The construct of narcissism is inconsistently defined across clinical theory, social-personality psychology, and psychiatric diagnosis. Two problems were identified that impede integration of research and clinical findings regarding narcissistic personality pathology: (a) ambiguity regarding the assessment of pathological narcissism vs. normal narcissism and (b) insufficient scope of existing narcissism measures. Four studies are presented documenting the initial derivation and validation of the Pathological Narcissism Inventory (PNI). The PNI is a 52-item self-report measure assessing 7 dimensions of pathological narcissism spanning problems with narcissistic grandiosity (Entitlement Rage, Exploitativeness, Grandiose Fantasy, Self-sacrificing Self-enhancement) and narcissistic vulnerability (Contingent Self-esteem, Hiding the Self, Devaluing). The PNI structure was validated via confirmatory factor analysis. The PNI correlated negatively with self-esteem and empathy, and positively with shame, interpersonal distress, aggression, and borderline personality organization. Grandiose PNI scales were associated with vindictive, domineering, intrusive, and overly-nurturant interpersonal problems, and vulnerable PNI scales were associated with cold, socially avoidant, and exploitable interpersonal problems. In a small clinical sample, PNI scales exhibited significant associations with parasuicidal behavior, suicide attempts, homicidal ideation, and several aspects of psychotherapy utilization.

No abstract

No abstract

Background Cumulative adversity and stress are associated with risk of psychiatric disorders. While basic science studies show repeated and chronic stress effects on prefrontal and limbic neurons, human studies examining cumulative stress and effects on brain morphology are rare. Thus, we assessed whether cumulative adversity is associated with differences in gray matter volume, particularly in regions regulating emotion, self-control, and top-down processing in a community sample. Methods One hundred three healthy community participants, aged 18 to 48 and 68% male, completed interview assessment of cumulative adversity and a structural magnetic resonance imaging protocol. Whole-brain voxel-based-morphometry analysis was performed adjusting for age, gender, and total intracranial volume. Results Cumulative adversity was associated with smaller volume in medial prefrontal cortex (PFC), insular cortex, and subgenual anterior cingulate regions (familywise error corrected, p <.001). Recent stressful life events were associated with smaller volume in two clusters: the medial PFC and the right insula. Life trauma was associated with smaller volume in the medial PFC, anterior cingulate, and subgenual regions. The interaction of greater subjective chronic stress and greater cumulative life events was associated with smaller volume in the orbitofrontal cortex, insula, and anterior and subgenual cingulate regions. Conclusions Current results demonstrate that increasing cumulative exposure to adverse life events is associated with smaller gray matter volume in key prefrontal and limbic regions involved in stress, emotion and reward regulation, and impulse control. These differences found in community participants may serve to mediate vulnerability to depression, addiction, and other stress-related psychopathology.

The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate that personality pathology is, at its core, fundamentally interpersonal. We review the proposed DSM-5 Section 3 redefinition of personality pathology involving self and interpersonal dysfunction, which we regard as a substantial improvement over the DSM-IV (and DSM-5 Section 2) definition. We note similarities between the proposed scheme and contemporary interpersonal theory and interpret the DSM-5 Section 3 definition using the underlying assumptions and evidence base of the interpersonal paradigm in clinical psychology. We describe how grounding the proposed DSM-5 Section 3 definition in interpersonal theory, and in particular a focus on the “interpersonal situation”, adds to its theoretical texture, empirical support, and clinical utility. We provide a clinical example that demonstrates the ability of contemporary interpersonal theory to augment the DSM-5 definition of personality pathology. We conclude with directions for further research that could clarify the core of personality pathology, and how interpersonal theory can inform research aimed at enhancing the DSM-5 Section 3 proposal and ultimately justify its migration to DSM-5 Section 2.