CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 302Personality Traits and PsychologyPersonality Disorders and PsychopathologySocial and Intergroup Psychology

Behavioral processes underlying the decline of narcissists’ popularity over time.

Leckelt, Marius, Küfner, Albrecht C. P., Nestler, Steffen, Back, Mitja D.·2015·Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
DOI 10.1037/pspp0000057
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Following a dual-pathway approach to the social consequences of grandiose narcissism, we investigated the behavioral processes underlying (a) the decline of narcissists' popularity in social groups over time and (b) how this is differentially influenced by the 2 narcissism facets admiration and rivalry. In a longitudinal laboratory study, participants (N = 311) first provided narcissism self-reports using the Narcissistic Personality Inventory and the Narcissistic Admiration and Rivalry Questionnaire, and subsequently interacted with each other in small groups in weekly sessions over the course of 3 weeks. All sessions were videotaped and trained raters coded participants' behavior during the interactions. Within the sessions participants provided mutual ratings on assertiveness, untrustworthiness, and likability. Results showed that (a) over time narcissists become less popular and (b) this is reflected in an initially positive but decreasing effect of narcissistic admiration as well as an increasing negative effect of narcissistic rivalry. As hypothesized, these patterns of results could be explained by means of 2 diverging behavioral pathways: The negative narcissistic pathway (i.e., arrogant-aggressive behavior and being seen as untrustworthy) plays an increasing role and is triggered by narcissistic rivalry, whereas the relevance of the positive narcissistic pathway (i.e., dominant-expressive behavior and being seen as assertive) triggered by narcissistic admiration decreases over time. These findings underline the utility of a behavioral pathway approach for disentangling the complex effects of personality on social outcomes.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/pspp0000057

Cites

64 of 64 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?

  • Perceptions of narcissistic individuals in peer groups vary according to the length of acquaintance, with short-term acquaintances evaluating narcissistic peers more positively and longer acquaintance diminishing these positive perceptions.

    “prior research shows that perceptions of narcissistic individuals in peer groups vary according to the length of acquaintance because the passage of time exposes narcissists’ negative characteristics. Thus, short-term acquaintances tend to evaluate narcissistic peers more positively, whereas over time with longer acquaintance these positive perceptions diminish (Carlson et al., 2011; Leckelt et al”

    From Narcissistic Leaders and Their Victims: Followers Low on Self-Esteem and Low on Core Self-Evaluations Suffer Most (2018) · cites this paper as Leckelt et al., 2015

  • At early stages of acquaintance, narcissists are more likely to increase in status and likability.

    “Studies focusing on the formation of affiliative bonds among previously unacquainted individuals found that, at early stages of acquaintance, narcissists were more likely to increase in status and likability.”

    From The "Why" and "How" of Narcissism: A Process Model of Narcissistic Status Pursuit (2020) · cites this paper as Leckelt et al., 2015

  • As interactions grow more intimate, narcissists are more likely to lose their initially high status and become less trusted and liked over time, especially because of antagonistic behaviors.

    “However, as interactions grew more intimate, narcissists were more likely to lose their initially high status and to become less trusted and liked over time, especially because of their antagonistic behaviors (Carlson & Lawless DesJardins, 2015; Küfner, Nestler, & Back, 2013; Leckelt et al., 2015; Paulhus, 1998).”

    From The "Why" and "How" of Narcissism: A Process Model of Narcissistic Status Pursuit (2020) · cites this paper as Leckelt et al., 2015

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Leckelt, M., Küfner, A. C. P., Nestler, S., & Back, M. D.
Affiliations
University of Münster (DE)
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Publisher
American Psychological Association (APA)
Published
2015
Volume
109
Issue
5
Pages
856-871
ISSN
  • 0022-3514 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1315
DOI
10.1037/pspp0000057
OpenAlex
W1622452712
Cited by
302
References
64
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 31 · 2023: 46 · 2022: 33 · 2021: 32 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 29 · 2018: 40 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1
FWCI
30.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
German Research Foundation (DFG) (BA 3731/6-1)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Disorders and Psychopathology
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
Keywords
grandiose narcissism, narcissistic admiration, narcissistic rivalry, behavioral pathways, assertiveness, untrustworthiness, likeability, small group interaction
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Female, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Male, Narcissism, Social Behavior, Social Desirability, Social Perception, Time Factors, Young Adult

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