Search

Objective: Theoretical conceptions of narcissism have long been characterized by two seemingly opposing poles: grandiosity and vulnerability. The goal of the current study was to investigate the extent to which traits associated with one profile are perceived to co-occur with the other within an individual. Method: Lay raters (n = 862; 56% female; 80% Caucasian; mean age = 37) recruited from Amazon's MTurk and assigned to one of four conditions in which they rated how often a series of narcissistic traits were displayed by a prototypical grandiose narcissist, vulnerable narcissist, a close friend, or themselves. Vulnerable narcissism items were specifically worded to assess internalizing vs. externalizing-based emotional responses. Results: Results suggest that grandiosely narcissistic individuals are seen as responding angrily to ego-threatening situations, while vulnerably narcissistic individuals are seen as responding with a broader array of negative emotions including anger, sadness, and shame. In contrast, vulnerably narcissistic individuals were not rated as consistently demonstrating behaviors, attitudes, or cognitions associated with grandiose narcissism. Conclusions: Grandiose and vulnerable narcissistic individuals both exhibit anger in response to ego threat, but sadness/shame responses are much more characteristic of vulnerable narcissism. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Objective Increasing attention has been paid to the distinction between the dimensions of narcissistic grandiosity and vulnerability. We examine the degree to which basic traits underlie vulnerable narcissism, with a particular emphasis on the importance of Neuroticism and Agreeableness. Method Across four samples (undergraduate, online community, clinical-community), we conduct dominance analyses to partition the variance predicted in vulnerable narcissism by the Five-Factor Model personality domains, as well as compare the empirical profiles generated by vulnerable narcissism and Neuroticism. Results These analyses demonstrate that the lion's share of variance is explained by Neuroticism (65%) and Agreeableness (19%). Similarity analyses were also conducted in which the extent to which vulnerable narcissism and Neuroticism share similar empirical networks was tested using an array of criteria, including self-, informant, and thin slice ratings of personality; interview-based ratings of personality disorder and pathological traits; and self-ratings of adverse events and functional outcomes. The empirical correlates of vulnerable narcissism and Neuroticism were nearly identical (MrICC = .94). Partial analyses demonstrated that the variance in vulnerable narcissism not shared with Neuroticism is largely specific to disagreeableness-related traits such as distrustfulness and grandiosity. Conclusions These findings demonstrate the parsimony of using basic personality to study personality pathology and have implications for how vulnerable narcissism might be approached clinically.

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.

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.

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.

Our meta-analysis also finds no change over time in Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI) scores among California college students, most likely due to the cultural and ethnic shifts at the University of California campuses over this time (especially the large increase in Asian-American student enrollment). Students in the rest of the country, from 27 campuses, show an increase of d=0.41 in narcissism over 24 years. The finding that high school students' self-esteem does not change replicates our previous cross-temporal meta-analysis. The self-enhancement measure used by the authors is flawed, as it uses self-reported grades rather than an objective measure. Sampling issues are minor, as the meta-analysis was a representative sampling of college students. Finally, problems with a simplistic “good” and “bad” labeling of NPI factors are discussed.

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.

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.

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.

A cross-temporal meta-analysis found that narcissism levels have risen over the generations in 85 samples of American college students who completed the 40-item forced-choice Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI) between 1979 and 2006 (total n=16,475). Mean narcissism scores were significantly correlated with year of data collection when weighted by sample size (beta=.53, p