Development of a Rasch homogenous short form of the Pathological Narcissism Inventory

During the last decades, the narcissistic personality inventory (npi) was the most widely used questionnaire to measure narcissism as a personality trait. But the npi assesses grandiose narcissism only, while recent discussions emphasize the existence of vulnerable narcissism. The pathological narcissism inventory (pni, pincus et al., 2009) is a new questionnaire assessing these different aspects of narcissism. However, with 54 items on seven subscales, the pni is quite long to serve as a screening tool for narcissistic traits. We therefore developed a short form to facilitate its application in research and practice. Even though the pni covers different symptoms of narcissism, they are all expressions of the same underlying construct. We therefore used the rasch model to guide the item selection. Method and results: a sample of 1837 participants (67.5% female, mean age 26.8 years) was used to choose the items for the short form. Two criteria were adopted: all aspects, represented by the seven subscales in the original, should be retained, and items should be rasch homogenous. In a step-by-step procedure we excluded items successively until reaching a homogenous pool of 22 items. All remaining items had satisfactory fit indices and fitstatistics for the model were good. characteristics of the resulting short form were tested using a new independent validation sample (n=104, mean age = 32.8, 45% female). Correlations of the short pni with different validation measures were comparable to the correlations obtained with the original form, indicating that the two forms were equivalent. Conclusion: the resulting one-dimensional measure can be used as a screening questionnaire for pathological narcissism. The rasch homogeneity facilitates the comparison of narcissism scores among a variety of samples.

Self-esteem, narcissism, and stressful life events: Testing for selection and socialization

We examined whether self-esteem and narcissism predict the occurrence of stressful life events (i.e., selection) and whether stressful life events predict change in self-esteem and narcissism (i.e., socialization). The analyses were based on longitudinal data from 2 studies, including samples of 328 young adults (Study 1) and 371 adults (Study 2). The effects of self-esteem and narcissism were mutually controlled for each other and, moreover, controlled for effects of depression. After conducting the study-level analyses, we meta-analytically aggregated the findings. Self-esteem had a selection effect, suggesting that low self-esteem led to the occurrence of stressful life events; however, this effect became nonsignificant when depression was controlled for. Regardless of whether depression was controlled for or not, narcissism had a selection effect, suggesting that high narcissism led to the occurrence of stressful life events. Moreover, stressful life events had a socialization effect on self-esteem, but not on narcissism, suggesting that the occurrence of stressful life events decreased self-esteem. Analyses of trait–state models indicated that narcissism consisted almost exclusively of perfectly stable trait variance, providing a possible explanation for the absence of socialization effects on narcissism. The findings have significant implications because they suggest that a person’s level of narcissism influences whether stressful life events occur, and that self-esteem is shaped by the occurrence of stressful life events. Moreover, we discuss the possibility that depression mediates the selection effect of low self-esteem on stressful life events.

Refining the vulnerability model of low self-esteem and depression: Disentangling the effects of genuine self-esteem and narcissism

A growing body of research supports the vulnerability model of low self-esteem and depression, which states that low self-esteem is a risk factor for depression. The goal of the present research was to refine the vulnerability model, by testing whether the self-esteem effect is truly due to a lack of genuine self-esteem or due to a lack of narcissistic self-enhancement. For the analyses, we used data from 6 longitudinal studies consisting of 2,717 individuals. In each study, we tested the prospective effects of self-esteem and narcissism on depression both separately for each construct and mutually controlling the constructs for each other (i.e., a strategy that informs about effects of genuine self-esteem and pure narcissism), and then meta-analytically aggregated the findings. The results indicated that the effect of low self-esteem holds when narcissism is controlled for (uncontrolled effect = -.26, controlled effect = -.27). In contrast, the effect of narcissism was close to zero when self-esteem was controlled for (uncontrolled effect = -.06, controlled effect = .01). Moreover, the analyses suggested that the self-esteem effect is linear across the continuum from low to high self-esteem (i.e., the effect was not weaker at very high levels of self-esteem). Finally, self-esteem and narcissism did not interact in their effect on depression; that is, individuals with high self-esteem have a lower risk for developing depression, regardless of whether or not they are narcissistic. The findings have significant theoretical implications because they strengthen the vulnerability model of low self-esteem and depression.

What’s the best method? Comparison of different short forms oft he Pathological Narcissism Inventory

Recent research emphasizes the various facets of narcissism. As a consequence, newly developed questionnaires for narcissism have a large number of subscales and items. However, for the daily use in research and practice, short measures are crucial. In this study we compare different short forms of the Pathological Narcissism Questionnaire, a 54 item measure with seven subscales. In different samples (total N>2000) we applied different theoretical models to construct short forms of approximately 20 items. In particular, we compared IRT, item-total correlation, and factor loading based short forms and versions based on content validity and random selection. In all versions the original subscale structure was preserved. Results show that the short forms all have high correlations with the original version. Furthermore, correlations with criterion validation measures were comparable. We conclude that the item number can be reduced substantially without loosing information. Pros and cons of the different reduction methods are discussed.

How to measure Narcissism – an ongoing discussion

Over the last decades, research on narcissism was dominated with a focus on grandiose narcissism as measured by the NPI (Raskin & Terry, 1988), however, recent discussions emphasize the broad range of manifestations of narcissism, in particular more vulnerable aspects. As a result, new questionnaires were developed to cover the full range of these aspects. One example is the Pathological Narcissism Scale (PNI, Pincus et al. 2009), a 52 item questionnaire with seven subscales covering both grandiose and vulnerable aspects. Validation studies show that narcissism as measured with the PNI differs substantially from narcissism as measured with the NPI. Moreover, a discussion concerning the composition of grandiose and vulnerable narcissism has evolved from these data. In our study we demonstrate how scores on narcissism and narcissism subtypes are associated with a broad variety of personality and clinical measures. In a sample of 1837 participants (1240 female, 597 male; mean age 26.8 years) we investigated the correlation patterns of both PNI and NPI subscales with constructs like FFM, aggression, emotions, clinical symptoms, and well-being. Results show that the assignment of subscales to grandiose and vulnerable subtypes are not unambiguous. We therefore conclude that the decision of how to measure narcissism needs further investigation.

Narcissism and emotional contagion: do narcissists “catch” the emotions of others?

In this research, we investigated the association between narcissism and one central aspect of empathy, susceptibility for emotional contagion (the transfer of emotional states from one person to another). In an experimental study (N=101), we were able to compare actual susceptibility for emotional contagion (as indicated by a change in emotions that converges with the emotions of another person) and self-reported susceptibility for emotional contagion (assessed via questionnaire). Results showed that in the case of positive emotions, narcissists were actually less susceptible to emotional contagion than individuals low in narcissism. At the same time, however, narcissists believed they were more susceptible to contagion of positive emotions. Thus, narcissists were less likely to “catch the positive emotions” of others than individuals low in narcissism, but at the same time lacked the self-insight capabilities to notice this.