Content uploaded by Bryan Gibson
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Bryan Gibson on Nov 14, 2016
Content may be subject to copyright.
Psychology of Popular Media Culture
Narcissism on the Jersey Shore: Exposure to Narcissistic
Reality TV Characters Can Increase Narcissism Levels in
Viewers
Bryan Gibson, Ian Hawkins, Christopher Redker, and Brad J. Bushman
Online First Publication, November 10, 2016. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000140
CITATION
Gibson, B., Hawkins, I., Redker, C., & Bushman, B. J. (2016, November 10). Narcissism on the
Jersey Shore: Exposure to Narcissistic Reality TV Characters Can Increase Narcissism Levels in
Viewers. Psychology of Popular Media Culture. Advance online publication. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000140
Narcissism on the Jersey Shore: Exposure to Narcissistic Reality TV
Characters Can Increase Narcissism Levels in Viewers
Bryan Gibson and Ian Hawkins
Central Michigan University
Christopher Redker
Ferris State University
Brad J. Bushman
The Ohio State University and VU University Amsterdam
Recent research documents an increase in narcissism in the United States. Little research,
however, has explored mechanisms that could cause higher narcissism. In 2 studies, we test
the hypothesis that exposure to narcissistic reality TV characters is related to greater
narcissism for those engaging in experience taking (Kaufman & Libby, 2012). Study 1 is
a correlational study showing that greater exposure to narcissistic reality TV while engaged
in experience taking is related to higher levels of narcissism. Study 2 is an experimental
study showing that participants randomly assigned to watch a narcissistic reality TV show,
under conditions that encouraged experience taking, were more narcissistic. These results
suggest that media can shape trait narcissism levels that are generally assumed to be stable.
Keywords: narcissism, reality TV, media, experience taking
“Everybody loves me, babies, dogs, ya know, hot girls,
cougars. I just have unbelievable mass appeal”
—Mike “The Situation” Sorrentino, from
Jersey Shore
There is no shortage of self-love, either in the
real world or in the reel world. Narcissism is on
the rise in the United States. Cross-temporal
meta-analyses found a 30% increase in narcis-
sism between 1979 and 2008 (Twenge, Kon-
rath, Foster, Campbell, & Bushman, 2008). The
factors contributing to this increase in narcis-
sism, however, remain unclear. Some factors
shown to contribute to the development of nar-
cissism include parental overvaluation (Brum-
melman et al., 2015), excessive noncontingent
praise (Twenge & Campbell, 2009), and enter-
ing adulthood during an economic boom (Bian-
chi, 2014). It is not clear, however, that these
factors coincide with the rise in narcissism.
Another potential contributing factor is that
in this generation, more so than past genera-
tions, we are regularly exposed to highly nar-
cissistic celebrities. Some speculate that celeb-
rities might be “super spreaders” of narcissism,
leaving in their wake a generation of adoring
fans who adopt the narcissistic traits they see in
their favorite TV stars (Gentile, 2011; Pinsky &
Young, 2009). Indeed, data suggest that celeb-
rities are more narcissistic than the general pop-
ulace, and that Reality TV celebrities are the
most narcissistic of all (Young & Pinsky, 2006).
Recent research has identified a positive corre-
lation between exposure to reality TV and
viewer narcissism (Lull & Dickinson, in press).
Although suggestive of a potential causal rela-
tionship between reality TV exposure and
viewer narcissism, this research doesn’t speak
directly to the question of whether watching
narcissistic celebrities does in fact cause view-
ers to become more narcissistic. In addition, this
research did not explore whether experience
taking (i.e., losing oneself in the character)
moderates the effect. To fill these important
gaps in the literature, the current research
uses the experimental method to test whether
a causal relationship exists between exposure
to narcissistic TV characters and narcissism
levels in viewers (Study 2), and whether ex-
Bryan Gibson and Ian Hawkins, Department of Psychol-
ogy, Central Michigan University; Christopher Redker, De-
partment of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Ferris State
University; Brad J. Bushman, School of Communication,
The Ohio State University, and Department of Communi-
cation Science, VU University Amsterdam.
Correspondence concerning this article should be ad-
dressed to Bryan Gibson, Department of Psychology, Cen-
tral Michigan University, Sloan Hall 101, Mount Pleasant,
MI 48859. E-mail: bryan.gibson@cmich.edu
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
Psychology of Popular Media Culture © 2016 American Psychological Association
2016, Vol. 6, No. 1, 000 2160-4134/16/$12.00 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000140
1
perience taking moderates the relationship
(Studies 1 and 2).
Reality TV is a huge success story. From a
paltry 4 reality shows on TV in 2000, to 320 in
2012 (Ocasio, 2012), reality TV has grown ex-
ponentially. Research has begun to explore po-
tential consequences of exposure to reality TV,
especially negative consequences. For example,
exposure to reality TV has been linked to ag-
gression in viewers (Gibson, Thompson, Hou,
& Bushman, 2016; Ward & Carlson, 2013),
illegal drug use and prescription drug misuse
among college students (Fogel & Shlivko,
2016), engaging in more “one night stands”
(Fogel & Kovalenko, 2013), increased permis-
sive sexual attitudes (Bond & Drogos, 2014),
negative body image in adolescent girls
(Ashikali, Dittmar, & Ayers, 2014), self-
objectification in college women (Vanden-
bosch, Muise, Eggermont, & Impett, 2015), ide-
alized views of female beauty (Markey &
Markey, 2012), stereotyping of females as so-
cially aggressive (Behm-Morawitz, Lewallen,
& Miller, 2016), beliefs that females in the real
world engage in more inappropriate behaviors
(e.g., arguing, gossip) than males do (Riddle &
De Simone, 2013), antifat attitudes (Domoff et
al., 2012), and eating disorder attitudes
(Mazzeo, Trace, Mitchell, & Gow, 2007). This
research on reality TV supports the view that
these shows are in fact being viewed as “real
life,” and that they can have negative conse-
quences on viewers after the TV is turned off. In
addition, some have noted that the majority of
work on reality TV to this point has been cor-
relational, and have suggested that more exper-
imental work is required to evaluate causal hy-
potheses (Riddle & De Simone, 2013). We
address this suggestion in our Study 2.
In the current research, we explore the pos-
sibility that exposure to narcissistic reality TV
stars can also increase viewer narcissism. We
hypothesize that whether reality TV increases
narcissism levels depends on how viewers re-
spond to the reality stars they are watching. We
propose that viewer narcissism will increase
only when viewers engage in what has been
termed experience taking, which occurs when
viewers simulate events in the narrative as if
they were the character (Kaufman & Libby,
2012). Experience taking occurs when the
viewer lets go “of key components of their own
identity—such as their beliefs, memories, per-
sonality traits, and ingroup affiliations—and in-
stead assumes the identity of a protagonist, ac-
cepting the character’s decisions, outcomes, and
reactions as their own” (Kaufman & Libby,
2012, p. 2). In other words, experience taking
involves losing oneself in the character. One
study found that more experience taking led
readers to adopt traits exhibited by a protago-
nist, including introversion, extroversion, and
even reduced prejudice (Kaufman & Libby,
2012). We suggest that a similar process could
be at work for viewers of reality TV. Viewers
who engage in experience taking, losing them-
selves in the world of the show, will be more
likely to adopt traits displayed by the characters,
including narcissistic traits.
It is important to also briefly discuss other
constructs frequently used in media research in
order to explain why these constructs were
deemed less likely moderators than experience
taking. First, a number of studies have explored
what are termed parasocial relationships be-
tween viewers and TV characters. This re-
search, however, has focused on the sense of
relationship gained by the viewer through fre-
quent viewing of the character (Rubin &
McHugh, 1987). Other research on reality TV
effects has examined the role of parasocial re-
lationships on viewer outcomes (Bond & Dro-
gos, 2014). This research, however, examined
long-term exposure effects rather than effects of
individual viewing experiences. Although para-
social relationships may play a role in how
exposure to narcissistic characters affects
viewer narcissism, we were interested in more
immediate effects that could potentially be ob-
served following a single exposure to these
characters. An alternative construct, parasocial
interactions, does consider how viewers re-
spond during individual viewing experiences
(Schramm & Hartmann, 2008). The scale used
to measure parasocial interactions, however, in-
cludes items that describe a psychological ex-
perience that is relatively detached from the
character (e.g., “Occasionally, I wondered if
PERSONA was similar to me or not” and “I
kept wondering if I knew persons who were
similar to PERSONA”; Schramm & Hartmann,
2008, p. 389). Experience taking, in contrast,
involves a sense of losing oneself within the
world of the story and the characters in the
story. Such detached evaluation of the charac-
ters, therefore, seemed to lack that sense that the
2 GIBSON, HAWKINS, REDKER, AND BUSHMAN
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
viewer was simulating the mindset of the TV
character.
Related to experience taking, identification
and perspective taking are constructs often used
in mass communication research. Identification
is often described as adopting the identity and
perspective of a character and imagining oneself
as being that character (Cohen, 2001). Although
identification is similar to experience taking,
there are a few important differences that we
believe make experience taking a better fit for
our hypotheses. Most importantly, Cohen
(2001) describes identification as a response to
textual features that are specifically intended to
provoke identification. Thus, in this view, iden-
tification occurs directly as a response to situa-
tions carefully crafted by writers and directors
to draw their audience into the narrative and
adopt the perspective of the protagonist. In ad-
dition, wishful identification has typically been
operationalized by asking participants how
much they identify with frequently viewed and
familiar characters (Bond & Drogos, 2014;
Hoffner & Buchanan, 2005). Because our study
focuses on reality TV, which to a certain extent
is more unscripted then regular fictional TV,
and because we are interested in Study 2 on
immediate responses to one episode of Jersey
Shore (rather than identification with familiar
characters over time), identification might not
be the best choice in our research. Identification
and experience taking are, however, closely re-
lated constructs. Kaufman and Libby (2012)
used Cohen’s (2001) discussion of identifica-
tion to help develop items in their experience
taking measure. Another construct, perspective
taking, is similar to experience taking but with a
few important differences. Research has shown
that perspective taking increases the activation
of an individual’s self-concept. Experience tak-
ing, in contrast, occurs when individuals relin-
quish their self-concept (see Kaufman & Libby,
2012 for further differences between experience
taking and perspective taking). We propose that
viewers can become more narcissistic when
they relinquish their self-concept while viewing
narcissistic reality TV characters. For these rea-
sons, the experience taking construct better cap-
tures our view of how viewers of reality TV
may themselves become more narcissistic than
does perspective taking.
Finally, another related construct is trans-
portation (Green, Brock, & Kaufman, 2004).
Transportation occurs when a media consumer
becomes immersed or lost in a narrative world.
Transportation has been shown to have effects
similar to what we propose may occur for view-
ers of reality TV. For example, transported in-
dividuals are more likely to adopt attitudes and
beliefs of the protagonist of the story (Green &
Brock, 2000). Although related, experience tak-
ing focuses on the adoption of views congruent
with the story’s protagonist, and does not re-
quire that immersion into a narrative take place.
Given that reality TV often proceeds without a
strong narrative component, experience taking
would seem to be more apt as a construct for our
research.
In summary, we considered experience tak-
ing as the most likely moderator of the effect of
exposure to narcissistic TV characters on nar-
cissism levels in viewers. In addition, experi-
ence taking could be seen as a more natural way
to measure and manipulate identification with
media characters than parasocial relationships,
parasocial interactions, identification, perspec-
tive taking, or transportation. Therefore, we test
the hypothesis that increased experience taking
when watching narcissistic reality TV stars will
increase viewer narcissism. Study 1 is a corre-
lational study in which we measure frequency
of exposure to reality TV, experience taking,
and narcissism. Study 2 is an experiment in
which we directly manipulated exposure to nar-
cissistic reality TV shows and experience tak-
ing, and then measured narcissism levels in
viewers.
Study 1
Method
Participants. Participants were 144 under-
graduate psychology students who volunteered
in exchange for extra course credit. A power
analysis revealed that about 140 participants
was required to detect a correlation of r⫽.25
with power ⫽.80 at the .05 significance level.
This correlation was based on previous research
(Lull & Dickinson, in press). Gender and other
demographic data were not collected. Study 2
addresses this weakness by testing for gender
effects.
Procedure. Participants completed the
anonymous survey in class. From a list of 48
reality TV shows (see Table 1), they identified
3REALITY TV AND NARCISSISM
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
the three shows that they watched most often.
We selected a set of popular reality shows by
gathering information from recent TV ratings
available on relevant websites (e.g., Nielsen,
IMDb). In order to assess whether each show
included a preponderance of characters that dis-
played narcissistic tendencies, a group of seven
naïve raters were provided with information
regarding narcissistic characteristics. The infor-
mation provided to raters included descriptions
of the seven subscales of the Narcissistic Per-
sonality Inventory (NPI; Raskin & Terry,
1988), namely, Authority,Entitlement,Exhibi-
tionism,Exploitativeness,Self-Sufficiency,Su-
periority,Vanity, as well as the actual 40 nar-
cissistic items of the NPI. These traits, and the
types of behaviors that may be indicative of the
traits, were discussed in a group training ses-
sion. Raters then went through the list of shows
and made independent judgments of whether
each show could be characterized as featuring
highly narcissistic stars. If they were unfamiliar
with a given show, they were encouraged to
research the show. Of the 48 shows, 37 were
judged identically by all seven judges. Of the 11
shows for which there was disagreement, seven
of them had just one person disagreeing with six
others, and in these seven cases, agreement was
reached through discussion. Thus, of the 48
shows identified, consensus was easily reached
on 44 shows (92%). Four shows had more equal
division among the seven raters (Duck Dynasty,
Cops,X-Factor,and Shark Tank). Of these,
agreement was reached after discussion for the
first three shows. Consensus was not achieved
for Shark Tank, with more raters putting it into
the nonnarcissistic category. In the final data
analysis, this show was put in the nonnarcissis-
tic category. However, only 19 participants
listed this show among their top three, and
results are similar regardless of how the show
was categorized. After selecting their most fre-
quently watched reality shows, respondents in-
dicated how frequently they watched each show
(1 ⫽very infrequently to5⫽very frequently).
To assess how much participants engaged in
experience taking with the characters in the
show, they completed a 7-item experience tak-
Table 1
Reality Shows Included in the Survey
Narcissistic Nonnarcissistic
16 and Pregnant Alaska: The Last Frontier
The Apprentice American Restoration
Bad Girls Club Amish Mafia
The Bachelor Comic Book Men
The Bachelorette Cops
Basketball Wives Deadliest Catch
Basketball Wives LA Dual Survival
Big Brother Duck Dynasty
Catfish: The TV Show Extreme Makeover: Home Edition
Dance Moms Ghost Hunters
Hell’s Kitchen Hardcore Pawn
Here Comes Honey Boo-boo Impractical Jokers
Jersey Shore Lizard Lick Towing
Keeping Up with the Kardashians Masterchef
Khloé & Lamar Mythbusters
Kourtney & Kim Take New York Pawn Stars
Kourtney and Kim Take Miami Shark Tank
Love & Hip Hop Storage Wars
Naked Dating Swamp Men
The Real Housewives of Atlanta Swamp People
The Real Housewives of Miami Top Gear
The Real Housewives of New Jersey The X Factor
The Real World
Rich Kids of Beverly Hills
Snooki & JWoww
Teen Mom 2
4 GIBSON, HAWKINS, REDKER, AND BUSHMAN
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
ing measure for their top three shows (Kaufman
& Libby, 2012). Sample items include “I feel
like I can put myself in the shoes of the indi-
viduals featured in the show” and “At key mo-
ments in the show, I feel I know what the
individuals featured are going through” (1 ⫽
strongly disagree to 9 ⫽strongly agree; Cron-
bach’s alpha’s ⬎.78).
Finally, participants completed the NPI
(Raskin & Terry, 1988), which includes 40
forced-choice item pairs (e.g., “I prefer to blend
in with the crowd” vs. “I like to be the center of
attention”). This task was not altered in any way
to reflect a moment-to-moment change in nar-
cissism, but rather was presented as a general
trait measure. The NPI is a standard measure of
narcissism with well-established reliability and
validity (Raskin & Terry, 1988). It is important
to note that the NPI measures subclinical levels
of narcissism, not narcissism as a personality
disorder. A debriefing followed.
Results
A hierarchical regression analysis was carried
out to assess the independent and interactive
effects of the number of narcissistic shows, fre-
quency of viewing the show, and experience
taking on narcissism level as measured by the
NPI. Each show selected by participants was
coded either narcissistic (coded 1) or nonnar-
cissistic (coded 0). Thus, the number of narcis-
sistic shows ranged from 0 to 3. For the fre-
quency of viewing variable, the frequency of
viewing each of the three shows was added.
Similarly, for the experience taking variable,
the self-rated level of experience taking for each
of the three shows was added. Each of these
three variables was standardized and then en-
tered on the first step of the regression, all
two-way interaction terms were entered on the
second step, and the three-way interaction term
was entered on the third step. Overall, 19 par-
ticipants did not complete the NPI, and 7 par-
ticipants did not complete one or more of the
experience taking or frequency of viewing
items, leaving 118 participants in the final sam-
ple. The results of the regression analysis can be
seen in Table 2. The overall model was signif-
icant after the first step, R
2
⫽.08, F(3, 112) ⫽
3.10, p⫽.03. Both the number of narcissistic
shows, ⫽.20, t(107) ⫽2.09, p⬍.04, and
experience taking, ⫽.21, t(107) ⫽2.19, p⫽
.03, were significant predictors of narcissism.
The direct effect of frequency of viewing was
not significant. The second step did not produce
a significant increase in R
2
. The third step, how-
ever, did produce a significant increase in R
2
,
F(1, 108) ⫽4.73, p⫽.03. The two-way inter-
action between number of narcissistic shows
and frequency of viewing narcissistic shows
was significant, ⫽.26, t(107) ⫽2.10, p⬍
.04. This effect was qualified by the expected
three-way interaction, ⫽.30, t(107) ⫽2.63,
p⫽.01. No other effects were significant. In
addition, main effects for both the number of
narcissistic shows, ⫽.09, t(107) ⫽.95, p⬎
.35, and experience taking variable, ⫽.17,
t(107) ⫽1.46, p⬎.14, dropped to nonsignifi-
cant levels in the third step (see Table 2). The
three-way interaction was probed using the
method for testing slope differences (Dawson &
Richter, 2006). For participants reporting high
experience taking and high viewing frequency,
those watching more narcissistic shows re-
ported higher scores on the NPI than those
watching less narcissistic shows (see Figure 1).
The slope of this relationship differed signifi-
cantly from each of the three other potential
combinations of experience taking and viewing
frequency: t(107) ⫽2.67, p⬍.01, for those
Table 2
Results of the Hierarchical Regression: Study 1
Regression step ⌬R
2

Step 1 .08
ⴱ
Show narcissism .20
ⴱ
Viewing frequency ⫺.01
Total experience taking .21
ⴱ
Step 2 .04
Show narcissism .17
Viewing frequency ⫺.12
Total experience taking .16
Narcissism ⫻Frequency .20
Narcissism ⫻Experience taking .09
Frequency ⫻Experience taking ⫺.03
Step 3 .05
ⴱⴱ
Show narcissism .09
Viewing frequency ⫺.15
Total experience taking .17
Narcissism ⫻Frequency .25
ⴱ
Narcissism ⫻Experience taking .01
Frequency ⫻Experience taking ⫺.17
Narcissism ⫻Frequency ⫻Experience
taking .30
ⴱⴱ
ⴱ
p⬍.05.
ⴱⴱ
p⬍.01.
5REALITY TV AND NARCISSISM
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
reporting high experience taking but low view-
ing frequency; t(107) ⫽2.67, p⬍.01, for those
reporting low experience taking but high view-
ing frequency; and t(107) ⫽2.10, p⬍.04, for
those reporting low experience taking and low
viewing frequency. The latter three combina-
tions were not different from each other (p’s ⬎
.25).
Discussion
Results from Study 1 provide some support
for the idea that viewing narcissistic reality TV
characters may increase narcissism levels in
viewers, especially if viewers engage in expe-
rience taking. This extends the findings of pre-
vious research showing a correlation between
frequency of viewing reality TV and viewer
narcissism (Lull & Dickinson, in press). Our
results support the idea that this relationship is
likely to emerge under two conditions: (a) when
the reality TV show being watched focuses on
narcissistic lead characters; and (b) when view-
ers engage in experience taking while viewing
the show. Given the correlational nature of
Study 1, however, it’s difficult to determine the
direction of causation. It may be that more
narcissistic viewers are more drawn to narcis-
sistic shows, and are more likely to engage in
experience taking with narcissistic characters.
In addition, a third factor might be responsible
for both increased viewing of narcissistic shows
and increased levels of trait narcissism. Study 2
addresses these concerns by using an experi-
mental methodology. Participants were ran-
domly assigned to view either a narcissistic
reality TV show or a situation comedy. Some
participants were given instructions designed to
enhance experience taking, whereas the other
participants were given instructions designed to
minimize experience taking. After watching the
assigned show, participants completed a mea-
sure of experience taking and the NPI.
Study 2
Participants
Participants were 165 college students in var-
ious psychology courses (61% female) who vol-
unteered in exchange for extra course credit.
Participants completed the study individually. A
power analysis revealed that about 40 people in
each of the four experimental conditions was
required to detect a medium (d⫽0.5) to large
(d⫽0.8) effect-size estimate with power ⫽.80
at the .05 significance level. Data collection
Figure 1. Study 1: The three-way interaction between show narcissism, viewing frequency,
and experience taking on viewer narcissism.
6 GIBSON, HAWKINS, REDKER, AND BUSHMAN
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
stopped at the end of the week that this sample
size was reached. This study was approved by
the IRB at a large Midwestern University.
Procedure
Study 2 was a 2 (type of show: narcissistic vs.
nonnarcissistic) ⫻2 (experience taking: en-
hance vs. inhibit experience taking) between-
subjects factorial design. Participants were ran-
domly assigned to watch one of four shows in
one of two different categories. Two shows in
each category were selected to increase the gen-
eralizability of the results (Wells & Windschitl,
1999). In the reality show condition, partici-
pants watched either Jersey Shore or The Real
World, shows identified in Study 1 as focusing
on narcissistic characters. In the scripted com-
edy condition, participants watched The Office
or Friends. Because the comedy shows were
shorter than the reality shows, viewers assigned
to the comedy condition watched two episodes,
whereas those assigned to the reality show con-
dition watched only one episode. Thus, total
viewing time in each condition was about 40
min.
To manipulate experience taking, participants
read a fake news article reporting on viewer
enjoyment of TV shows before watching their
randomly assigned show. In the enhance expe-
rience taking condition, participants read that
research had found that people experience more
enjoyment when they strongly identify with
characters in the shows they watch. In the in-
hibit experience taking condition, participants
read that research had found that people expe-
rience more enjoyment when they distance
themselves from characters in the shows they
watch. We have successfully used similar ma-
nipulations in our previous research (Bushman,
Baumeister, & Stack, 1999; Bushman & Whi-
taker, 2010).
Participants were asked to write down the
character in the show that they most closely
identified with, and then completed the same
experience taking measure used in Study 1,
applied to that character. Participants were also
asked how regularly they watched the show,
whether they were interested in seeing more
episodes of the show, and how much they en-
joyed the show they watched (1 ⫽not at all to
9⫽very much). They also reported whether
they had seen the episode of the show they
watched prior to this viewing, and how many
hours of TV they watch weekly. Finally, they
completed the NPI and were debriefed.
Results
Preliminary analyses.
Stimulus sampling. There were no signifi-
cant differences between the two narcissistic
programs on NPI scores (p⫽.85), or between
the two comedy programs on NPI scores (p⫽
.86). Thus, the two narcissistic programs were
combined and the two nonnarcissistic programs
were combined for subsequent analyses.
Relationships between variables. An initial
correlation analysis was carried out to explore
relationships among the variables measured in
Study 2. As can be seen in Table 3, participants
who reported more experience taking during
viewing also reported higher levels of enjoy-
ment, more regular viewing of the show they
had watched, more interest in seeing more epi-
sodes of the show, more hours spent watching
TV, and higher levels of narcissism. Thus, peo-
ple who regularly viewed the show, enjoyed
watching the show, and were interested in see-
ing more episodes of the show all reported
higher levels of experience taking. The direc-
tion of causation in this relationship is unclear
based on these correlational data (i.e., it is not
clear whether more experience taking during
viewing leads to more liking, if liking the show
leads to more experience taking, or if some third
factor is related to both liking and experience
taking). However, given that regularity of view-
ing the show could not be affected by experi-
ence taking during the experiment, it may be the
case that participants who already liked the
show engaged in more experience taking while
watching the show during the experiment. In-
terestingly, and in line with our hypothesis, the
correlations between experience taking, enjoy-
ment, regularity of viewing, and interest in
viewing further episodes remained significant
when breaking the sample into just those who
viewed the comedy shows and just those that
viewed the reality TV shows (all r’s ⬎.22, all
p’s ⬍.05). The correlation between experience
taking and narcissism, however, was only sig-
nificant for those watching the reality TV
shows, r(82) ⫽.37, p⫽.001, but not for those
watching the comedy shows, r⫽⫺.09. Thus,
higher levels of experience taking when watch-
7REALITY TV AND NARCISSISM
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
ing the reality TV show were associated with
higher levels of narcissism. In addition, the cor-
relation between whether participants reported
being regular viewers of the show and scores on
the NPI, which was nonsignificant in the overall
sample, attained significance for those watching
the narcissistic reality TV shows, r(82) ⫽.26,
p⬍.05. In other words, those reporting more
regular viewing of the reality shows used in
Study 2 also reported higher levels of narcis-
sism. These latter two correlations serve as a
conceptual replication to the results reported in
Study 1.
Narcissism manipulation check. To ensure
that the shows differed in terms of the level of
narcissism displayed, two independent raters
blind to the experimental hypothesis watched
the TV programs used in Study 2, and coded for
any actions that fit into any of the seven sub-
scales of the NPI (i.e., Authority,Entitlement,
Exhibitionism,Exploitativeness,Self-Suffi-
ciency,Superiority, and Vanity). Across the four
shows, 66 narcissistic actions were noted. The
raters agreed on 51% of the observed actions,
and 100% consensus was reached through dis-
cussion. Table 4 reports the frequency and type
of narcissistic behavior observed in each show.
As can be seen in Table 4, narcissistic programs
had over three times more narcissistic behaviors
than did nonnarcissistic programs. Thus, the
narcissism manipulation was successful.
Experience taking manipulation check.
As expected, experience taking scores were sig-
nificantly higher in the enhance experience tak-
ing condition (M⫽43.6, SD ⫽12.5) than in the
inhibit experience taking conditions (M⫽36.6,
SD ⫽10.6), F(1, 157) ⫽14.36, p⬍.001, d⫽
0.57, mean difference ⫽7.0, 95% CI [3.03,
10.18]. Thus, the manipulation of experience
taking was successful. Also, the main effect for
type of show watched was significant, F(1,
157) ⫽14.97, p⬍.001, d⫽0.61, mean dif-
ference ⫽7.1, 95% CI [3.29, 10.41]. Partici-
pants watching the narcissistic reality shows
engaged in less experience taking (M⫽36.5,
SD ⫽12.99) than those watching the comedy
shows (M⫽43.6, SD ⫽9.98). No other main or
interactive effects were significant (p’s ⬎.6).
Past viewing history and show enjoyment.
Only 24% of participants reported having seen
the show they watched before the study, and
this did not differ based on the category of
show,
2
(1) ⫽0.59, p⫽.44. Hours per week
spent watching TV did not differ across groups,
all (p’s ⬎.43). Enjoyment levels, however,
differed based on which category of show par-
ticipants watched, F(1, 157) ⫽52.63, p⬍.001,
d⫽1.18, mean difference ⫽2.3, 95% CI [1.77,
2.97]. Participants enjoyed the comedy shows
(M⫽7.3, SD ⫽1.77) more than the reality
shows (M⫽5.0, SD ⫽2.12). A similar pattern
emerged for the item measuring interest in
seeing further episodes of the show, F(1,
161) ⫽72.21, p⬍.001, d⫽1.34, for type of
show watched, mean difference ⫽2.88, 95%
CI [2.21, 3.55]. Participants viewing the com-
edy show reported more interest in seeing more
episodes (M⫽6.90, SD ⫽2.04) than those
Table 3
Correlations Among Measured Variables: Study 2
Measured variable ET E I HWT RSV NPI
Experience taking — .55
ⴱⴱ
.57
ⴱⴱ
.17
ⴱ
.30
ⴱⴱ
.18
ⴱ
n⫽165 n⫽165 n⫽164 n⫽165 n⫽165
Enjoyment — .89
ⴱⴱ
.10 .42
ⴱⴱ
.09
n⫽165 n⫽164 n⫽165 n⫽165
Interest — .08 .49
ⴱⴱ
.11
n⫽164 n⫽165 n⫽165
Hours watching TV — .06 .00
n⫽164 n⫽164
Regular show viewer — .15
n⫽165
Note. ET ⫽Experience Taking; HWT ⫽Hours Watching TV; RSV ⫽Regular Show
Viewer; NPI ⫽Narcissistic Personality Inventory. Tabled values represent the Pearson’s
r-value for the respective relationships. Values with one asterisk indicate relationships
significant at the .05 level, whereas those with two asterisks indicate relationships significant
at the .001 level.
8 GIBSON, HAWKINS, REDKER, AND BUSHMAN
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
watching the reality TV episode (M⫽4.1,
SD ⫽2.34). In addition, there was a main effect
for the experience taking variable, F(1, 161) ⫽
4.62, p⬍.05, d⫽0.34, mean difference ⫽
0.71, 95% CI [⫺0.09, 1.51]. Participants en-
couraged to engage in experience taking re-
ported more interest in seeing more episodes
(M⫽5.84, SD ⫽2.56) than did those not
encouraged to engage in experience taking
(M⫽5.13, SD ⫽2.65). Finally, the same
pattern emerged for the question regarding
whether they were regular viewers of the show,
F(1, 161) ⫽18.95, p⬍.001, d⫽0.69, for the
type of show watched, mean difference ⫽1.40,
95% CI [0.75, 2.05]. The experience taking
variable also found an effect, F(1, 161) ⫽3.94,
p⬍.05, d⫽0.31, mean difference ⫽0.64,
95% CI [⫺0.04, 1.32]. Those encouraged to
engage in experience taking reported being
more regular viewers of the show (M⫽3.80,
SD ⫽2.23) than those not encouraged to en-
gage in experience taking (M⫽3.20, SD ⫽
2.17). Type of show and experience taking did
not interact in any of these analyses (p’s ⬎.40).
Because these three items (show enjoyment,
interest in viewing more, and being regular
viewers) showed similar patterns, they were
combined into one variable, Cronbach’s al-
pha ⫽.82, and in subsequent analyses this scale
was used as a covariate in order to control for
enjoyment.
Primary analyses. A 2 (type of show: nar-
cissistic vs. nonnarcissistic) ⫻2 (experience
taking valence: enhance vs. inhibit experience
taking) ⫻2 (gender) ANCOVA (with the
3-item scale enjoyment scale as a covariate) on
narcissism scores was carried out. As in much
previous work (Grijalva et al., 2015), there was
a main effect for gender, F(1, 156) ⫽17.12,
p⬍.001, p
2⫽.10, mean difference ⫽3.90,
95% CI [2.37, 6.11]. Men (M⫽18.10) were
significantly more narcissistic than women
(M⫽14.20). More importantly, there was a
significant interaction between type of show
and experience taking valence, F(1, 156) ⫽
4.05, p⫽.046, p
2⫽.025 (see Figure 2).
1
No
other main or interactive effects were signifi-
cant, all p’s ⬎.13. Test for simple effects
showed that among participants who saw the
narcissistic reality show, narcissism scores were
significantly higher for participants who read
the bogus article stating that experience taking
1
Rerunning the ANOVA without enjoyment as a cova-
riate leads to identical results. Again, only the gender main
effect, F(1, 157) ⫽17.33, p⬍.001, and the type of show
by experience taking interaction, F(1, 157) ⫽4.19, p⫽
.042, were significant.
Table 4
Narcissistic Actions Performed During the Episodes Used in the Experiment
Television shows Category of narcissistic actions Total narcissistic actions
Friends Authority (1)
Entitlement (2)
Superiority (2) 5
The Office Authority (2)
Entitlement (3)
Exploitative (4)
Vanity (2) 11
The Real World Authority (5)
Entitlement (6)
Exhibitionism (3)
Exploitative (1)
Self-sufficiency (1)
Superiority (2)
Vanity (2) 20
Jersey Shore Authority (3)
Entitlement (4)
Exhibitionism (6)
Exploitative (1)
Superiority (7)
Vanity (9) 30
9REALITY TV AND NARCISSISM
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
enhances enjoyment than for those who read the
article stating that experience taking inhibits
enjoyment, F(1, 156) ⫽4.69, p⫽.03, p
2⫽
.029, mean difference ⫽2.90, 95% CI [0.05,
5.78]. Among participants who saw a comedy
TV show, the experience taking manipulation
had no impact on narcissism scores, F(1,
156) ⬍1, p
2⫽.003, mean difference ⫽1.00,
95% CI [⫺3.43, 1.51]. Among participants in
the increase experience taking condition, those
watching the narcissistic reality show tended to
be more narcissistic than those watching the
comedy TV show, F(1, 156) ⫽3.66, p⫽.06,
p
2⫽.023, mean difference ⫽2.8, 95% CI
[0.25, 5.37]. Among participants in the inhibit
experience taking conditions, there was no dif-
ference between those watching the comedy TV
show and those watching the narcissistic reality
show, F(1, 160) ⬍1, p
2⫽.003, mean differ-
ence ⫽1.00, 95% CI [⫺3.86, 1.84].
Discussion
Study 2 replicated the findings of Study 1
using an experimental design. Participants who
watched a narcissistic reality show while engag-
ing in experience taking reported higher levels
of narcissism than those who did not engage in
experience taking and those who did not watch
a narcissistic reality show.
General Discussion
Despite the interest in increasing levels of
narcissism in the United States, little research
has explored factors leading to higher narcis-
sism levels. Our research identifies a connection
between exposure to narcissistic reality TV stars
and viewer narcissism. This connection, how-
ever, is only present when viewers engage in
experience taking, letting go of their own iden-
tity in ways that lead them take on the charac-
teristics of the stars they are watching. In Study
1, survey respondents who reported watching
more narcissistic reality TV shows, and who
reported engaging in more experience taking,
also reported higher levels of narcissism. Study
2 more clearly demonstrates the causal nature of
this relationship by showing that participants
randomly assigned to watch a narcissistic reality
show while engaging in experience taking were
themselves more narcissistic afterward.
As with most traits, there are likely a large
number of factors that contribute to the devel-
opment of narcissism. These might include par-
enting style (Brummelman et al., 2015; Horton,
Bleau, & Drwecki, 2006; Otway & Vignoles,
2006), excessive noncontingent praise (Twenge
& Campbell, 2009), and economic conditions
during emerging adulthood (Bianchi, 2014).
Figure 2. Study 2: Interactive effects of viewing narcissistic TV programs and experience
taking on narcissism levels. Capped vertical bars denote ⫾1 standard error (SE).
10 GIBSON, HAWKINS, REDKER, AND BUSHMAN
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
Our research, however, is the first to identify
how exposure to a particular form of media,
narcissistic reality TV, can increase viewer nar-
cissism. Only viewers who engaged in experi-
ence taking, however, showed this effect. In a
broader sense, these findings are consistent with
previous research showing that narcissism lev-
els are increasing over time (Twenge & Foster,
2010; Twenge et al., 2008). Reality TV celeb-
rities have been shown to be the most narcis-
sistic of all the celebrity groups (Pinsky &
Young, 2009; Young & Pinsky, 2006). Thus,
watching reality TV shows and identifying with
the characters might be adding to the increasing
narcissism problem. Although this is clearly not
the sole reason why narcissism is increasing
over time, our studies provide evidence that
identification with narcissistic reality stars
should be included in the discussion of factors
causing narcissism to increase.
These results also raise the question of
whether viewers are likely to naturally engage
in experience taking when watching shows on
their own. Other research suggests that viewers
of reality TV have a variety of different motives
for watching (Nabi, Biely, Morgan, & Stitt,
2003; Reiss & Wiltz, 2004; Tsay-Vogel & Kra-
kowiak, in press). Some viewers see themselves
as similar to the reality TV stars they watch, and
watching gives them a chance to fantasize that
they, too, could become famous (Reiss & Wiltz,
2004), especially since reality TV stars have no
professional training in acting. Such individuals
may be particularly likely to engage in experi-
ence taking while watching these shows. Others
viewers, however, may be drawn to reality TV
because they feel different than the characters
they see. These viewers may be more likely to
avoid experience taking, adopting a more de-
tached style of viewing that contrasts them-
selves to the reality stars they watch. Viewing
shows in this fashion would be unlikely to lead
to increasing levels of narcissism, and may even
decrease narcissism scores.
Our findings have implications for research
on narcissism, as measured by the NPI. Our data
show that scores on the NPI can potentially be
responsive to changing experiences in the lives
of individuals. Most research on narcissism
treats it as a stable personality trait. However,
we made no adjustment to the wording of NPI
items to focus on a current state rather than a
trait, as others have done (Giacomin & Jordan,
2014). Nevertheless, we were able to create
shifts in narcissism based on exposure to nar-
cissistic reality TV stars. Identifying stimuli that
can lead to shifts in narcissism can help us gain
a better understanding of how narcissism might
develop. Thus, using the NPI as a dependent
variable, as we did in our research, is a poten-
tially under utilized research strategy (see, Gen-
tile, Twenge, Freeman, & Campbell, 2012, for
another study using this strategy). Furthermore,
the fact that survey data showed this relation-
ship even though the respondents had not re-
cently watched the reality shows, suggests that
this shift could potentially be a lasting one.
One potential alternative explanation for our
results is that they are evidence of priming. A
large research literature suggests that priming
can influence the way the individuals respond to
the world around them (Loersch & Payne,
2011). There are two reasons that we believe
that priming is an insufficient explanation for
our results. First, if priming drove our results,
then participants who viewed narcissistic reality
TV but did not engage in experience taking
would have also shown an increase in narcis-
sism. Second, if priming drove our results then
it would be unlikely that Study 1 would have
identified the relationship between Reality TV
exposure, experience taking, and narcissism.
Participants completing the survey may or may
not have recently viewed a narcissistic reality
TV program; therefore, their responses on the
NPI were unlikely to be influenced by priming.
Given our pattern of results, experience taking
would seem to be the most parsimonious expla-
nation of the effect. Much as experience taking
with an introverted protagonist in Kaufman and
Libby’s (2012) studies led their participants to
report being more introverted, experience tak-
ing with a narcissistic reality TV star led our
participants to report being more narcissistic.
The consequences of such an increase in nar-
cissism could potentially be quite negative. Nar-
cissism is associated with a variety of undesir-
able outcomes. For example, narcissists are
more likely to lash out aggressively when they
receive negative feedback (Bushman &
Baumeister, 1998), are more likely to be drawn
toward sexual aggression (Bushman, Bonacci,
Van Dijk, & Baumeister, 2003), are less likely
to be committed to their romantic partners
(Campbell & Foster, 2002), and are more likely
to show physiological reactivity to negative
11REALITY TV AND NARCISSISM
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
emotions (Cheng, Tracy, & Miller, 2013). Be-
cause of the wealth of negative consequences of
narcissism, it is important to identify factors
that might increase narcissism. By examining
how media exposure affects viewers, our re-
search takes an important step in that direction.
Media has been shown to influence a variety of
behaviors, including aggression (Anderson et
al., 2010) and risk taking (Fischer, Greitemeyer,
Kastenmuller, Vogrincic, & Sauer, 2011), and a
variety of attitudes and beliefs, including body
image dissatisfaction (Markey & Markey, 2012)
and brand attitudes (Gibson, Redker, & Zim-
merman, 2014). Little research, however, has
examined how media might influence the traits
of media consumers. Our findings suggest that
such effects occur, and that media may have the
power to shape consumers in ways that have
broad effects on their future actions. Our results
suggest that engaging in experience taking
while watching narcissistic reality TV charac-
ters is a recipe for becoming convinced that
you, too, have “unbelievable mass appeal.”
References
Anderson, C. A., Shibuya, A., Ihori, N., Swing, E. L.,
Bushman, B. J., Sakamoto, A.,...Saleem, M.
(2010). Violent video game effects on aggression,
empathy, and prosocial behavior in eastern and
western countries: A meta-analytic review. Psy-
chological Bulletin, 136, 151–173. http://dx.doi
.org/10.1037/a0018251
Ashikali, E., Dittmar, H., & Ayers, S. (2014). The
effect of cosmetic surgery reality tv shows on
adolescent girls’ body image. Psychology of Pop-
ular Media Culture, 3, 141–153. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1037/ppm0000022
Behm-Morawitz, E., Lewallen, J., & Miller, B.
(2016). Real mean girls? Reality television view-
ing, social aggression, and gender-related beliefs
among female emerging adults. Psychology of
Popular Media Culture, 5, 340 –355.
Bianchi, E. C. (2014). Entering adulthood in a reces-
sion tempers later narcissism. Psychological Sci-
ence, 25, 1429 –1437. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/
0956797614532818
Bond, B. J., & Drogos, K. L. (2014). Sex on the
shore: Wishful identification and parasocial rela-
tionships as mediators in the relationship between
Jersey Shore exposure and emerging adults’ sexual
attitudes and behaviors. Media Psychology, 17,
102–126. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15213269
.2013.872039
Brummelman, E., Thomaes, S., Nelemans, S. A.,
Orobio de Castro, B., Overbeek, G., & Bushman,
B. J. (2015). Origins of narcissism in children.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
USA, 112, 3659 –3662.
Bushman, B. J., & Baumeister, R. F. (1998). Threat-
ened egotism, narcissism, self-esteem, and direct
and displaced aggression: Does self-love or self-
hate lead to violence? Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 75, 219 –229. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1037/0022-3514.75.1.219
Bushman, B. J., Baumeister, R. F., & Stack, A. D.
(1999). Catharsis, aggression, and persuasive in-
fluence: Self-fulfilling or self-defeating prophe-
cies? Journal of Personality and Social Psychol-
ogy, 76, 367–376. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-
3514.76.3.367
Bushman, B. J., Bonacci, A. M., van Dijk, M., &
Baumeister, R. F. (2003). Narcissism, sexual re-
fusal, and aggression: Testing a narcissistic reac-
tance model of sexual coercion. Journal of Per-
sonality and Social Psychology, 84, 1027–1040.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.84.5.1027
Bushman, B. J., & Whitaker, J. L. (2010). Like a mag-
net: Catharsis beliefs attract angry people to violent
video games. Psychological Science, 21, 790 –792.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0956797610369494
Campbell, W. K., & Foster, C. A. (2002). Narcissism
and commitment in romantic relationships: An in-
vestment model analysis. Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin, 28, 484 – 495. http://dx.doi
.org/10.1177/0146167202287006
Cheng, J. T., Tracy, J. L., & Miller, G. E. (2013). Are
narcissists hardy or vulnerable? The role of narcis-
sism in the production of stress-related biomarkers
in response to emotional distress. Emotion, 13,
1004 –1011. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0034410
Cohen, J. (2001). Defining identification: A theoret-
ical look at the identification of audiences with
media characters. Mass Communication and Soci-
ety, 4, 245–264. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/
S15327825MCS0403_01
Dawson, J. F., & Richter, A. W. (2006). Probing
three-way interactions in moderated multiple re-
gression: Development and application of a slope
difference test. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91,
917–926. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.91
.4.917
Domoff, S. E., Hinman, N. G., Koball, A. M., Stor-
fer-Isser, A., Carhart, V. L., Baik, K. D., & Carels,
R. A. (2012). The effects of reality television on
weight bias: An examination of The Biggest Loser.
Obesity, 20, 993–998. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/
oby.2011.378
Fischer, P., Greitemeyer, T., Kastenmüller, A.,
Vogrincic, C., & Sauer, A. (2011). The effects of
risk-glorifying media exposure on risk-positive
cognitions, emotions, and behaviors: A meta-
12 GIBSON, HAWKINS, REDKER, AND BUSHMAN
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 137, 367–
390. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0022267
Fogel, J., & Kovalenko, L. (2013). Reality television
shows focusing on sexual relationships are associ-
ated with college students engaging in one-night
stands. Journal of Cognitive and Behavioral Psy-
chotherapies, 13, 321–331.
Fogel, J., & Shlivko, A. (2016). Reality television
programs are associated with illegal drug use and
prescription drug misuse among college students.
Substance Use and Misuse, 51, 62–72. http://dx
.doi.org/10.3109/10826084.2015.1082593
Gentile, B. (2011). Celebrity and narcissism. In
W. K. Campbell & J. D. Miller (Eds.), The hand-
book of narcissism and narcissistic personality
disorders (pp. 403– 409). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Gentile, B., Twenge, J. M., Freeman, E. C., & Camp-
bell, W. K. (2012). The effect of social networking
websites on positive self-views: An experimental
investigation. Computers in Human Behavior, 28,
1929 –1933. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012
.05.012
Giacomin, M., & Jordan, C. H. (2014). Down-
regulating narcissistic tendencies: Communal fo-
cus reduces state narcissism. Personality and So-
cial Psychology Bulletin, 40, 488 –500. http://dx
.doi.org/10.1177/0146167213516635
Gibson, B., Redker, C., & Zimmerman, I. (2014).
Conscious and nonconscious effects of product
placement: Brand recall and active persuasion
knowledge affect brand attitudes and brand self-
identification differently. Psychology of Popular
Media Culture, 3, 19 –37. http://dx.doi.org/10
.1037/a0032594
Gibson, B., Thompson, J., Hou, B., & Bushman, B. J.
(2016). Just harmless entertainment? Effects of
surveillance reality TV on physical aggression.
Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 5, 66 –73.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000040
Green, M. C., & Brock, T. C. (2000). The role of
transportation in the persuasiveness of public nar-
ratives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychol-
ogy, 79, 701–721. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-
3514.79.5.701
Green, M. C., Brock, T. C., & Kaufman, G. F.
(2004). Understanding media enjoyment: The role
of transportation into narrative worlds. Communi-
cation Theory, 14, 311–327. http://dx.doi.org/10
.1111/j.1468-2885.2004.tb00317.x
Grijalva, E., Newman, D. A., Tay, L., Donnellan,
M. B., Harms, P. D., Robins, R. W., & Yan, T.
(2015). Gender differences in narcissism: A meta-
analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 141, 261–
310. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0038231
Hoffner, C., & Buchanan, M. (2005). Young adults’
wishful identification with television characters:
The role of perceived similarity and character at-
tributes. Media Psychology, 7, 325–351. http://dx
.doi.org/10.1207/S1532785XMEP0704_2
Horton, R. S., Bleau, G., & Drwecki, B. (2006).
Parenting narcissus: What are the links between
parenting and narcissism? Journal of Personality,
74, 345–376. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-
6494.2005.00378.x
Kaufman, G. F., & Libby, L. K. (2012). Changing
beliefs and behavior through experience-taking.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
103, 1–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0027525
Loersch, C., & Payne, B. K. (2011). The situated
inference model: An integrative account of the
effects of primes on perception, behavior, and
motivation. Perspectives on Psychological Sci-
ence, 6, 234 –252. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/
1745691611406921
Lull, R. B., & Dickinson, T. M. (in press). Does
television cultivate narcissism? Relationships be-
tween television exposure, preferences for specific
genres, and subclinical narcissism. Psychology of
Popular Media Culture.
Markey, C. N., & Markey, P. M. (2012). Emerging
adults’ responses to a media presentation of ideal-
ized female beauty: An examination of cosmetic
surgery in reality television. Psychology of Popu-
lar Media Culture, 1, 209 –219. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1037/a0027869
Mazzeo, S. E., Trace, S. E., Mitchell, K. S., & Gow,
R. W. (2007). Effects of a reality TV cosmetic
surgery makeover program on eating disordered
attitudes and behaviors. Eating Behaviors, 8, 390 –
397. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eatbeh.2006.11
.016
Nabi, R. L., Biely, E. N., Morgan, S. J., & Stitt, C. R.
(2003). Reality-based programming and the psychology
of its appeal. Media Psychology, 5, 303–330. http://dx
.doi.org/10.1207/S1532785XMEP0504_01
Ocasio, A. (2012, September 18). Reality TV by the
numbers. Screenrant.com. Retrieved from http://
screenrant.com/reality-tv-statistics-infographic-
aco-149257
Otway, L. J., & Vignoles, V. L. (2006). Narcissism
and childhood recollections: A quantitative test of
psychoanalytic predictions. Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin, 32, 104 –116. http://dx.doi
.org/10.1177/0146167205279907
Pinsky, D., & Young, S. M. (2009). The mirror
effect: How celebrity narcissism is seducing Amer-
ica. New York, NY: Harper-Collins.
Raskin, R., & Terry, H. (1988). A principal-
components analysis of the Narcissistic Personal-
ity Inventory and further evidence of its construct
validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psy-
chology, 54, 890 –902. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/
0022-3514.54.5.890
13REALITY TV AND NARCISSISM
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
Reiss, S., & Wiltz, J. (2004). Why people watch
reality TV. Media Psychology, 6, 363–378. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1207/s1532785xmep0604_3
Riddle, K., & De Simone, J. J. (2013). A Snooki
effect? An exploration of the surveillance sub-
genre of reality TV and viewers’ beliefs about
the ‘real’ real world. Psychology of Popular
Media Culture, 2, 237–250. http://dx.doi.org/10
.1037/ppm0000005
Rubin, R. B., & McHugh, M. P. (1987). Development
of parasocial interaction relationships. Journal of
Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 31, 279 –292.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08838158709386664
Schramm, H., & Hartmann, T. (2008). A new mea-
sure to assess the intensity and breadth of paraso-
cial processes. Communications, 33, 385– 401.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/COMM.2008.025
Tsay-Vogel, M., & Krakowiak, K. M. (in press).
Exploring viewers’ responses to nine reality TV
subgenres. Psychology of Popular Media Culture.
Twenge, J. M., & Campbell, W. K. (2009). The
narcissism epidemic: Living in the age of entitle-
ment. New York, NY: Atria.
Twenge, J. M., & Foster, J. D. (2010). Birth cohort
increases in narcissistic personality traits among
American college students, 1982–2009. Social
Psychological and Personality Science, 1, 99 –106.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1948550609355719
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 Per-
sonality, 76, 875–902. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j
.1467-6494.2008.00507.x
Vandenbosch, L., Muise, A., Eggermont, S., & Im-
pett, E. A. (2015). Sexualizing reality television:
Associations with trait and state self-objectifica-
tion. Body Image, 13, 62– 66. Advance online pub-
lication. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2015
.01.003
Ward, L. M., & Carlson, C. (2013). Modeling mean-
ness: Associations between reality TV consump-
tion, perceived realism, and adolescents’ social
aggression. Media Psychology, 16, 371–389.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2013.832627
Wells, G. L., & Windschitl, P. D. (1999). Stimulus
sampling and social psychological experimenta-
tion. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
25, 1115–1125. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/
01461672992512005
Young, S. M., & Pinsky, D. (2006). Narcissism and
celebrity. Journal of Research in Personality, 40,
463– 471. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2006.05
.005
Received April 12, 2016
Revision received September 21, 2016
Accepted September 29, 2016 䡲
14 GIBSON, HAWKINS, REDKER, AND BUSHMAN
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
A preview of this full-text is provided by American Psychological Association.
Content available from Psychology of Popular Media Culture
This content is subject to copyright. Terms and conditions apply.