Narcissism is Associated with Weakened Frontostriatal Connectivity: A DTI Study

Abstract

Narcissism is characterized by the search for affirmation and admiration from others. Might this motivation to find external sources of acclaim exist to compensate for neuro-structural deficits that link the self with reward? Greater structural connectivity between brain areas that process self-relevant stimuli (i.e., the medial prefrontal cortex) and reward (i.e., the ventral striatum) is associated with fundamentally positive self-views. We predicted that narcissism would be associated with less integrity of this frontostriatal pathway. We used diffusion tensor imaging to assess the frontostriatal structural connectivity among 50 healthy undergraduates (32 females, 18 males) who also completed a measure of grandiose narcissism. White matter integrity in the frontostriatal pathway was negatively associated with narcissism. Our findings, while purely correlational, suggest that narcissism arises, in part, from a neural disconnect between the self and reward. The exhibitionism and immodesty of narcissists may then be a regulatory strategy to compensate for this neural deficit.
© The Author (2015). Published by Oxford University Press. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Full text

Narcissism is associated with weakened frontostriatal
connectivity: a DTI study
David S. Chester,
1
Donald R. Lynam,
2
David K. Powell,
3,4
and
C. Nathan DeWall
1
1
Department of Psychology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, USA,
2
Department of Psychological
Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA,
3
Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Spectroscopy Center,
and
4
Department of Anatomy and Neurobiology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, USA
Correspondence should be addressed toDavid S. Chester, Department of Psychology, University of Kentucky, 0003 Kastle Hall, Lexington, KY 40506-0044,
USA. E-mail: davidchester@uky.edu
Abstract
Narcissism is characterized by the search for affirmation and admiration from others. Might this motivation to find
external sources of acclaim exist to compensate for neurostructural deficits that link the self with reward? Greater
structural connectivity between brain areas that process self-relevant stimuli (i.e. the medial prefrontal cortex) and reward
(i.e. the ventral striatum) is associated with fundamentally positive self-views. We predicted that narcissism would be
associated with less integrity of this frontostriatal pathway. We used diffusion tensor imaging to assess the frontostriatal
structural connectivity among 50 healthy undergraduates (32 females, 18 males) who also completed a measure of
grandiose narcissism. White matter integrity in the frontostriatal pathway was negatively associated with narcissism. Our
findings, while purely correlational, suggest that narcissism arises, in part, from a neural disconnect between the self and
reward. The exhibitionism and immodesty of narcissists may then be a regulatory strategy to compensate for this neural
deficit.
Key words: narcissism; frontostriatal connectivity; diffusion tensor imaging; white matter; self-esteem
Introduction
Daily social interactions are festooned with the presence of ego-
tistical and vain individuals. Yet what motivates the brazen
swagger of these narcissists? In what follows, we argue that a
structural deficit in the brain predicts narcissists’ blunted sense
of reward in relation to the self. This lack of self-reward con-
nectivity may then motivate their conceited attitudes and be-
havior to compensate for this deficiency.
Narcissism exists in two forms: grandiose and vulnerable
(Morf and Rhodewalt, 2001; Miller et al., 2011). Grandiose narcis-
sism is characterized by greater extraversion and lower agree-
ableness (Miller et al., 2011) and greater self-esteem (Miller et al.,
2012). According to self-regulatory models of narcissism, gran-
diose narcissists use their interpersonal environment to obtain
affirmation of their selves that they do not intrinsically generate
(Campbell et al., 2006; Morf and Rhodewalt, 2001). To date, no
study has examined whether neurostructural correlates of nar-
cissism may help explain the source of this motivation. The cur-
rent study fills this gap in the literature.
The underlying physiology of grandiose narcissists offers a
clue regarding their drive for external admiration and
affirmation. Although grandiose narcissism is unassociated
with self-reports of rejection’s sting, it is associated with
increased reactivity in regions of the brain that subserve the
pain of rejection (Cascio et al., forthcoming), which goes on to
predict whether they retaliate (Chester and DeWall,
forthcoming). Narcissism is also associated with a greater stress
responses in peripheral physiology during potential self-esteem
threats (Edelstein et al., 2010). These findings suggest that gran-
diose narcissism is rooted in a physiological substrate that does
not promote a stable, stoic and positive self. What remains un-
known is whether grandiose narcissism and its associated
Received: 23 March 2015; Revised: 21 May 2015; Accepted: 2 June 2015
V
CThe Author (2015). Published by Oxford University Press. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com
1
Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 2015, 1–5
doi: 10.1093/scan/nsv069
Original article
Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience Advance Access published June 26, 2015
by guest on June 27, 2015http://scan.oxfordjournals.org/Downloaded from

motivation to seek extrinsic sources of affirmation arises in the
structure of the nervous system.
The neural basis of positive self-regard has been a budding
area of inquiry among neuroscientists. A key midline region,
the medial prefrontal cortex (MPFC) shows robust sensitivity to
the self-relevance of stimuli, particularly its rostral and ventral
aspects (Denny et al., 2012). For example, MPFC activity corres-
ponded to individuals’ judgments of whether personality traits
related to themselves vs a close other (Heatherton et al., 2006).
Further, the more ventral portions of the MPFC play a special
role in self-valuation (D’Argembeau et al., 2012). If the MPFC is
the neuroanatomical seat of self-relevant processing and the
value of the self, then the extent to which this region acts in
concert with other brain regions that subserve positive affect
should predict self-esteem. The ventral striatum plays a critical
role in the subjective experience of positive affect and hedonic
reward (Berridge and Kringelbach, 2013). Chavez and
Heatherton (forthcoming) demonstrated that dispositional
self-esteem is associated with greater functional and structural
connectivity between the ventral striatum and the MPFC (i.e.
frontostriatal connectivity). These findings suggest that a neural
link between self-relevant processing and pleasure subserves
fundamentally positive self-views.
The pursuit of external self-affirmations among grandiose
narcissists may reflect a compensatory strategy to counteract a
deficit in this neural link. Much as sensation-seeking individ-
uals turn to exciting behaviors (e.g. substance abuse) as a motiv-
ation to compensate for a tonic, biological state of reduced
reward activity (Dawe et al., 2004), narcissists may self-
aggrandize as a means to increase the chronically deficient
reward that is experienced in relation to the self. We sought to
test this possibility by assessing whether grandiose narcissism
was associated with a neural disconnect between the self and
reward. Specifically, we predicted that narcissism would be
negatively associated with structural frontostriatal connectivity.
Methods
Participants
Fifty healthy, right-handed undergraduate students (64% fe-
male; age: M¼18.78, s.d. ¼1.04) were recruited to participate
from the University of Kentucky Introductory Psychology
Subject Pool. Participants were compensated with partial course
credit and $45. Participants were excluded from the study if
they reported any history of psychological or neurological path-
ology, claustrophobia, seizures, major medical issues, issues
with substance abuse, current use of psychoactive medication,
learning disorders, color blindness or a body-mass index indi-
cating obesity (i.e. >30). For safety reasons, participants were
also excluded if they reported any metallic objects or devices in-
side their body. All participants provided informed consent and
all procedures were approved by the University of Kentucky
Office of Research Integrity.
These data were collected as part of a larger study on the
role of negative emotion in impulsivity. Because of this larger
aim, participants were recruited to be relatively high or low in
impulsivity and neuroticism, as determined by their scores
being above the scale’s midpoint for both of these constructs.
All reported effects in this manuscript remain significant after
controlling for participants’ group assignment. We did not as-
sess correlations with impulsivity or neuroticism with frontos-
triatal connectivity as our hypotheses did not pertain to these
constructs.
Materials
Narcissistic personality index (NPI-16)
To measure dispositional individual differences in grandiose
narcissism, participants completed the 16-item Narcissistic
Personality Inventory (NPI-16; Ames et al., 2006; Miller et al.,
2012). In this measure, participants repeatedly decide between a
dichotomous narcissistic (e.g. I think I am a special person) or
non-narcissistic (e.g. I am no better or worse than most people)
response. These items focus more on the grandiose elements of
narcissism (e.g. self-enhancement) and less on the vulnerable
aspects (e.g. hostility; Miller et al., 2012). Scores across all 16
items were scored such that narcissistic responses were coded
as 1 and non-narcissistic responses were coded as 0. Responses
were then averaged across all 16 items to yield a trait narcissism
score that could range from 0 to 1.
Procedure
Participants first completed an intake session in which they
were screened for safety and comfort in the magnetic resonance
imaging (MRI) environment and then they completed a battery
of questionnaires that assessed demographic information and
trait narcissism. Several days later, participants arrived at the
University of Kentucky’s Magnetic Resonance Imaging and
Spectroscopy Center where they were again screened for MRI
safety and comfort. Participants then entered the MRI scanner
and underwent diffusion tensor imaging for approximately
10 min.
Magnetic resonance imaging
Data acquisition. All MRI data were acquired on a 3.0-Tesla
Siemens MAGNETOM Trio scanner using a 32-channel head
coil. Diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) was acquired across the en-
tire brain using an axial double-refocused spin-echo echo pla-
nar imaging sequence (TR ¼8000 ms, TE ¼96 ms, FOV ¼224 mm,
52 slices, 2 mm isotropic resolution). DT images were acquired
with 64 noncollinear encoding direction (b¼1000 s/mm
2
) and
six images without diffusion weighting (b¼0 s/mm
2
, b0). Then,
a high-resolution T1-weighted MP-RAGE sequence was acquired
from each participant to allow for native space registration of
the DTI data (parameters: 1mm
3
isotropic voxel size, TR ¼1.69 s,
TE ¼2.56 ms, flip angle ¼12).
Preprocessing and FA extraction. DTI data were analyzed using
FMRIB’s Software Library (FSL v5.0; Smith et al., 2004; Jenkinson
et al., 2012). Raw DT images were preprocessed to correct for
head motion and residual eddy current distortion using a
12-parameter affine alignment to the corresponding b0 image
via FMRIB’s Linear Image Registration Tool (FLIRT). Next,
FMRIB’s Diffusion Toolbox (FDT v2.0) was used to fit the diffu-
sion tensor and calculate fractional anisotropy (FA) eigenvalues.
FA images were then registered into MNI152 space using FSL’s
tract-based spatial statistics (TBSS v1.2) program. All partici-
pants’ FA images were aligned to a common target using a non-
linear registration approach and then affine registered and
resampled to 2 mm
3
MNI152 space. Frontostriatal tract masks
for the left and right hemisphere were acquired from Chavez
and Heatherton (forthcoming; Figure 1A). Mean FA values were
extracted for each hemisphere of the frontostriatal tract for
each participant. The FA values from each hemisphere of the
frontostriatal tract were then averaged together to create a sin-
gle frontostriatal FA value for each participant.
2|Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 2015, Vol. 0, No. 0
by guest on June 27, 2015http://scan.oxfordjournals.org/Downloaded from

Quality check. Reconstructed FA volumes were visually inspected
prior to eddy current correction for excessive distortions and
signs of excessive motion during the scan (e.g. striations, dis-
placement), and then again after the eddy current correction’s
affine registration phase for misalignments between the ori-
ginal and target volumes. After normalization to MNI152 stand-
ard-space, FA volumes were displayed in a vertical slice
directory for visual inspection against one another to detect
misalignments or other deviations. None of the participants’
DTI volumes were excluded as no serious abnormalities were
detected.
Results
We predicted that narcissism would relate to lower FA values in
the frontostriatal pathway. Because narcissism tends to be
higher for males than for females (Twenge et al., 2008), we con-
trolled for participant sex in our analysis. Frontostriatal FA did
not differ by participant sex, b¼0.19, t(47) ¼1.42, P¼0.164.
As predicted, narcissism related to lower structural integrity
between the MPFC and ventral striatum. Frontostriatal FA was
negatively associated with grandiose narcissism, b¼0.34,
t(47) ¼2.46, P¼0.017 [95% bias-corrected and accelerated confi-
dence interval: b¼0.63 to 0.06 (Figure 1B)]. This association
was observed in both the left, b¼0.30, t(47) ¼2.13, P¼0.039,
and right, b¼0.32, t(47) ¼2.40, P¼0.020, hemispheres of the
frontostriatal tract. Thus, narcissistic motivation to secure exter-
nal admiration and affirmation may arise from a deficit in neural
pathways thatconnect self-relevant processing with reward.
Discussion
Grandiose narcissists display bloated self-esteem that they seek
to bolster from external sources of self-affirmation (Morf and
Rhodewalt, 2001). Yet whether this motivation is associated
with a neural deficit in intrinsically positive self-views is un-
known. Using DTI, we found that grandiose narcissism pre-
dicted reduced white matter integrity between brain regions
that, in concert, subserve self-esteem (Chavez and Heatherton,
forthcoming). This observed tendency of individuals higher in
narcissism to have less frontostriatal connectivity mirrors other
work showing that the biology of narcissists reveals a far differ-
ent view than merely self-reports would allow for (Cascio et al.,
2015).
Our results fit well with regulatory models of narcissism
(Morf and Rhodewalt, 2001; Campbell et al., 2006). The results
paint a picture of narcissists as seeking positive self-related ex-
periences in a similar fashion to sensation-seekers who crave
excitement as a compensation for their internally dull mental
states (Dawe et al., 2004). These findings also support the notion
of the frontostriatal pathway as a crucial neural correlate of
truly positive self-views (Chavez and Heatherton, forthcoming).
Future research should examine this tract’s role in other phe-
nomena characterized by vulnerable self-esteem (e.g. depres-
sion, disorder eating).
According to our compensatory model of narcissism, in
which narcissists seek external self-affirmation to compensate
for their internal deficit in self-reward connectivity, narcissists
have a larger disparity between their baseline and desired levels
of self-reward connectivity than non-narcissists. However, an
alternative explanation could be that narcissists possess a simi-
lar baseline of self-reward connectivity to others, but the
amount or magnitude of stimuli necessary to reach their
desired levels of self-esteem may be larger. Much like the
need of substance-dependent individuals to require greater
and greater doses to achieve their desired high, narcissists
may require substantially more external affirmation than their
less-vain counterparts because each instance is associated
Fig. 1. (A) Sagittal and axial views of the frontostriatal masks, displayed in red, overlaid atop an MNI152 normalized template brain. Coordinates are in MNI space. (B–D)
Scatterplots depicting negative associations between average frontostriatal fractional anisotropy and scores on the narcissistic personality inventory for (B) bilateral,
(C) left and (D) right hemispheres of the pathway. Curved lines represent 95% confidence intervals around the regression line.
D. S. Chester et al. |3
by guest on June 27, 2015http://scan.oxfordjournals.org/Downloaded from

with less reward. Indeed, if narcissists do not possess an intrin-
sically robust frontostriatal connection, external affirmations
are unlikely to hold a strong hedonic magnitude. Our findings
are unable to determine which of these accounts is more
probable, or if they both have some basis in fact. Future re-
search might benefit from experimentally pitting these models
against one another, perhaps through functional MRI tasks
that test neural BOLD response changes during external self-
affirmations.
A lingering question remains from our findings: if narcis-
sism is associated with high self-esteem (Miller et al., 2012), and
high self-esteem is associated with greater frontostriatal con-
nectivity (Chavez and Heatherton, forthcoming), how could nar-
cissism be associated with lesser frontostriatal connectivity? To
question our findings on these grounds is to fall victim to a syl-
logistic logical fallacy in which the observed, positive associ-
ations between several constructs (narcissism and self-esteem,
self-esteem and frontostriatal connectivity) fictitiously implies
a third, positive association (narcissism and frontostriatal con-
nectivity). At a theoretical level, there are two reasons for the
observed disparity between our findings and what might ‘logic-
ally’ be expected. First, narcissists’ higher reports of self-esteem
might suggest that they are successful in obtaining the external
sources of self-affirmation that they require. It is even possible
that external self-reports of high self-esteem may serve this af-
firming purpose. Second, a contentious body of literature has
suggested that there is a disconnect between narcissists’ expli-
cit and implicit sense of self-esteem (Zeigler-Hill, 2006).
Therefore, our connectivity findings may reflect the impaired
and threatened implicit self-esteem of narcissists, that does not
appear in explicit self-reports. Such discrepant self-esteem may
arise early in human life from the internalization of high expli-
cit self-esteem from overly affirming parents (Brummelman
et al., 2015), while leaving the frontostriatal connection
unchanged.
As a potential limitation, our narcissism measure, the NPI-
16, tends to capture the more grandiose facets of narcissism
and its unitary nature fails to assess the multidimensionality of
dispositional narcissism (e.g. authority, exhibitionism;
Ackerman et al., 2011). Thus, it is uncertain what the associ-
ations between frontostriatal integrity would be with vulnerable
and other subtypes of narcissism. We also assessed subclinical
levels of narcissism, it is then unclear if our findings could ex-
tend to individuals with narcissistic personality disorder. Given
the many divergences between clinical and subclinical narcis-
sism (Miler and Campbell, 2008), we would not necessarily pre-
dict that individuals with narcissistic personality disorder
would show a weakened frontostriatal pathway. Further, it
must be stressed that these findings are purely correlational
and obtained from a sample population of 50 undergraduate
students. This relatively small sample size makes our results an
optimum target for future replication efforts.
Our findings do not suggest that narcissists are a ‘lost cause’
because of any perceived immutability of brain structure.
Indeed, clinical interventions can readily alter white matter in-
tegrity (Voss et al., 2013). Therefore, our findings may help in-
form interventions targeting reductions in narcissistic
tendencies by suggesting that they should foster intrinsic (and
perhaps biological) connections between the self and reward,
perhaps through repeated administrations of intrinsic self-
affirmations (Schimel et al., 2004). Such approaches underscore
the value of structural and neural investigations of maladaptive
dispositions and will hopefully lead to their reduced prevalence
in daily life.
Funding
This experiment was funded by a grant from the University
of Kentucky’s Center for Drug Abuse Research Translation
(CDART; Sponsor: National Institute on Drug Abuse, Grant
number: DA005312) to C. N. DeWall and D. R. Lynam.
Conflict of interest. None declared.
Acknowledgements
The authors are grateful to Robert Chavez for providing his
generous assistance in acquiring the frontostriatal masks
and other analytic advice regarding this project. We thank
Richard Milich and Donald Lynam for their assistance in
running and guiding this project.
References
Ackerman, R.A., Witt, E.A., Donnellan, M.B., Trzesniewski, K.H.,
Robins, R.W., Kashy, D.A. (2011). What does the narcissis-
tic personality inventory really measure? Assessment,18,
67–87.
Ames, D.R., Rose, P., Anderson, C.P. (2006). The NPI-16 as a short
measure of narcissism. Journal of Research in Personality,40,
440–50.
Berridge, K.C., Kringelbach, M.L. (2013). Neuroscience of affect:
brain mechanisms of pleasure and displeasure. Current Opinion
in Neurobiology,23, 294–303.
Brummelman, E., Thomaes, S., Nelemans, S.A., Castro, B.O. de,
Overbeek, G., Bushman, B.J. (2015). Origins of narcissism in
children. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,112,
3659–62.
Campbell, W.K., Brunell, A.B., Finkel, E.J. (2006). Narcissism,
interpersonal self regulation, and romantic relationships: An
agency model approach. In Finkel, E.J., Vohs, K.D., editors. Self
and Relationships: Connecting Intrapersonal and Interpersonal
Processes. New York: Guilford.
Cascio, C.N., Konrath, S.H., Falk, E.B. (2015). Narcissists’ social
pain seen only in the brain. Social Cognitive and Affective
Neuroscience, 10, 335–41.
Chavez, R.S., Heatherton, T. F. (forthcoming). Multimodal fron-
tostriatal connectivity underlies individual differences in self-
esteem. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience.
Chester, D.S., DeWall, C.N. (forthcoming). Sound the alarm: The
effect of narcissism on retaliatory aggression is moderated by
dACC reactivity to rejection. Journal of Personality.
D’Argembeau, A., Jedidi, H., Balteau, E., Bahri, M., Phillips, C.,
Salmon, E. (2012). Valuing one’s self: medial prefrontal
involvement in epistemic and emotive investments in self-
views. Cerebral Cortex,22, 659–67.
Dawe, S., Gullo, M.J., Loxton, N.J. (2004). Reward drive and rash
impulsiveness as dimensions of impulsivity: Implications for
substance misuse. Addictive Behaviors,29, 1389–1405.
Denny, B. T., Kober, H., Wager, T.D., Ochsner, K.N. (2012). A
meta-analysis of functional neuroimaging studies of self and
other judgments reveals a spatial gradient for mentalizing in
medial prefrontal cortex. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience,24,
1742–52.
Edelstein, R.S., Yim, I.S., Quas, J.A. (2010). Narcissism predicts
heightened cortisol reactivity to a psychosocial stressor in
men. Journal of Research in Personality,44, 565–72.
Heatherton, T.F., Wyland, C.L., Macrae, C.N., Demos, K.E., Denny,
B.T., Kelley, W.M. (2006). Medial prefrontal activity
4|Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 2015, Vol. 0, No. 0
by guest on June 27, 2015http://scan.oxfordjournals.org/Downloaded from

differentiates self from close others. Social Cognitive and
Affective Neuroscience,1, 18–25.
Jenkinson, M., Beckmann, C.F., Behrens, T.E.J., Woolrich, M.W.,
Smith, S.M. (2012). FSL. NeuroImage,62, 782–90.
Miller, J.D., Campbell, W.K. (2008). Comparing clinical and social-
personality conceptualizations of narcissism. Journal of
Personality,76, 449–76.
Miller, J.D., Hoffman, B.J., Gaughan, E.T., Gentile, B., Maples, J.,
Campbell, W.K. (2011). Grandiose and vulnerable narcissism: a
nomological network analysis. Journal of Personality,79,
1013–42.
Miller, J.D., Price, J., Campbell, W.K. (2012). Is the narcissistic per-
sonality inventory still relevant? A test of independent grandi-
osity and entitlement scales in the assessment of narcissism.
Assessment,19, 8–13.
Morf, C.C., Rhodewalt, F. (2001). Unraveling the paradoxes of
narcissism: a dynamic self-regulatory processing model.
Psychological Inquiry,12, 177–96.
Schimel, J., Arndt, J., Banko, K.M., Cook, A. (2004). Not all self-af-
firmations were created equal: the cognitive and social bene-
fits of affirming the intrinsic (vs. Extrinsic) self. Social Cognition,
22, 75–99.
Smith, S. M., Jenkinson, M., Woolrich, M.W., et al. (2004). Advances
in functional and structural MR image analysis and implementa-
tion as FSL. NeuroImage,23, Supplement 1(0), S208–19.
Twenge, J.M., Konrath, S., Foster, J.D., Campbell, W.K., Bushman,
B.J. (2008). Egos inflating over time: A cross-temporal meta-
analysis of the narcissistic personality inventory. Journal of
Personality, 76, 875–901.
Voss, M.W., Heo, S., Prakash, R.S., et al. (2013). The influence of
aerobic fitness on cerebral white matter integrity and cognitive
function in older adults: Results of a one-year exercise inter-
vention. Human Brain Mapping,34, 2972–85.
Zeigler-Hill, V. (2006). Discrepancies between implicit and expli-
cit self-esteem: implications for narcissism and self-esteem
instability. Journal of Personality,74, 119–44.
D. S. Chester et al. |5
by guest on June 27, 2015http://scan.oxfordjournals.org/Downloaded from