Previous research has often portrayed narcissism as a unitary construct, however more recent research suggests it may be multidimensional. This study was conducted to examine the utility of two measures of narcissism – the Narcissistic Pathological Inventory and the Pathological Narcissism Inventory, in jointly assessing a broader range of narcissism content. The sample consisted of 220 undergraduate students. Eight factors were extracted from an exploratory analysis labeled: Contingent Self-Esteem, Grandiose Fantasy, Leadership/Authority, Devaluing the Self, Grandiose Exhibitionism, Manipulative, Entitlement, and Superiority. It was found that these narcissism factors had differing relationships with self-esteem, depression, anxiety, and stress. Although a higher-order factor structure did not have satisfactory fit, it is maintained that these eight factors reflect the two higher order dimensions of adaptive and maladaptive narcissism. It is recommended that future researchers construct their studies based on a multidimensional conceptualisation of narcissism, and use multiple narcissism measures.
1.1. Conceptual dimensionality
Research into the conceptual dimensionality of narcissism is complex, with different taxonomic levels at which narcissism can be examined. There is not yet agreement regarding the number of dimensions that make up the construct. According to Ackerman et al. (2011), narcissism may be broadly conceptualized in two higher order dimensions – adaptive and maladaptive. Adaptive narcissism is related to psychological health and resilience (Sedikides, Rudich, Gregg, Kumashiro, & Rusbult, 2004) and maladaptive narcissism is related to entitlement and negative affect (Pincus et al., 2009). This may be analogous to normal versus pathological narcissism (Pincus & Lukowitsky, 2010). Normal narcissism has been associated with the ability to promote a positive self-image, seek out self-enhancing experiences in social environments, and assert dominance in achievement related contexts (Pincus and Lukowitsky, 2010 and Ackerman et al., 2011). Pathological narcissism is related to problematic self-regulation processes, and can be further broken down into grandiose and vulnerable dimensions (Ackerman et al., 2011 and Miller et al., 2013).
The grandiose dimension is associated with elements of grandiosity, aggression and entitlement, whereas the vulnerable dimension is associated with feelings of inadequacy, negative affect and incompetence (Miller et al., 2011). This grandiose/vulnerable distinction is widely supported in the clinical literature (Pincus et al., 2009 and Cain et al., 2008). This two-factor model focusses only on a maladaptive or pathological conceptualization of narcissism.
Other research has put forward models that may capture more adaptive traits associated with narcissism. Russ, Shedler, Bradley, and Westen (2008) three-factor model consists of ‘Grandiose/Malignant’, ‘Fragile’ and ‘High-Functioning Exhibitionist’ factors. The Grandiose/Malignant and Fragile dimensions are similar to the grandiose/vulnerable distinction. The third factor, High-Functioning Exhibitionism, appears to capture more beneficial or adaptive narcissistic traits such as leadership ability, and outgoingness, accompanied by an excessive sense of self-importance (Russ et al., 2008). Ackerman et al. (2011) also proposed a model consisting of three factors – ‘Leadership/Authority’, ‘Grandiose Exhibitionism’ and ‘Entitlement/Exploitativeness’. Adaptive narcissism traits are reflected by the Leadership/Authority factor. When compared to the two-factor model, these three-factor models encompass a wider range of traits associated with both adaptive and maladaptive narcissism. However adaptive narcissism profiles are often uncorrelated with maladaptive profiles, thus researchers have questioned the whether an adaptive dimension should be considered in the measurement of narcissism at all (Ackerman et al., 2011).
This study contributes to factor analyses of narcissism measures. It follows on from the proposals for an adaptive/maladaptive distinction between narcissism measures and facets (Ackerman et al., 2011). Most importantly, this study has been an empirical investigation of narcissism factors, and provides evidence for a multidimensional conceptualisation of narcissism. Finally, evidence is provided for the utility of narcissism factors in the prediction of psychological outcomes.
