Cited by 272Personality Disorders and PsychopathologyPersonality Traits and PsychologyPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research

Refining the Construct of Narcissistic Personality Disorder: Diagnostic Criteria and Subtypes

Russ, Eric, Shedler, Jonathan, Bradley, Rebekah, Westen, Drew·2008·American Journal of Psychiatry

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Narcissistic personality disorder has received relatively little empirical attention. This study was designed to provide an empirically valid and clinically rich portrait of narcissistic personality disorder and to identify subtypes of the disorder. METHOD: A random national sample of psychiatrists and clinical psychologists (N=1,201) described a randomly selected current patient with personality pathology. Clinicians provided detailed psychological descriptions of the patients using the Shedler-Westen Assessment Procedure-II (SWAP-II), completed a checklist of axis II diagnostic criteria, and provided construct ratings for each axis II personality disorder. Descriptions of narcissistic patients based on both raw and standardized SWAP-II item scores were aggregated to identify, respectively, the most characteristic and the most distinctive features of narcissistic personality disorder. RESULTS: A total of 255 patients met DSM-IV criteria for narcissistic personality disorder based on the checklist and 122 based on the construct ratings; 101 patients met criteria by both methods. Q-factor analysis identified three subtypes of narcissistic personality disorder, which the authors labeled grandiose/malignant, fragile, and high-functioning/exhibitionistic. Core features of the disorder included interpersonal vulnerability and underlying emotional distress, along with anger, difficulty in regulating affect, and interpersonal competitiveness, features that are absent from the DSM-IV description of narcissistic personality disorder. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that DSM-IV criteria for narcissistic personality disorder are too narrow, underemphasizing aspects of personality and inner experience that are empirically central to the disorder. The richer and more differentiated view of narcissistic personality disorder suggested by this study may have treatment implications and may help bridge the gap between empirically and clinically derived concepts of the disorder.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1176/appi.ajp.2008.07030376

Cites

32 of 32 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?

  • Results suggest potential for meaningful expansion of additional traits within the antagonism domain (e.g., manipulativeness, callousness and hostility) to indicate severity of pathology in interpersonal functioning.

    “However, beyond grandiosity and attention seeking, these results suggest potential for meaningful expansion of additional traits within the antagonism domain to indicate the severity of pathology in interpersonal functioning (e.g., manipulativeness, callousness and hostility)”
  • Grandiose narcissism is typically characterized by attention seeking, arrogance, and self-enhancing and exaggerated self-worth, and individuals with grandiose narcissism are interpersonally domineering, antagonistic, and vindictive.

    “Grandiose narcissism is typically characterized by attention seeking, arrogance, and self-enhancing and exaggerated self-worth. These individuals have been found to be interpersonally domineering, antagonistic and vindictive [14, 74, 75, 84].”
  • These features can be grouped to resemble narcissistic subtypes as described in research literature.

    “These features can be grouped to resemble narcissistic subtypes as described in research literature, such as the subtypes outlined by Russ, Shedler [55] in their Q-Factor Analysis of SWAP-II Descriptions of Patients with Narcissistic Personality Disorder.”

    From Living with pathological narcissism: a qualitative study (2020) · cites this paper as [55]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Russ, E., Shedler, J., Bradley, R., & Westen, D.
Affiliations
Emory University (US)
Venue
American Journal of Psychiatry
Published
2008-11
Volume
165
Issue
11
Pages
1473-1481
ISSN
  • 0002-953X (ISSN-L)
  • 1535-7228
OpenAlex
W2134253629
Cited by
272
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 21
FWCI
23.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • American Journal of Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH062378, MH-62378, MH62377, R01MH062377)
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, diagnostic criteria, DSM-IV, personality disorder subtypes, Axis II personality disorders, interpersonal vulnerability, anger, emotion regulation
MeSH terms
Adult, Diagnosis, Differential, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Personality Assessment, Personality Disorders, Psychometrics, Q-Sort, Sampling Studies, Reproducibility of Results, 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