The most widely used measure of trait narcissism is the Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI), which can provide both total and subscale scores. However, with a length of 40 items, this measure may not be ideal in settings in which time or participant attention may limit the types of measures that can be administered. In response, Ames, Rose, and Anderson (2006) created the NPI-16, which provides a shorter, unidimensional measure of the construct. In the present research, we examine the reliability and validity of the NPI-16 in conjunction with a new short measure of narcissism, the NPI-13, which provides both a total score and 3 subscale scores (Leadership/Authority; Grandiose Exhibitionism; Entitlement/Exploitativeness). Across 2 studies, we demonstrate that both short measures manifest good convergent and discriminant validity and adequate overall reliability. The NPI-13 may be favored over the NPI-16 because it allows for the extraction of 3 subscales, consistent with the use of its parent measure.

Commonly used dating violence prevention programs assume that promotion of more egalitarian gender role attitudes will prevent dating violence perpetration. Empirical research examining this assumption, however, is limited and inconsistent. The current study examined the longitudinal association between gender role attitudes and physical dating violence perpetration among adolescent boys (n=577; 14% Black, 5% other race/ethnicity) and examined whether injunctive (i.e., acceptance of dating violence) and descriptive (i.e., beliefs about dating violence prevalence) normative beliefs moderated the association. As expected, the findings suggest that traditional gender role attitudes at T1 were associated with increased risk for dating violence perpetration 18 months later (T2) among boys who reported high, but not low, acceptance of dating violence (injunctive normative beliefs) at T1. Descriptive norms did not moderate the effect of gender role attitudes on dating violence perpetration. The results suggest that injunctive norms and gender role attitudes work synergistically to increase risk for dating violence perpetration among boys; as such, simultaneously targeting both of these constructs may be an effective prevention approach.

No abstract

Research on gender roles suggests that men who strongly adhere to traditional masculine gender norms are at increased risk for the perpetration of violent and abusive acts toward their female intimate partners. Yet, gender norms alone fail to provide a comprehensive explanation of the multifaceted construct of intimate partner violence (IPV) and there is theoretical reason to suspect that men who fail to conform to masculine roles may equally be at risk for IPV. In the present study, we assessed effect of masculine discrepancy stress, a form of distress arising from perceived failure to conform to socially-prescribed masculine gender role norms, on IPV. Six-hundred men completed online surveys assessing their experience of discrepancy stress, masculine gender role norms, and history of IPV. Results indicated that masculine discrepancy stress significantly predicted men’s historical perpetration of IPV independent of other masculinity related variables. Findings are discussed in terms of potential distress engendered by masculine socialization as well as putative implications of gender role discrepancy stress for understanding and intervening in partner violence perpetrated by men.