A Trifurcated Model of Narcissism and its relation to Aggression

Abstract

Modern society encourages the expression of narcissism in individuals, reflecting a “Narcissism Epidemic” seen across the globe (Twenge & Campbell, 2009). The culture on narcissism is alarming, because narcissistic traits have been constantly associated to greater behavioral and mental health problems (Shane, 2001). Such trends imply that narcissism should now be further examined within non-clinical populations, as narcissism is now known more as a personality trait, and less as a personality disorder. The present study hoped to gain a deeper understanding of non-clinical individuals with narcissistic personality traits by looking at personality differences that underlie sub-groups of narcissism. Additionally, differences in proactive aggression, reactive aggression, and emotion dysregulation among the groups of narcissistic personality traits were examined. The current study hoped to delve deeper into the narcissism-aggression relationship in order to investigate how differing patterns of aggression seen within narcissistic individuals may be explained by the sub-groups of narcissism. Past literature struggled to gain a consensus on what characteristics make up narcissism. By looking at the different patterns of aggression an emotion dysregulation in distinct groupings of narcissistic personality traits, the present study hoped to deliver insight on the structure of narcissism. Specifically, the study performed a Latent Profile Analysis (LPA) to extract distinct sub-groups of narcissistic personality traits. This moves beyond past studies on narcissism, because previous studies have only looked at how singular traits (e.g., extraversion) are related to narcissism. However, an LPA allows for the current study to look at combinations of personality traits (e.g., extraversion with neuroticism), which is important because personality traits are not independent from one another. The study hypothesized that the extracted sub-groups will be differentially associated to proactive aggression reactive aggression, and emotional dysregulation. 607 undergraduate Korean students under the age of 30 participated in online self-report questionnaires. Descriptive statistics and correlation analyses were first conducted with the data. Then, a BCH approach three-step Latent Profile Analysis (LPA) was performed to decide on the number of latent groups of narcissistic personality traits. Finally, differences in aggression and emotion dysregulation across groups were examined. Findings consisted of the following. First, five groups of narcissistic personality traits were extracted. The extracted groups of “Low Narcissism,” “Neurotic Extravert,” “Neurotic,” “Combined Narcissism,” and “Antagonistic Extravert” were found. Mainly, the groups differed from existing models of narcissism, because the factor of antagonism was not found to be a common core represented in all presentations of narcissism. Another difference was that a couple of groups had individuals with both extraversion and neuroticism, something that was not accounted for in past research on the structure of narcissism. Implications of such findings are discussed in the study. Second, the groups were differentially associated to the observed variables. Proactive aggression levels were highest in the “Antagonistic Extravert” group, followed by the groups of “Combined Narcissism” and “Neurotic Extravert.” Reactive aggression levels were highest in the “Neurotic” and “Neurotic Extravert” groups, followed by the “Antagonistic Extravert” group. When looking at emotion dysregulation, it was highest in the “Antagonistic Extravert” group, followed by the “Neurotic” and the “Neurotic Extravert” group. These findings partly support past research on aggression patterns within the trifurcated model of narcissism, but differ because it was unable to find a positive effect of extraversion on aggression and emotion dysregulation. The findings are discussed further in the study. Overall, the different patterns of proactive aggression, reactive aggression, and emotion dysregulation support the argument that narcissism is a structure made up with distinct sub-groups consisting of different personality traits and related behaviors. The extracted groups help provide insight on the limitations of the existing conceptualizations of narcissism, and help advance an understanding of the structure of narcissism.;본 연구는 자기애의 하위요인을 이루는 성격 특징들과, 그 요인들간의 주도적, 반응적 공격성의 차이를 살펴보고자 하였다. 특히, 자기애라는 개념에 대한 정의가 아직 확실하게 정해지지 않은 것이 문제가 되는 바, 본 연구는 자기애-공격성 관계를더 깊이 연구하고 그 관계 내에서 보이는 주도적, 반응적 공격성의 차이를 통해 자기애 안에서의 하위집단들에 대한 이해도를 높이고자 한다. 또한, 집단간 공격성의 차이를 설명하기 위해 정서조절곤란도 살펴보았다. 이와 같은 연구 목적을 위해 전국의 만 30세 이하의 대학생을 대상으로 자기보고식 설문을 실시하였고 총 607명의 자료를 이용해 분석을 실시하였다. 본 연구는 잠재 프로파일 분석을 사용하여 자기애적 성격 특징들의 조합으로 이루어진 유형들을 파악하고, 유형간 주도적 공격성, 반응적 공격성, 정서조절곤란의 차이들을 확인하였다. 잠재 프로파일 분석을 3단계 접근법 (BCH)을 사용하여 유형들을 확인한 후, 종속변수인 공격성과 정서조절곤란을 보조변인으로 넣어 유형별 차이를 확인하였다. 본 연구의 주요 결과는 다음과 같았다. 먼저 자기애적 성격 특징에 대한 5가지 프로파일 유형을 추출하였다. ‘낮은 자기애’, ‘신경증적 외향성’, ‘혼합된 자기애’, ‘신경증적 자기애’, 그리고 ‘적대적 외향성’의 5가지 유형으로 구분되었다. 주도적 공격성은 ‘적대적 외향성’ 유형 다음으로 ‘혼합된 자기애’와 ‘신경증적 외향성’ 유형에서 가장 높았고, 반응적 공격성은 ‘신경증적 자기애’와 ‘신경증적 외향성’, 유형에서 가장 높았다. 정서조절곤란은 ‘적대적 외향성’ 유형에서 가장 높았고 그 다음으로 ‘신경증적 자기애’와 ‘신경증적 외향성’ 유형에서 가장 높았다.