Assessment of Narcissistic Personality Disorder

Watson, Chris; Bagby, R. Michael

doi:10.1002/9781118093108.ch10

Cited by 8 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 64 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The nine-item Narcissistic Personality Disorder subscale of the Personality Diagnostic Questionnaire–4 (Hyler, 1994) is the most frequently used self-report measure of narcissistic personality disorder (Miller & Campbell, 2008; C. Watson & Bagby, 2011).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Communal narcissism.

Gebauer¹,

Sedikides²,

Verplanken³

et al. 2012

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

292

376

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An agency-communion model of narcissism distinguishes between agentic narcissists (individuals satisfying self-motives of grandiosity, esteem, entitlement, and power in agentic domains) and communal narcissists (individuals satisfying the same self-motives in communal domains). Five studies supported the model. In Study 1, participants listed their grandiose self-thoughts. Two distinct types emerged: agentic ("I am the most intelligent person") and communal ("I am the most helpful person"). In Study 2, we relied on the listed communal grandiose self-thoughts to construct the Communal Narcissism Inventory. It was psychometrically sound, stable over time, and largely independent of the Narcissistic Personality Inventory-the standard measure of agentic narcissism. In Studies 3 and 4, agentic and communal narcissists shared the same self-motives, while crucially differing in their means for need satisfaction: Agentic narcissists capitalized on agentic means, communal narcissists on communal means. Study 5 revisited the puzzle of low self-other agreement regarding communal traits and behaviors. Attesting to the broader significance of our model, this low self-other agreement was partly due to communal narcissists: They saw themselves as high, but were seen by others as low, in communion.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Communal narcissism.

Gebauer¹,

Sedikides²,

Verplanken³

et al. 2012

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

292

376

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Fifth, unpublished data were requested from key scholars in the field, and researchers were specifically contacted if their published or unpublished papers did not provide necessary information. Sixth, we searched for papers that mentioned common measures of narcissism identified from two chapters in the Handbook of Narcissism and Narcissistic Personality that focused on the measurement of narcissism (i.e., Tamborski & Brown, 2011; Watson & Bagby, 2011).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Narcissism and Self-Insight

Grijalva

Zhang

2015

Pers Soc Psychol Bull

169

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current article reviews the narcissism-self-enhancement literature using a multilevel meta-analytic technique. Specifically, we focus on self-insight self-enhancement (i.e., whether narcissists perceive themselves more positively than they are perceived by others); thus, we only include studies that compare narcissists' self-reports to observer reports or objective measures. Results from 171 correlations reported in 36 empirical studies (N = 6,423) revealed that the narcissism-self-enhancement relationship corrected for unreliability in narcissism was .21 (95% confidence interval [CI] = [.17, .25]), and that narcissists tend to self-enhance their agentic characteristics more than their communal characteristics. The average corrected relationship between narcissism and self-enhancement for agentic characteristics was .29 (95% CI = [.25, .33]), whereas for communal characteristics it was .05 (95% CI = [-.01, .10]). In addition, we individually summarized narcissists' self-enhancement for 10 different constructs (i.e., the Big Five, task performance, intelligence, leadership, attractiveness, and likeability).

show abstract

“…The reality is that narcissism lacks a definition shared across the various interested researchers in disciplines ranging from psychiatry to social/personality psychology (Cain et al, 2008; Miller & Campbell, 2008; Pincus & Lukowitsky, 2010). Nothing better reflects this state of affairs than the diversity of instruments available to measure narcissism, of which there has been a proliferation in the past decade or so (see, e.g., Samuel & Widiger, 2008; Watson & Bagby, 2011, for reviews; but also more recent additions from Back et al, 2013; Gebauer et al, 2012; Glover, Miller, Lynam, Crego, & Widiger, 2012). This diversity undercuts psychometric comparisons of specific inventories because expectations for nomological networks depend on theoretical assumptions about the construct.…”

Section: The Fundamental Debate: a Lack Of Common Groundmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the Measure and Mismeasure of Narcissism

Wright

2015

Assessment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Narcissism continues to suffer from a lack of consensual definition. Variability in the definition is reflected in the growing multitude of measures with oftentimes diverging nomological nets. Although the themes of narcissistic grandiosity and vulnerability appear to have achieved reasonable agreement on their central importance, the lower order structure of each is not well understood and debates remain about how (and whether) they can be integrated into a coherent whole. However, it is clear that a narrow focus on higher order grandiosity without consideration of concomitant vulnerability neglects clinically important features of narcissism. Occasioned by the potential for a new personality disorder model in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-Fifth edition, several colleagues and I demonstrated that pathological narcissism, as measured by the Pathological Narcissism Inventory, could not be adequately summarized by the lower order traits of Grandiosity and Attention Seeking, and argued that this should be reflected in the diagnostic manual in some form. Miller, Lynam, and Campbell then subjected these same data to critical reanalysis and interpretation. I respond here to several points raised by Miller and colleagues. In so doing, I highlight areas of agreement, disagreement, and suggest directions for future research.

show abstract

Assessment of Narcissistic Personality Disorder

Cited by 8 publications

References 64 publications

Communal narcissism.

Communal narcissism.

Narcissism and Self-Insight

On the Measure and Mismeasure of Narcissism

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About