CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 84Personality Disorders and PsychopathologyPersonality Traits and PsychologyPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research

Narcissistic personality disorder in DSM-5.

Skodol, Andrew E., Bender, Donna S., Morey, Leslie C.·2014·Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment
DOI 10.1037/per0000023
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The criteria for personality disorders in Section II of DSM-5 have not changed from those in DSM-IV. Therefore, the diagnosis of Section II narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) will perpetuate all of the well-enumerated shortcomings associated with the diagnosis since DSM-III. In this article, we will briefly review problems associated with Section II NPD and then discuss the evolution of a new model of personality disorder and the place in the model of pathological narcissism and NPD. The new model was intended to be the official approach to the diagnosis of personality pathology in DSM-5, but was ultimately placed as an alternative in Section III for further study. The new model is a categorical-dimensional hybrid based on the assessment of core elements of personality functioning and of pathological personality traits. The specific criteria for NPD were intended to rectify some of the shortcomings of the DSM-IV representation by acknowledging both grandiose and vulnerable aspects, overt and covert presentations, and the dimensionality of narcissism. In addition, criteria were assigned and diagnostic thresholds set based on empirical data. The Section III representation of narcissistic phenomena using dimensions of self and interpersonal functioning and relevant traits offers a significant improvement over Section II NPD.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/per0000023

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The DSM-5 NPD criteria have been criticised for emphasizing grandiosity and excluding vulnerability.

    “Despite these features being important aspects of narcissism that have been validated through empirical research [2, 3], they have been criticised for their emphasis on grandiosity and the exclusion of vulnerability in narcissism [4, 5]”

    From Living with pathological narcissism: a qualitative study (2020) · cites this paper as [5]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 32 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Skodol, A. E., Bender, D. S., & Morey, L. C.
Affiliations
  • University of Arizona (US)
  • Texas A&M University (US)
ORCID
Venue
Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment
Publisher
American Psychological Association (APA)
Published
2014-10
Volume
5
Issue
4
Pages
422-427
ISSN
  • 1949-2715 (ISSN-L)
  • 1949-2723
DOI
10.1037/per0000023
OpenAlex
W2154196883
Cited by
83
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 3
FWCI
5.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Personality Disorders Theory Research and Treatment (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Disorders and Psychopathology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research
Keywords
narcissistic personality disorder, DSM-5, personality disorder diagnosis, pathological narcissism, grandiose narcissism, vulnerable narcissism, personality functioning, personality traits, diagnostic criteria, DSM-IV
MeSH terms
Humans, Models, Psychological, Personality, Personality Disorders, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review