes but only weakly motivated to avoid negative outcomes. Relative approach-avoidance motivation was shown to be useful in terms of explaining behavioral tendencies associated with narcissism (i.e., functional and dysfunctional impulsivity) and distinguishing different "flavors" of narcissism (i.e., overt and covert narcissism). Discussion focuses on how approach-avoidance motivation may be used to explain prior findings in the narcissism literature and generate novel future hypotheses.
ABSTRACT Evidence has accrued to suggest that there are 2 distinct dimensions of narcissism, which are often labeled grandiose and vulnerable narcissism. Although individuals high on either of these dimensions interact with others in an antagonistic manner, they differ on other central constructs (e.g., Neuroticism, Extraversion). In the current study, we conducted an exploratory factor analysis of 3 prominent self-report measures of narcissism (N=858) to examine the convergent and discriminant validity of the resultant factors. A 2-factor structure was found, which supported the notion that these scales include content consistent with 2 relatively distinct constructs: grandiose and vulnerable narcissism. We then compared the similarity of the nomological networks of these dimensions in relation to indices of personality, interpersonal behavior, and psychopathology in a sample of undergraduates (n=238). Overall, the nomological networks of vulnerable and grandiose narcissism were unrelated. The current results support the need for a more explicit parsing of the narcissism construct at the level of conceptualization and assessment.
Both narcissists and high self-esteem individuals engage in active self-enhancement to support their positive self-views. However, while narcissists want to assert their superiority, high self-esteem individuals desire to be valued by the social community. These different self-goals suggest that only narcissists can afford to engage in forceful and brazen self-enhancement strategies. Consistent with expectation, in two studies, narcissists exploited self-enhancement opportunities primarily by augmenting self-ratings on positive traits. Individuals with genuine high self-esteem in contrast, self-presented more moderately and also used the more socially accepted discounting of negative traits. Subsequent increased accessibility of positive self-information, only shown by narcissists, indicates that their desire for self-worth is hard to fulfill. These findings continue to illuminate the distinction between narcissism and self-esteem.
Background:
The goal of quality assurance in health care is to preserve and improve patient care. Recently, RAND developed a set of evidence-based candidate indicators for evaluating the quality of care for patients with localized prostate carcinoma; however, the feasibility and sensitivity of these indicators have not been tested in a clinical setting. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the feasibility of measuring these quality indicators and to determine their sensitivity to change in practice patterns over time.
Methods:
One hundred sixty-eight men who presented in either 1995 or in 2000 and were treated for localized prostate carcinoma were selected randomly from the University of Michigan tumor registry. A combination of electronic data base review and explicit chart review was used to assess the feasibility of measuring compliance for each indicator. For each indicator in which assessment was feasible, compliance with the RAND indicators was determined for patients in both years. Multivariate regression analysis was used to adjust for potential confounding effects of disease stage, tumor grade, prostate specific antigen (PSA) level, patient age, and therapy.
Results:
Based on review of available clinical data, measurement of compliance was feasible for 19 of 22 RAND candidate quality indicators (86%). For five indicators, significant differences in documentation (compliance) were detected between 1995 and 2000 (P < 0.05). Treatment received and higher PSA levels were associated independently with documentation of compliance for several indicators (P < 0.05).
Conclusions:
Measurement of the majority of the RAND quality indicators for the treatment of patients with localized prostate carcinoma was feasible, and improvements in several indicators were observed between 1995 and 2000. Demonstration of such variation, even within a single institution, suggests that the indicators are sufficiently sensitive to detect differences in practice patterns.
In this paper, three studies link narcissism to gambling in general, and gambling-related problems in particular, and the predictive link is shown to be mediated by judgment and decision processes. In Study 1, we demonstrate that narcissism relates to greater self-reported gambling frequency and gambling-related monetary expenditures in two samples. We extend these initial findings in Study 2 by showing that narcissism predicts higher reports of gambling-related pathology, as measured with a DSM-IV-based pathological gambling (PG) screen. Finally, we demonstrate in Study 3 that the link between gambling pathology and narcissism is partially mediated by narcissists' overconfidence, heightened risk acceptance, and myopic focus on reward, as measured by participants' behavioral performance on the Georgia Gambling Task (GGT) and Iowa Gambling Task (IGT). Discussion focuses on the empirical validation of the long-assumed narcissism–gambling link, the decision processes that underlie this link, and relations between narcissists' self-perceptions and their self-defeating behavior, especially in risk-relevant contexts. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Most research on narcissism has been conducted using the narcissistic personality inventory (NPI). However, the generalizability of findings from the NPI to narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) is unknown. The current study uses two samples (48 clinical outpatients; 49 undergraduates) to address this question by examining the correlations between the NPI and interview ratings of NPD. The profiles generated by both assessments in relation to measures of general personality traits are compared to expert and meta-analytically derived profiles of NPD. The NPI and NPD assess overlapping constructs as they are significantly correlated and generate similar personality profiles. The measures diverge primarily in that NPI narcissism includes traits related to certain facets of Extraversion, which is consistent with expert conceptualizations of NPD.
Influential social and personality psychology research indicates that narcissism is related to psychological health. Such inferences are open to question, however, because they nearly all rely on the same self-report instrument—the Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI;
[77] and [78])—to operationalize and measure narcissism. This is problematic because numerous NPI items do not appear to correspond to common definitions or manifestations of narcissism, and may instead be indicative of self-esteem. Two studies demonstrate that the NPI’s confound with self-esteem accounts for the purported relationship between narcissism and psychological health. This suggests that inferences about narcissism and psychological health may need to be reinterpreted. Results also highlight the need for measures that correspond more directly to core components of narcissism.
The relation between the Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI, Raskin & Hall, 1979) and conceptually relevant self and interpersonal variables was examined in three investigations. Based on clinical theory and description, it was proposed that the NPI would be correlated with self-images which were positive but low in complexity and vulnerable to threat. In addition, it was hypothesized that the NPI would be associated with antagonism and hostility, characteristics that should contribute to narcissists′ frequently observed interpersonal difficulties. As expected, the NPI was associated with extremely positive self-images as well as low self-complexity (Study 1). High NPI scores were also associated with a self-aggrandizing attributional style (Study 1) and higher scores on hostility and antagonism (Study 2). High NPI scorers appeared to benefit the most from the perception of available social support during periods of high stress. The findings are discussed with regard to the construct validity of the NPI and adaptive versus maladaptive aspects of narcissistic behavior.
The purpose of the current study was to elaborate the nomological net surrounding the constructs of reactive (RA) and proactive aggression (PA). Typically examined in the context of children, the current study utilized a sample of 211 young adults to examine the relations between reactive and proactive aggression and measures of general personality and social information processing, as well as maladaptive behavioral correlates such as crime, substance use, and riskier sex. Both raw and residualized scores were examined. Using raw scores, the primary differences between RA and PA were related to Neuroticism (i.e., RA more strongly related) and externalizing behaviors (i.e., PA more strongly). The authors comment on the similarity of findings when using raw scores and the divergence of findings using residualized scores and argue for a cautious interpretation of differences based on residualized scores. The authors conclude that the role of Neuroticism warrants further exploration as a means for understanding the heterogeneity of aggressive behavior.
There are few topics so fascinating both to the research investigator and the research subject as the self-image. It is distinctively characteristic of the human animal that he is able to stand outside himself and to describe, judge, and evaluate the person he is. He is at once the observer and the observed, the judge and the judged, the evaluator and the evaluated. Since the self is probably the most important thing in the world to him, the question of what he is like and how he feels about himself engrosses him deeply. This is especially true during the adolescent stage of development.
Paulhus and Williams (2002) identified a "Dark Triad" comprising the following related personality styles: narcissism, psychopathy, and Machiavellianism. The heterogeneity found in narcissism and psychopathy raises the possibility of a second triad made up of emotional vulnerability and dark traits (i.e., the vulnerable dark triad; VDT). Along with vulnerable narcissism and Factor 2 psychopathy, the third member of the hypothesized VDT is borderline personality disorder (BPD). Using a sample of 361 undergraduates, we examine the relations between these constructs and their relations with criterion variables, including personality, environmental etiological factors (e.g., abuse), and current functioning (e.g., psychopathology, affect). The results suggest that the VDT constructs are significantly related to one another and manifest similar nomological networks, particularly vulnerable narcissism and BPD. Although the VDT members are related to negative emotionality and antagonistic interpersonal styles, they are also related to introversion and disinhibition. Ultimately, it seems there is a "dark continuum" of pathological personality traits that differ primarily in relation to negative and positive emotionality and disinhibition.
Proposals suggest that many or all of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed. [DSM-IV]; American Psychiatric Association, 1994) personality disorders (PDs) may be omitted from the DSM (5th ed.; DSM-V) and replaced with a dimensional trait model of personality pathology (Krueger, Skodol, Livesley, Shrout, Huang, 2007; Skodol, 2009). Several authors have expressed concerns that this may be difficult for clinicians and researchers who are more comfortable with the extant PD diagnoses. In this study, we tested whether clinician ratings of traits from the Five-factor model (FFM; Costa McCrae, 1990) can be used to recreate DSM-IV PDs. Using a sample of 130 clinical outpatients, we tested the convergent and discriminant validity of the FFM PD counts in relation to consensus ratings of the DSM-IV PDs. We then examined whether the FFM and DSM-IV PD scores correlate in similar ways with self-reported personality traits from the Schedule for Nonadaptive and Adaptive Personality (Clark, 1993). Finally, we tested the clinical utility of the FFM PD counts in relation to functional impairment. Overall, the FFM PD counts, scored using clinician ratings of the FFM traits, appeared to function like the DSM-IV PDs, thus suggesting that the use of a dimensional trait model of personality in the DSM-V may still allow for an assessment of the DSM-IV PD constructs.
A recent meta-analysis (S. Vazire & D. C. Funder, 2006) suggested that narcissism and impulsivity are related and that impulsivity partially accounts for the relation between narcissism and self-defeating behaviors (SDB). This research examines these hypotheses in two studies and tests a competing hypothesis that Extraversion and Agreeableness account for this relation. In Study 1, we examined the relations among narcissism, impulsivity, and aggression. Both narcissism and impulsivity predicted aggression, but impulsivity did not mediate the narcissism-aggression relation. In Study 2, narcissism was related to a measure of SDB and manifested divergent relations with a range of impulsivity traits from three measures. None of the impulsivity models accounted for the narcissism-SDB relation, although there were unique mediating paths for traits related to sensation and fun seeking. The domains of Extraversion and low Agreeableness successfully mediated the entire narcissism-SDB relation. We address the discrepancy between the current and meta-analytic findings.
Synopsis
This is an introductory report for the Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI), a brief psychological self-report symptom scale. The BSI was developed from its longer parent instrument, the SCL-90-R, and psychometric evaluation reveals it to be an acceptable short alternative to the complete scale. Both test-retest and internal consistency reliabilities are shown to be very good for the primary symptom dimensions of the BSI, and its correlations with the comparable dimensions of the SCL-90-R are quite high. In terms of validation, high convergence between BSI scales and like dimensions of the MMPI provide good evidence of convergent validity, and factor analytic studies of the internal structure of the scale contribute evidence of construct validity. Several criterion-oriented validity studies have also been completed with this instrument
The current meta-analysis reviews research examining the relationships between each of the five-factor model personality dimensions and each of the 10 Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) personality disorder diagnostic categories. Effect sizes representing the relationships between these two constructs were compiled from 15 independent samples. Results were analyzed both within each individual personality disorder category and across personality disorders, indicating how personality disorders are different and similar, respectively, with regard to underlying personality traits. In terms of how personality disorders differ, the results showed that each disorder displays a five-factor model profile that is meaningful and predictable given its unique diagnostic criteria. With regard to their similarities, the findings revealed that the most prominent and consistent personality dimensions underlying a large number of the personality disorders are positive associations with Neuroticism and negative associations with Agreeableness. Extraversion appears to be a more discriminating dimension, as indicated by prominent but directionally variable associations with the personality disorders. The implications of these meta-analytic findings for clinical application and the advancement of future research are discussed.
Paying health care providers to meet quality goals is an idea with widespread appeal, given the common perception that quality of care in the United States remains unacceptably low despite a decade of benchmarking and public reporting. There has been little critical analysis of the design of the current generation of quality incentive programs. In this paper we examine public reports of paying for quality over the past five years and assess each of the identified programs in terms of key design features, including the market share of payers, the structure of the reward system, the amount of revenue at stake, and the targeted domains of health care quality.
The British sometimes have been characterized as steadfast, measured, tolerant of bus queues and surgical waiting lists, and perhaps even a bit stodgy. Parts of this portrait may be accurate, but the British adoption of pay for performance should dispel the last of these stereotypes forever. In this issue of the Journal, Doran et al.1 describe the initial operation and effect of a British policy (adopted in April 2004) that bases a substantial portion of salary payments to general practitioners on their success in meeting 146 criteria for high-quality performance, each of which is tied to a variable number of . . .
This review documents two themes of emphasis found in phenotypic descriptions of pathological narcissism across clinical theory, social/personality psychology, and psychiatric diagnosis. Clinical theories of narcissism spanning 35 years consistently describe variations in the expression of pathological narcissism that emphasize either grandiosity or vulnerable affects and self-states. Recent research in social/personality psychology examining the structure of narcissistic personality traits consistently finds two broad factors representing Grandiosity-Exhibitionism and Vulnerability-Sensitivity-Depletion respectively. However, the majority of psychiatric criteria for narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV; American Psychiatric Association, 1994) emphasize expressions of grandiosity. By placing most of the diagnostic emphasis on overt grandiosity, DSM NPD has been limited by poor discriminant validity, modest levels of temporal stability, and the lowest prevalence rate on Axis II. Despite converging support for two phenotypic themes associated with pathological narcissism, psychiatric diagnosis and social/personality psychology research often focus only on grandiosity in the assessment of narcissism. In contrast, clinical theory struggles with a proliferation of labels describing these broad phenotypic variations. We conclude that the construct of pathological narcissism is at a crossroads and provide recommendations for diagnostic assessment, clinical conceptualization, and future research that could lead to a more integrated understanding of narcissistic personality and narcissistic personality pathology.
There is a lack of consensus surrounding the conceptualization of narcissism. The present study compared two measures of narcissism-one used in clinical settings (Personality Diagnostic Questionnaire, PDQ-4+; Hyler, 1994) and one used in social-personality research (Narcissistic Personality Inventory, NPI; Raskin & Terry, 1988)-across two samples. Sample 1 (N=271) was composed of undergraduates, whereas Sample 2 (N=211) was composed of parents of the Sample 1 participants. The scales were significantly interrelated but manifested divergent relations with general personality traits, personality disorders (including expert prototypal ratings of narcissism), recollections of parenting received, and psychological distress and self-esteem. PDQ-4 narcissism captured an emotionally unstable, negative-affect-laden, and introverted variant of narcissism; NPI narcissism captured an emotionally resilient, extraverted form. The clinical and social-personality conceptualizations of narcissism primarily share a tendency to use an antagonistic interpersonal style. Implications for the DSM-V are discussed.
Profile similarity or agreement is increasingly used in personality research and clinical practice and has potential applications in many other fields of psychology. I compared 4 measures of profile agreement--the Pearson r, Cattell's (1949) r(p), McCrae's (1993) r(pa), and an intraclass correlation coefficient (double entry), ICC(DE)--using both broad factor and specific facet profiles. Matched versus mismatched self-ratings/other ratings on the NEO Personality Inventory-3 (McCrae, Costa, & Martin, 2005) were used as criteria. At the factor level, r(pa) and ICC(DE) were comparable, and both were superior to r(p) in distinguishing matched versus mismatched profiles. At the facet level, ICC(DE) was superior to the other coefficients. The Pearson r performed better than expected.
Die Polyederkrankheit und andere Ursachen des Massensterbens des grauen Lärchenwicklers im Jahre 1948
- E Jahn
Bericht über aufgetretene Forstschäden und deren Bekämpfung in Niederösterreich in den Jahren 1946–1949
- E Schimitschek
Das Pflanzenleben der Ostalpen
- R Scharfetter
Die wichtigsten natürlichen Waldformen der Ostalpen und des heutigen Österreich
- L Tschermak
The perils of partialling: Cautionary tales from aggression and psychopathy
- D Lynam
- R Hoyle
- J Newman
Lynam, D., Hoyle, R., & Newman, J. (2006). The perils of partialling: Cautionary tales
from aggression and psychopathy. Assessment, 13, 328-341.
Personality diagnostic questionnaire-4. NYSPI: Unpublished test Probing the link between narcissism and gambling: The mediating role of judgment and decision-making
- S E Hyler
- C E Lakey
- P Rose
- W K Campbell
- A S Goodie
Hyler, S. E. (1994). Personality diagnostic questionnaire-4. NYSPI: Unpublished test.
Lakey, C. E., Rose, P., Campbell, W. K., & Goodie, A. S. (2008). Probing the link
between narcissism and gambling: The mediating role of judgment and
decision-making. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 21, 113–137.