CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 83Personality Traits and PsychologyPersonality Disorders and PsychopathologyPsychological Testing and Assessment

Interpersonal Perception of Pathological Narcissism: A Social Relations Analysis

Lukowitsky, Mark R., Pincus, Aaron L.·2013·Journal of Personality Assessment
DOI 10.1080/00223891.2013.765881
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Impairments in self and interpersonal functioning are core features of personality pathology. Clinical theory and research indicate that compromised self-awareness and distorted interpersonal perceptions are particularly prominent in individuals exhibiting pathological narcissism and Narcissistic Personality Disorder. Therefore we conducted a study to gain a better understanding of interpersonal perception of pathological narcissism. A large sample (N=437) of moderately acquainted individuals assigned to 1 of 93 small mixed-sex groups completed self- and informant ratings on the Pathological Narcissism Inventory (PNI) in a round-robin design. The social relations model (SRM) was used to partition the variance in dyadic ratings to investigate several hypotheses about interpersonal perception of pathological narcissism. SRM analyses demonstrated evidence of assimilation (the tendency to perceive and rate others similarly) and consensus (the extent to which multiple observers form similar impressions of another person) in interpersonal perception of pathological narcissism. Results also indicated modest self-other agreement and assumed similarity (the tendency for people to perceive others as similar to themselves) for PNI higher order factors and subscale ratings. Finally, results suggested that individuals high in pathological narcissism had some awareness of how peers would rate them (metaperception) but believed that others would rate them similarly to how they rated themselves.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/00223891.2013.765881

Cites

118 of 118 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 use of informant ratings is a valid methodology to assess aspects of personality pathology, including pathological narcissism.

    “The use of informant ratings have found to be a valid methodology to assess aspects of personality pathology, including pathological narcissism (Lukowitsky & Pincus, 2013; Oltmanns et al., 2018), given the documented limitations of self‐report research for this population (Klonsky & Oltmanns, 2002).”

    From Pathological narcissism: An analysis of interpersonal dysfunction within intimate relationships (2022) · cites this paper as Lukowitsky & Pincus, 2013

  • Informant-based methods of investigating narcissism and its effects have previously been found to be effective and reliable, with consensus demonstrated across multiple observers.

    “Informant-based methods of investigating narcissism and its effects has previously been found to be effective and reliable [30] with consensus demonstrated across multiple observers [38].”

    From Living with pathological narcissism: a qualitative study (2020) · cites this paper as [38]

  • Informant-based methods of assessing narcissism have demonstrated reliability.

    “research has demonstrated the reliability of informant‐based methods of assessing narcissism (Lukowitsky & Pincus, 2013; Oltmanns et al., 2018).”

    From Pathological narcissism: An analysis of interpersonal dysfunction within intimate relationships (2022) · cites this paper as Lukowitsky & Pincus, 2013

  • Lukowitsky and Pincus report high levels of convergence for informant ratings of narcissism, indicating that multiple peers are likely to score the same individual similarly.

    “Further, Lukowitsky and Pincus [38] report high levels of convergence for informant ratings of narcissism, indicating that multiple peers are likely to score the same individual similarly”

    From Living with pathological narcissism: a qualitative study (2020) · cites this paper as [38]

  • The risk of biasing or priming participants is a limitation of all studies of this kind.

    “However, the risk of biasing or priming participants is a limitation of all studies of this kind, as studies implementing informant methodology for assessing narcissism typically rely on providing participants with a set of diagnostic criteria or narcissism specific measures as their sole indicator of narcissism (e.g. [30, 38]).”

    From Living with pathological narcissism: a qualitative study (2020) · cites this paper as [38]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Lukowitsky, M. R., & Pincus, A. L.
Affiliations
  • Albany Medical College (US)
  • Pennsylvania State University (US)
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Personality Assessment
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2013-02-13
Volume
95
Issue
3
Pages
261-273
ISSN
  • 0022-3891 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-7752
DOI
10.1080/00223891.2013.765881
OpenAlex
W2041372268
Cited by
83
References
118
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 1
FWCI
9.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Personality Assessment (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Disorders and Psychopathology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Psychological Testing and Assessment
Keywords
pathological narcissism, narcissistic personality disorder, interpersonal perception, social relations model, self-other agreement, metaperception, consensus, assimilation, assumed similarity, Pathological Narcissism Inventory, peer ratings, self-awareness
MeSH terms
Female, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Male, Narcissism, Personality Disorders, Personality Inventory, Self Concept, Social Behavior, Social Perception, Young Adult, Self Report

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