تفاوت های فردی در خودشیفتگی:خودنمایشی متورم در سراسر طول عمر و در سراسر جهان
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||تعداد کلمات|
|32175||2003||18 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||محاسبه نشده|
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Journal of Research in Personality, Volume 37, Issue 6, December 2003, Pages 469–486
The present investigation examined associations among narcissism, age, ethnicity, world region, and gender, using a large (n=3445) sample of participants representing several different world regions and ethnicities. The results suggest that (1) reported narcissism declines in older participants, (2) consistent with previous findings, males report being more narcissistic than females, (3) that ethnic differences in reported narcissism are generally comparable to those found in the self-esteem literature, and (4) that world region appears to exert influence on narcissism, with participants from more individualistic societies reporting more narcissism. The results are discussed in terms of how age and culture might impact narcissism and how future research might address this topic.
Culture and development across the lifespan play crucial roles in shaping the self. Personality and general character sometimes change as people age, especially as they move through adolescence and young adulthood (e.g., Ozer & Gjerde, 1989). Culture also exerts a great deal of pressure on the shaping of personality. For example, the DSM-IV TR notes that people who have recently immigrated may appear to have diagnosable personality disorders when, in fact, they are simply expressing personality traits common to their country of origin (American Psychiatric Association, 2000). Indeed, many authors have argued that culture strongly influences our personalities and views of self (e.g., Heine & Lehman, 1997; Markus & Kitayama, 1991). Even within a single country, culture may influence people to define themselves quite differently (Plaut, Markus, & Lachman, 2002). In the present investigation, we examined how age and culture influence the personality construct of narcissism. In order to collect data from as diverse a sample as possible, we used the Internet. The Internet is fast becoming recognized as a valid and reliable tool for data collection and has been utilized in several large-scale projects that collected data from thousands of participants worldwide. For example, Robins, Trzniewski, Tracy, Gosling, and Potter (2002) collected self-esteem reports from a worldwide sample of participants. Another set of researchers used the Internet to collect self-report personality questionnaires from a large set of respondents representing different ages (Srivastava, John, Gosling, & Potter, in press). The results of investigations such as these may yield valuable insight into the effects of age and culture on personality. The goal of the present investigation was twofold. First, we wanted to collect data on narcissism from a larger and more inclusive sample of participants compared to what one typically finds in the narcissism literature. Specifically, we wanted to gather data on narcissism from people who represented various age and ethnic identity categories as well as different regions of the world. Second, we wanted to test several specific hypotheses and conduct exploratory analyses with narcissism on this large and inclusive sample. Specifically, we wanted to determine whether age, ethnic identity, and country of residence are related to narcissism. We also wanted to replicate previous research showing that men usually report more narcissism than women (e.g., Bushman & Baumeister, 1999; Farwell & Wohlwend-Lloyd, 1998; Joubert, 1998; Ladd, Welsh, Vitulli, Labbe, & Law, 1997). Before we state our specific predictions we briefly address the general issue of narcissism and how it relates to other psychological constructs. Narcissism has a brief but rich history of psychological investigation. Early research in this area centered on narcissism as a personality disorder. The DSM-IV TR defines narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) as lack of empathy, need for admiration, and a pattern of grandiosity (American Psychiatric Association, 2000). Personality/social psychological researchers, however, focus on “sub-clinical” or “normal” narcissists—those who display some of the characteristics of NPD, but not necessarily enough to be diagnosed with NPD. In the present paper, when we refer to the term “narcissist,” we are using the personality/social psychological definition. Narcissism is correlated with several undesirable traits and behaviors. For example, narcissists tend to be less agreeable (Bradlee & Emmons, 1992), tend to be motivated less by intrinsic and more by extrinsic desires (Kasser & Ryan, 1996), and tend to brag about their accomplishments and display a relatively arrogant attitude (Paulhus, 1998). However, there are many positive aspects to narcissism as well. For example, narcissists tend to be highly extraverted (Bradlee & Emmons, 1992), socially bold (Emmons, 1984), less depressed, and less socially anxious (Watson & Biderman, 1993). In addition, narcissism is positively correlated with self-esteem (e.g., Emmons, 1984; Jackson, Ervin, & Hodge, 1992; Raskin, Novacek, & Hogan, 1991; Rhodewalt & Morf, 1995; Watson & Biderman, 1993; Watson, Hickman, & Morris, 1996). Using meta-analytic techniques, Campbell (1999) found an average correlation of .29 between narcissism and self-esteem (as measured by the Rosenberg (1965) self-esteem scale), using the results of 11 studies with a total of 2963 participants. Many researchers view high self-esteem as a positive trait (however, see Twenge & Campbell, 2001; for a more tempered evaluation of the benefits of possessing high self-esteem). Or perhaps more accurately stated, possessing low self-esteem is frequently viewed as a negative trait (e.g., Cutrona, 1982; Kanfer & Zeiss, 1983; Leary, 1983). Thus, despite their negative qualities, narcissists do appear to maintain several positive characteristics, including high self-esteem. As stated previously, the present investigation sought to answer several questions related to narcissism, age, and culture. The initial focal point of this investigation centers upon narcissism and its possible relation to age. Specifically, we wanted to answer the question: are younger people more narcissistic than older people? One might predict that narcissism is unlikely to change with age, especially after early adulthood. Although there is some change in personality during adolescence, a large body of research finds that personality is very stable, based primarily on analyses of correlational consistency, after the age of 30 (Costa & McCrae, 1988; Costa, McCrae, & Arenberg, 1980; Costa et al., 1986). Some cross-sectional research, on the other hand, reveals significant mean-level personality change with age (Srivastava et al., in press). In fact, a recent review of the research documented evidence that personality fluctuates across the lifespan in theoretically meaningful ways (Helson, Kwan, John, & Jones, 2002). Of course, it is possible that personality may demonstrate both correlational consistency and mean-level fluctuations. For example, it is possible that throughout the lives of two people, person A is always more agreeable than person B, but that they both become more agreeable as they age. To examine correlational consistency, longitudinal designs must be employed. Mean-level changes, however, may be investigated using cross-sectional paradigms. Because the primary measure of narcissistic personality (the focus of the present examination), the NPI (Raskin & Terry, 1988), has only been in use in its current form for a relatively short period of time, longitudinally based analyses of correlational consistency will have to wait. We can and we do, however, in the present investigation, assess mean-level fluctuations in narcissism across the lifespan. Thus we return to the issue that has generated considerable debate in personality research: is personality set in plaster after a certain age, or can it change? As for the personality construct of narcissism, we believe that it does change across the lifespan. There are at least three reasons to suggest why this assertion might be true: (1) what some clinicians call “disorder burnout,” (2) the incorporation of objective failure into one’s self-concept (which we label the “reality principle model”), and (3) cultural changes that may produce birth cohort effects. Our first reason to suspect age differences in narcissism is labeled “disorder burnout.” Clinicians have noted that certain personality disorders tend to “mellow” with age. For example, the DSM-IV TR suggests that many of the characteristics associated with antisocial personality disorder may become less evident as one grows older (American Psychiatric Association, 2000), and borderline personality disorder shows a similar pattern. This pattern fits NPD as well; the DSM-IV TR suggests that some common adolescent behaviors might even be mistaken for NPD. Thus, it seems likely that narcissism will decrease with age because as people age, some of the characteristics they possess that are associated with narcissism should assuage. We also speculate that as one grows older one will experience more frequent opportunities for failure (and, in fact, fail more frequently), which we label the “reality principle model.” For example, few children have experience with failing a test or being objectively compared with others before they enter school. As one progresses through life, however, the frequency of objective failure should increase simply because the number of instances when one might objectively succeed or fail increases. The challenge presented by these encounters also increases. In many ways, adolescence and young adulthood present evaluations with progressively higher stakes: college admissions, dating experiences, and job interviews may lead people to doubt their self-esteem in a way they never did as children. Continuing through the lifespan, problems associated with family and general health provide further evidence on one’s lessened ability. We believe that the more failure people experience, the less narcissistic they are likely to be. Young people have simply not had the opportunity to experience much failure. Older people have, and thus they should be less narcissistic. The disorder burnout and reality principle models suggest true age differences in narcissism. However, age differences in a cross-sectional study might also be due to birth cohort (Schaie, 1965; Twenge, 2002). Because people born at different times are exposed to different cultures, birth cohort is a useful proxy for the overall socio-cultural environment (Twenge, 2002). Several pieces of evidence suggest that recent cohorts and environments might be more narcissistic. Christopher Lasch’s well-known 1979 book, The Culture of Narcissism, argued that the United States became progressively more individualistic and self-focused during the 1970s. Other authors found that this trend toward individualism was pervasive and long-standing ( Baumeister, 1987; Gough, 1991). In addition, college students reported progressively higher self-esteem between 1968 and 1994 ( Twenge & Campbell, 2001), even though objective measures such as SAT scores and divorce rates would suggest a decrease in self-esteem. The correlation between self-esteem and narcissism suggests that narcissism scores might have risen as well (especially because the self-esteem rise was disconnected from true improvement or achievement). Thus, younger people (who were born more recently) grew up in a culture focused more on self-esteem and individualism. Older people, raised in more collectivistic eras (e.g., the 1950s), might be less likely to harbor narcissistic traits. This again suggests that narcissism should decrease with age, though this model predicts that the difference would lie in birth cohort rather than in development. Thus far, we have discussed the reasoning behind our hypothesis that reported narcissism will decline in older participants. We now continue and present evidence for our second and third predictions, that narcissism will show world regional and ethnic differences. A growing body of recent research suggests that self-concept variables differ among ethnic groups. Gray-Little and Hafdahl (2000) first identified a self-esteem advantage for Black Americans versus White Americans. This result was confirmed and extended by Twenge and Crocker (2002) in a meta-analysis of self-esteem and ethnic identity. Specifically, they tested potential differences in self-esteem among Whites, Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, and American Indians.1 They found what amounts to a self-esteem continuum, with Blacks reporting the highest self-esteem, followed by Whites. Hispanics, Asians, and American Indians reported the lowest self-esteem. These results corresponded exactly to the comparative levels of individualism among these groups (Oyserman, Coon, & Kemmelmeier, 2002), suggesting that narcissism might show a similar pattern. We therefore predict that a similar continuum will be evident for narcissism. The basis for this prediction is the reliable association between narcissism and self-esteem, which should translate into a result for narcissism that is similar to the result for self-esteem found by Twenge and Crocker (2002). Further, because individualistic thinking is probably positively associated with increased narcissism, the fact that the ethnic differences in self-esteem correspond directly to levels of individualism should mean that narcissism will follow a similar pattern. This prediction, however, may mask important cultural and regional differences in narcissism. For example, Fukunishi et al. (1996) found that the Chinese are more narcissistic than Americans, but the Japanese are less narcissistic than Americans. Thus even within Asia there appears to be some variance as to how narcissistic people are. Plaut et al. (2002) found regional differences in self-description within the United States. For example, people from the West South Central region (e.g., Texas, Oklahoma) report being more outspoken and self-confident, compared to other regions of the country. People from the New England area report being particularly concerned with being softhearted and caring. One might infer from such results, then that if different regions of the United States produce self-concepts laden with either self or other-focused ideologies one might expect a construct such as narcissism to also vary from region to region. There is also a tremendous amount of literature suggesting that self-conceptualization varies across international boundaries. Much of this research focuses on differences stemming from collectivistic versus individualistic cultures. In a recent meta-analytic review, Oyserman et al. (2002) reported consistent differences in collectivistic and individualistic orientations when comparing Americans with Europeans, Asians, Africans, and Middle-Easterners. Other researchers have reported the cross-cultural effects of these social orientations on behaviors and perceptions. For example, Kitayama, Markus, and Matsumoto (1997) examined how collectivistic and individualistic culture shapes situational perceptions. American participants were more likely to identify situations where self-esteem enhancement was likely whereas Japanese participants were more likely to identify situations where self-criticism was the likely outcome. Other research suggests that people from individualistic cultures, in comparison to people from collectivistic cultures, agree more strongly with self-relevant positive emotions (Lee, Jones, & Mineyama, 2002), are less modest (Kurman & Sriram, 2002), are more likely to project their own feelings onto others and recall personal situations from their own perspective as opposed to the perspective of others (Cohen & Gunz, 2002), are more likely to engage in agentic self-enhancement (Kurman, 2001), and tend to report well-being as more closely associated with emotions that are interpersonally distancing (e.g., pride) (Kitayama, Markus, & Kurokawa, 2000). These findings all point to a clear delineation between collectivistic and individualistic cultures in terms of self-concept and perception. As the research suggests, individualism encourages greater focus on the self whereas collectivism promotes greater focus on the group. Thus, individualistic promotion of self-focus over other-focus should be reflected in greater narcissism being expressed in people from more individualistic cultures. This leads us to our third prediction: regional world differences in narcissism will reflect differences in individualism across world regions. Therefore, we expect to find that people from countries with increased individualism will also report being more narcissistic. Our remaining prediction is a replication of previously reported results, which find that men are more narcissistic than women (e.g., Bushman & Baumeister, 1999; Farwell & Wohlwend-Lloyd, 1998; Joubert, 1998; Ladd et al., 1997). In fact, Campbell (1999) found an average correlation of .18 (males higher than females) between gender and narcissism across 20 samples with 3668 participants. Thus, our final hypothesis is that male participants in the present investigation will report more narcissism compared to female participants. The data in the present article, obtained from a large and diverse sample, should help increase the generalizability of this already reliable finding. Previous research has neglected the potentially crucial roles that age and culture play on narcissism. Thus, our knowledge of potential developmental and cultural influences is lacking. The present investigation will for the first time demonstrate the efficacy of these predictors on the personality construct of narcissism, employing a sample that is larger than any previously found in the narcissism literature. To summarize, the present research sought to test four hypotheses concerning narcissism, age, and culture. First, we predict that narcissism will be negatively related to age. Second, we predict that ethnic differences in reported narcissism will fit the same pattern as ethnic differences in self-esteem (Blacks highest, followed by Whites, Hispanics, and then Asians; Twenge & Crocker, 2002). Third, we predict that people from world regions that are more individualistic will also report being more narcissistic. Finally, we predict that men will be more narcissistic than women. We tested each prediction using a sample of participants who completed Internet versions of a narcissism and demographic questionnaire.