CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 285Personality Traits and PsychologyEmotions and Moral BehaviorDeath Anxiety and Social Exclusion

Grandiose Narcissism Versus Vulnerable Narcissism in Threatening Situations: Emotional Reactions to Achievement Failure and Interpersonal Rejection

Besser, Avi, Priel, Beatriz·2010·Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology
DOI 10.1521/jscp.2010.29.8.874
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This study compared grandiose narcissism and vulnerable narcissism in terms of emotional reactions to threats involving achievement failure and interpersonal rejection. It was hypothesized that grandiose narcissism is associated with vulnerability to achievement setbacks. In contrast, vulnerable narcissism involves sensitivity to shaming interpersonal experiences. A randomized experimental 2-wave design was used with a community sample of 448 participants. Each participant was asked to imagine 1 of 4 randomly assigned hypothetical scenarios intended to evoke the threat of high- (n = 117) or low- (n = 105) level interpersonal rejection; or high- (n = 108) or low- (n = 118) level achievement failure. According to this study's findings, in the high achievement-threat group, but not in the high interpersonal-threat group, grandiose narcissism significantly predicted greater change in negative outcomes. In contrast, in the face of a high-level interpersonal threat, but not a high-level achievement-threat, high levels of vulnerable narcissism were significantly associated with greater change in negative outcomes. These findings illustrate how different types of threatening situations vary in their relevance to grandiose narcissism as compared to vulnerable narcissism.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1521/jscp.2010.29.8.874

Cites

49 of 49 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?

  • Grandiose narcissism is selectively related to angry reactions in response to threats of failure, but not rejection, whereas people with vulnerable narcissism react with anger to threats of rejection, but not failure.

    “Grandiose narcissism is selectively related to angry reactions in response to threats of failure, but not rejection, whereas people with vulnerable narcissism react with anger to threats of rejection, but not failure (38).”

    From Narcissistic Personality Disorder: Progress in Understanding and Treatment (2022) · cites this paper as [38]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 50 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Besser, A., & Priel, B.
Affiliations
Ben-Gurion University of the Negev (IL)
Venue
Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology
Publisher
Guilford Publications
Published
2010-10
Volume
29
Issue
8
Pages
874-902
ISSN
0736-7236 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1521/jscp.2010.29.8.874
OpenAlex
W2142443154
Cited by
285
References
50
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 27 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 28 · 2020: 25 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 29 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 5
FWCI
8.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Emotions and Moral Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Death Anxiety and Social Exclusion
Keywords
grandiose narcissism, vulnerable narcissism, interpersonal rejection, threat appraisal, emotional responses, shame, self-esteem

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