NARCISISM-Department of Psychology, University of Southern Mississippi

Narcissism is a multifaceted construct that is inconsistently defined and assessed between clinical psychology and social-personality psychology. The purpose of the present study was to examine the similarities and differences in the cognitive schemas underlying various forms of narcissism. This was accomplished by examining the associations of normal and pathological forms of narcissism with the early maladaptive schemas. The results showed important similarities in these associations (e.g., all of the narcissism scales were positively associated with the entitlement schema) as well as differences (e.g., vulnerable narcissism was the only form of narcissism that was positively associated with subjugation). Discussion focuses on the implications of these results for the ways in which individuals with these forms of narcissism perceive and navigate their social environments.

Research highlights
►Both normal and pathological forms of narcissism are associated with schemas concerning entitlement. ►Important differences emerged in the associations that the forms of narcissism had with early maladaptive schemas. ►Early maladaptive schemas may be associated with the ways in which individuals with various forms of narcissism perceive and navigate their social environments.

Keywords: Narcissism; Grandiose; Vulnerable; Schemas

Article Outline
1.
Overview and predictions
2.
Method
2.1. Participants and procedure
2.2. Measures
2.2.1. Normal narcissism
2.2.2. Pathological narcissism
2.2.3. Early maladaptive schemas
3.
Results
3.1. Leadership/authority
3.2. Self-absorption/Self-admiration
3.3. Superiority/arrogance
3.4. Exploitation/entitlement
3.5. Grandiose narcissism
3.6. Vulnerable narcissism
4.
Discussion
5.
Conclusion
References
The personality construct of narcissism – which takes its name from the ancient Greek myth of Narcissus (Ellis, 1898) – refers to a pervasive pattern of grandiosity and self-importance. Narcissism is a construct that has been of considerable interest to both clinical and social-personality psychology in recent years. Attempts to integrate these bodies of literature, however, have been hampered by inconsistencies in the definition and measurement of narcissism between these disciplines ([Cain et al., 2008], [Miller and Campbell, 2008] and [Pincus et al., 2009]). Clinical psychologists tend to conceptualize narcissism as a personality disorder characterized by arrogant or haughty behaviors, feelings of entitlement, a lack of empathy, and a willingness to exploit other individuals (American Psychiatric Association, 2000). The form of narcissism studied by clinical psychologists is often associated with emotional instability and the tendency to experience negative emotions. In contrast, social-personality psychologists often consider subclinical levels of narcissism as a normally distributed personality feature. This form of narcissism tends to be more emotionally resilient and extraverted than the form of narcissism that is generally considered by clinical psychologists (Miller & Campbell, 2008). These differences lead clinical psychologists to emphasize the pathological elements of narcissism, whereas social-personality psychologists focus more of their attention on the somewhat “normal” aspects of narcissism (see Miller & Campbell, 2008 or Pincus & Lukowitsky, 2010, for extended discussions). Consistent with the previous literature (e.g., Pincus & Lukowitsky, 2010), we will refer to these types of narcissism as pathological narcissism and normal narcissism, respectively. It is important to note that normal narcissism consists of both adaptive and maladaptive elements, so it is certainly not a completely “healthy” form of narcissism. That is, both normal and pathological forms of narcissism have maladaptive elements but they differ in terms of the emphasis that each places on these features.

The distinction between pathological and normal forms of narcissism is further complicated by the possibility that pathological narcissism may be a heterogeneous construct consisting of both a grandiose and a vulnerable form (e.g., [Akhtar and Thompson, 1982], [Cooper, 1998], [Dickinson and Pincus, 2003], [Gabbard, 1989], [Gabbard, 1998], [Gersten, 1991], [Hendin and Cheek, 1997], [Kohut, 1971], [Pincus and Lukowitsky, 2010], [Rathvon and Holmstrom, 1996], [Rose, 2002], [Rovik, 2001], [Wink, 1991] and [Wink, 1996]). Grandiose narcissism is the most easily recognized form of pathological narcissism because it is characterized by maladaptive self-enhancement strategies such as holding an overly positive self-image, exploiting others, and engaging in exhibitionistic behaviors (Pincus & Lukowitsky, 2010). This form of narcissism is clearly represented by the diagnostic criteria for Narcissistic Personality Disorder (American Psychiatric Association, 2000). Vulnerable narcissism is the second phenotypic expression of pathological narcissism and it may either be the primary form of expressed narcissism or displayed in alternation with the grandiose form of narcissism. The vulnerable form of pathological narcissism is characterized by self and emotional dysregulation including a negative self-image, self-criticism, negative affective experiences (e.g., anger, shame, dysphoria), interpersonal sensitivity, and social withdrawal (Pincus & Lukowitsky, 2010). The existence of grandiose and vulnerable phenotypic expressions of pathological narcissism has been supported by a number of studies using various measures of pathological narcissism (e.g., [Rathvon and Holmstrom, 1996] and [Wink, 1991]; see Pincus & Lukowitsky, 2010, for a review).

The development and maintenance of narcissistic personality features may be due, at least in part, to the cognitive schemas that individuals rely on to organize and make sense of the events that occur during the course of their lives (Beck, Freeman, & Davis, 2003). Along these lines, Young (1990) proposed a model in which circumstances that interfere with the development of autonomy, connectedness, worthiness, or realistic expectations and limits (e.g., markedly traumatic interactions or repeated negative interactions with caregivers) may lead individuals to develop schemas that support maladaptive styles of perceiving themselves, others, and relationships. For example, individuals may find relationships threatening (connectedness), become overly dependent on others (autonomy), feel defective (worthiness), or feel superior to others (unrealistic expectations and limits). Young developed the concept of early maladaptive schemas in an attempt to better understand the relationships between negative interactions early in life and the various manifestations of personality pathology that are expressed in adulthood. Early maladaptive schemas refer to deeply rooted negative beliefs about oneself, others, and the world that may develop during the earliest years of life and result in erroneous and dysfunctional perceptions, emotions, thoughts, and behaviors. Early maladaptive schemas influence the interpretation of subsequent events as these experiences are viewed through the negative lenses of schemas which serve to selectively incorporate corroborating information and discount conflicting information ([McGinn and Young, 1996] and [Schmidt et al., 1995]). Once these schemas are formed, they are extended and elaborated throughout the course of the individual’s life and often result in negative automatic thoughts and subjective distress because of their maladaptive nature. The concept of early maladaptive schemas retains the information-processing component that was central to earlier definitions of cognitive schemas (e.g., Beck, 1967) but places more focus on thematic content and early development (Young, 1990).

Young (1990) originally identified 16 early maladaptive schemas but more recent research has suggested that there may actually be only 15 schemas (e.g., [Lee et al., 1999] and [Schmidt et al., 1995]). Further analyses suggested that these early maladaptive schemas cluster within the following higher-order schema domains (Hoffart et al., 2005): disconnection (emotional deprivation, emotional inhibition, mistrust, social isolation, and defectiveness), impaired autonomy (subjugation, dependence, failure to achieve, vulnerability to harm, abandonment, and enmeshment), impaired limits (insufficient self-control and entitlement), and exaggerated standards (self-sacrifice and unrelenting standards). Table 1 presents a description of each domain and its associated schemas.

Table 1. Early maladaptive schema domains.
Disconnection: The expectation that needs for security, safety, stability, nurturance, and acceptance will not be met.
1. Emotional deprivation: The belief that minimal levels of emotional support will not be received.
2. Emotional inhibition: The belief that the expression of emotions will result in negative consequences such as embarrassment or harm to others.
3. Mistrust: The belief that others will be abusive and manipulative.
4. Social isolation: The belief that one is alienated and somehow different from other people.
5. Defectiveness: The belief that one is defective and unlovable at some fundamental level.
Impaired Autonomy: Beliefs regarding one’s ability to be separate from others and function independently.
6. Subjugation: Believing that the preferences of others are more important than personal desires.
7. Dependence: The belief that one needs considerable help from others to manage everyday responsibilities.
8. Failure to achieve: The belief that one is destined to fail in areas of achievement because of fundamental inadequacies.
9. Vulnerability to harm: Exaggerated fears concerning one’s ability to prevent “random” catastrophes.
10. Abandonment: The belief that other individuals will be unable to provide emotional support because they are emotionally unstable or because these individuals will die or abandon the person.
11. Enmeshment: Excessive emotional involvement and closeness with one or more significant others at the expense of full individuation and normal social development.
Impaired Limits: Deficiencies in self-discipline and in setting emotional and interpersonal limits.
12. Insufficient self-control: The belief that self-discipline is unimportant and that little restraint is required for emotions and impulses.
13. Entitlement: The belief that one should be able to do or have whatever one wants, regardless of what others consider reasonable or the cost to others.
Exaggerated Standards: Beliefs concerning self-deprivation and perfectionism.
14. Self-sacrifice: Exaggerated beliefs of duty and responsibility to other individuals.
15. Unrelenting standards: The belief that one must meet unrealistically high standards.

Full-size table
Note. The descriptions of the early maladaptive schemas and domains are based on those presented in (Young, 1990) and (Hoffart et al., 2005), and Schmidt et al. (1995).


View Within Article



Young and his colleagues ([Young and Flanagan, 1998] and [Young et al., 2003]) have proposed that the core early maladaptive schemas underlying narcissism are entitlement, emotional deprivation, and defectiveness. The entitlement schema is located within the impaired limits domain and is believed to manifest in behaviors such as insisting that one should be able to do or have whatever one wants with little regard for the welfare of other individuals. These feelings of entitlement are thought to develop as a result of overly indulgent parents setting too few limits for their children or, perhaps, as overcompensation for feelings of defectiveness stemming from cold and rejecting parenting. The emotional deprivation and defectiveness schemas both fall within the disconnection domain. Schemas in the disconnection domain are thought to interfere with individuals developing the capacity to experience intimacy, love, and acceptance in their relationships with others. The emotional deprivation schema is thought to result from a lack of parental nurturance, empathy, and protection. This schema often results in individuals yearning for an emotional connection with others but, at the same time, being uncomfortable with closeness due to a fear that others will be unable or unwilling to meet their needs for continued emotional support. The defectiveness schema, in turn, concerns feelings of shame that stem from the individual believing that he or she is flawed in some fundamental manner. It is believed that this schema results from parenting that is severely critical or rejecting. Young et al. (2003) proposed a state of tension between emotional deprivation (craving contact) and defectiveness (withdrawing from contact) for narcissists which hinders their ability to form stable intimate relationships. Instead, narcissists may often try to fill their emotional needs through self-aggrandized demanding of attention (entitlement). These speculations concerning which early maladaptive schemas may be associated with narcissism are interesting and may provide additional insight into the cognitive structures underlying narcissistic tendencies. To our knowledge, the present study is the first attempt to empirically examine these predictions.

1. Overview and predictions
The purpose of the present study was to examine how normal and pathological forms of narcissism would compare in their associations with the early maladaptive schema domains. Our prediction for the grandiose form of narcissism – which was consistent with the speculation of Young and Flanagan (1998) – was that it would be positively associated with a range of early maladaptive schemas including those reflecting entitlement, emotional deprivation, and defectiveness. We predicted that vulnerable narcissism would be positively associated with an even broader array of early maladaptive schemas because previous observations have shown that vulnerable narcissists have a tendency to report a variety of problems and resist improvement in order to maintain the special status conferred on them as a result of their suffering ([Pincus et al., 2009] and [Sarasohn, 2004]). Our prediction for normal narcissism was that it would have less consistent associations with the early maladaptive schemas compared to the pathological forms of narcissism because normal narcissism has been shown to be associated with a combination of adaptive (e.g., positive beliefs about the self, social dominance) and maladaptive outcomes (e.g., turbulent interpersonal relationships, aggression; see Morf & Rhodewalt, 2001, for a review).

2. Method
2.1. Participants and procedure
Participants were 442 students (94 men and 348 women) enrolled in undergraduate psychology courses who participated in return for partial fulfillment of a research participation requirement. The mean age of participants was 20.92 years (SD = 4.78). The racial/ethnic composition was 56% White, 40% Black, and 4% Other. Participants completed measures of normal narcissism, grandiose narcissism, vulnerable narcissism, and early maladaptive schemas.

2.2. Measures
2.2.1. Normal narcissism
Normal narcissism was measured using the Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI; [Raskin and Hall, 1979] and [Raskin and Hall, 1981]). The NPI was developed according to diagnostic criteria but appears to assess an emotionally resilient and extraverted form of narcissism (Miller & Campbell, 2008). The form of narcissism captured by the NPI is at least somewhat adaptive with its maladaptive aspects being limited for the most part to feelings of entitlement and the tendency to exploit others. The version of the NPI used in the present research contains 37 true–false items that Morf and Rhodewalt (1993) adapted from Emmons’s (1987) factor analysis of the original, 54-item instrument. This version of the NPI consists of the following four factors: leadership/authority (α = .75), self-absorption/self-admiration (α = .71), superiority/arrogance (α = .70), and exploitation/entitlement (α = .68). Despite their low levels of internal consistency, we used the individual subscale scores rather than the overall composite score due to the fact that the exploitation/entitlement subscale often has a different pattern of associations with related constructs (e.g., self-esteem) than is observed for the other subscales or the total NPI score (see Brown, Budzek, & Tamborski, 2009, for a review). The construct validity and internal consistency of the NPI has been previously demonstrated ([Emmons, 1987], [Raskin and Hall, 1981] and [Raskin and Terry, 1988]).

2.2.2. Pathological narcissism
The Pathological Narcissism Inventory (PNI; Pincus et al., 2009) is a 52-item measure developed to assess the grandiose and vulnerable aspects of pathological narcissism. Responses for the PNI were made on scales ranging from 1 (not at all like me) to 6 (very much like me). The PNI measures seven dimensions of pathological narcissism: contingent self-esteem (e.g., “It’s hard for me to feel good about myself unless I know other people like me”), exploitative (e.g., “I can make anyone believe anything I want them to”), self-sacrificing self-enhancement (e.g., “I try to show what a good person I am through my sacrifices”), hiding the self (e.g., “When others get a glimpse of my needs, I feel anxious and ashamed”), grandiose fantasy (e.g., “I often fantasize about being recognized for my accomplishments”), devaluing (e.g., “When others don’t meet my expectations, I often feel ashamed about what I wanted”), and entitlement rage (e.g., “It irritates me when people don’t notice how good a person I am”). As outlined in recent studies ([Tritt et al., 2010] and [Wright et al., in press]), these seven dimensions load onto the two higher-order factors of grandiose narcissism (exploitative, self-sacrificing self-enhancement, and grandiose fantasy) and vulnerable narcissism (contingent self-esteem, hiding the self, entitlement rage, and devaluing). Initial information concerning the reliability and validity of the PNI has shown that it is correlated in the expected direction with other measures of narcissism (e.g., NPI) as well as related constructs such as self-esteem level, interpersonal style, clinical outcomes, and contingent self-esteem ([Pincus et al., 2009] and [Zeigler-Hill et al., 2008]). The internal consistencies of the PNI grandiosity and vulnerability subscales were .86 and .95, respectively.

2.2.3. Early maladaptive schemas
Internal representations of self and other were assessed using the Young Schema Questionnaire – Short Form (YSQ-SF; Young, 1998). The YSQ-SF is a 75-item questionnaire that is designed to assess 15 early maladaptive schemas: emotional deprivation (e.g., “In general, people have not been there to give me warmth, holding, and affection”; α = .91), emotional inhibition (e.g., “I control myself so much that people think I am unemotional”; α = .89), mistrust (e.g., “It is only a matter of time before someone betrays me”; α = .92), social isolation (e.g., “I feel alienated from other people”; α = .93), defectiveness (e.g., “I am too unacceptable in very basic ways to reveal myself to other people”; α = .94), subjugation (e.g., “I have a lot of trouble demanding that my rights be respected and that my feelings be taken into account”; α = .89), dependence (e.g., “I do not feel capable of getting by on my own in everyday life”; α = .83), failure to achieve (e.g., “Most other people are more capable than I am in areas of work and achievement”; α = .95), vulnerability to harm (e.g., “I can’t seem to escape the feeling that something bad is about to happen”; α = .90), abandonment (e.g., “I worry that people I feel close to will leave me or abandon me”; α = .93), enmeshment (e.g., “I often feel that I do not have a separate identity from my parent[s] or partner”; α = .83), insufficient self-control (e.g., “I can’t force myself to do things I don’t enjoy, even when I know it’s for my own good”; α = .85), entitlement (e.g., “I feel that I shouldn’t have to follow the normal rules and conventions other people do”; α = .81), self-sacrifice (e.g., “I am a good person because I think of others more than of myself”; α = .86), and unrelenting standards (e.g., “I feel there is constant pressure for me to achieve and get things done”; α = .88). Responses to the YSQ-SF were made on scales ranging from 1 (completely untrue of me) to 6 (describes me perfectly) with higher scores indicating more dysfunctional levels of the schemas. The YSQ-SF has demonstrated adequate test–retest reliability and internal consistency as well as convergent and discriminant validity ([Lee et al., 1999], [Schmidt et al., 1995] and [Stopa et al., 2001]).

3. Results
Table 2 presents the means, standard deviations, and intercorrelations for the measures in the present study. Men were found to report higher scores than women for the following measures of narcissism: leadership/authority (t[440] = 3.25, p < .001), superiority/arrogance (t[440] = 3.94, p < .001), exploitation/entitlement (t[440] = 2.34, p < .05), and grandiose narcissism (t[440] = 2.17, p < .05). Gender differences also emerged for a number of the early maladaptive schemas such that men reported higher scores than women for emotional deprivation (t[440] = 2.63, p < .01), emotional inhibition (t[440] = 3.25, p < .001), mistrust (t[440] = 2.71, p < .01), defectiveness (t[440] = 4.05, p < .001), subjugation (t[440] = 3.23, p < .001), and failure to achieve (t[440] = 2.74, p < .01). Despite these differences between men and women, the inclusion of gender in the preliminary analyses did not qualify any of the results reported in later sections so gender will not be discussed further. Table 2. Correlations and Descriptive Statistics for Narcissism and Early Maladaptive Schemas. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 1. L/A – 2. S/S .50*** – 3. S/A .57*** .40*** – 4. E/E .38*** .30*** 5. Grandiose narcissism .27*** .20*** .47*** .40*** – 6. Vulnerable narcissism .05 −.02 .19*** .43*** .52*** – 7. Emotional deprivation −.04 .00 .19*** .25*** .20*** .34*** – 8. Emotional inhibition −.02 −.02 .26*** .20*** .30*** .43*** .52*** – 9. Mistrust −.01 .08 .24*** .35*** .46*** .56*** .50*** .52*** – 10. Social isolation −.27*** −.15** .05 .16*** .21*** .43*** .53*** .50*** .53*** – 11. Defectiveness −.15*** −.18*** .18*** .15** .19*** .38*** .49*** .54*** .52*** .70*** – 12. Subjugation −.14** −.09 .18*** .20*** .30*** .52*** .53*** .53*** .55*** .69*** .67*** – 13. Dependence −.02 −.04 .18*** .17*** .19*** .34*** .49*** .40*** .42*** .56*** .62*** .65*** – 14. Failure to achieve −.16*** −.21*** .06 .09 .21*** .41*** .51*** .54*** .51*** .69*** .78*** .66*** .70*** – 15. Vulnerability to harm −.03 −.03 .21*** .26*** .31*** .50*** .42*** .44*** .63*** .51*** .58*** .66*** .60*** .58*** – 16. Abandonment −.02 .11* .13** .30*** .36*** .54*** .43*** .35*** .59*** .50*** .44*** .54*** .43*** .43*** .54*** – 17. Enmeshment .08 .01 .29*** .22*** .25*** .38*** .39*** .37*** .35*** .46*** .45*** .56*** .57*** .51*** .56*** .35*** – 18. Insufficient self-control −.06 −.12** .15*** .24*** .20*** .47*** .37*** .43*** .45*** .45*** .46*** .58*** .52*** .53*** .57*** .46*** .48*** – 19. Entitlement .24*** .23*** .40*** .45*** .35*** .46*** .29*** .42*** .46*** .26*** .33*** .38*** .38*** .31*** .45*** .38*** .41*** .51*** – 20. Self-sacrifice .03 .07 .10* .09 .39*** .28*** .22*** .22*** .33*** .27*** .23*** .34*** .18*** .20*** .28*** .39*** .30*** .22*** .18*** – 21. Unrelenting standards .09 .08 .14** .24*** .38*** .31*** .11* .23*** .29*** .11* .06 .19*** .12* .03 .24*** .26*** .21*** .22*** .48*** .48*** – Mean 5.56 6.02 4.40 3.31 4.54 3.42 2.10 2.29 2.92 2.30 1.82 2.13 1.98 2.03 2.26 2.66 1.95 2.55 2.66 3.58 3.77 Standard deviation 2.36 1.90 2.54 1.88 1.03 1.18 1.30 1.23 1.41 1.36 1.21 1.18 1.07 1.21 1.32 1.47 1.08 1.14 1.10 1.25 1.28 Full-size table Note. L/A = leadership/authority, S/S = self-absorption/self-admiration, S/A = superiority/arrogance, E/E = exploitation/entitlement. *p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001. View Within Article The leadership/authority and self-absorption/self-admiration subscales from the NPI were both correlated with grandiose narcissism (rs > .20, ps < .001) but not vulnerable narcissism (|rs| < .05, ns). In contrast, the superiority/arrogance and exploitation/entitlement subscales from the NPI were correlated with both grandiose narcissism (rs > .19, ps < .001) and vulnerable narcissism (rs > .40, ps < .001). This suggests that the form of normal narcissism captured by the NPI clearly has grandiose elements but that the link between normal narcissism and vulnerable narcissism is more complex such that certain elements of normal narcissism are associated with vulnerable narcissism (i.e., superiority/arrogance and exploitation/entitlement) but others are not (i.e., leadership/authority and self-absorption/self-admiration). We began our examination of the associations between these forms of narcissism and the early maladaptive schemas by inspecting their zero-order correlations. These correlations revealed that both grandiose narcissism and vulnerable narcissism had significant associations with all 15 of the schemas which suggest that the pathological forms of narcissism were associated with broad, undifferentiated cognitive styles indicative of distress. In contrast, the subscales of the NPI had a more complex pattern of associations with the early maladaptive schemas which suggests somewhat greater specificity in terms of cognitive distortions. For example, the only early maladaptive schema for which all four subscales of the NPI had similar associations was the entitlement schema. A series of hierarchical multiple regression analyses were used to gain a clearer understanding of the associations between narcissism and the early maladaptive schemas. These analyses allowed us to determine the unique associations between each of the schemas and the forms of narcissism. Each form of narcissism was examined in a separate regression model with the early maladaptive schemas serving as predictors. The main effects for the 15 early maladaptive schemas were entered simultaneously so that any observed effects would reflect the unique association between that particular schema and narcissism rather than merely reflecting cognitive styles indicative of distress. The results of these analyses are presented in Table 3. Table 3. Hierarchical Multiple Regression Analysis of Narcissism onto the Early Maladaptive Schemas. NPI Leadership/Authority NPI Self-Absorption/Self-Admiration NPI Superiority/Arrogance NPI Exploitation/Entitlement PNI Grandiose Narcissism PNI Vulnerable Narcissism R2 β R2 β R2 β R2 β R2 β R2 β Predictors .23*** .25*** .28*** .28*** .33*** .47*** Emotional Deprivation .04 .03 .07 .14* −.07 −.05 Emotional Inhibition .08 .06 .14* −.06 .10 .07 Mistrust .07 .15* .15* .20** .31*** .20*** Social Isolation −.35*** −.08 −.22*** .01 −.09 .06 Defectiveness −.03 −.20** .20** .01 −.10 −.11 Subjugation −.13* −.03 .05 −.04 .08 .19** Dependence .15* .17* .08 −.01 −.01 −.16* Failure to Achieve −.14* −.29*** −.35*** −.23*** .06 .09 Vulnerability to Harm −.03 −.06 −.03 .00 −.04 .03 Abandonment .04 .17** −.06 .12* .11 .23*** Enmeshment .19** .07 .24*** .08 .07 .07 Insufficient Self-Control −.14* −.28*** −.12* .00 −.14* .09 Entitlement .35*** .40*** .37*** .36*** .12* .13* Self-Sacrifice .10 .12* .04 −.09 .18** −.03 Unrelenting Standards −.12* −.21*** −.14** .01 .13* .07 Full-size table *p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001. View Within Article 3.1. Leadership/authority The following early maladaptive schemas emerged as significant predictors of leadership/authority: social isolation (β = −.35, p < .001), subjugation (β = −.13, p < .05), dependence (β = .15, p < .05), failure to achieve (β = −.14, p < .05), enmeshment (β = .19, p < .01), insufficient self-control (β = −.14, p < .05), entitlement (β = .35, p < .001), and unrelenting standards (β = −.12, p < .05). That is, leadership/authority was positively associated with three early maladaptive schemas (i.e., dependence, enmeshment, and entitlement) and negatively associated with five schemas (i.e., social isolation, subjugation, failure to achieve, insufficient self-control, and unrelenting standards). The results of the regression analysis differed from the zero-order correlations in that the associations between leadership/authority and schemas reflecting dependence, enmeshment, and insufficient self-control reached conventional levels of significance in the regression even though their zero-order correlations were not significant. In contrast, the correlation between leadership/authority and defectiveness was not significant in the regression despite their significant zero-order correlation. 3.2. Self-absorption/Self-admiration Mistrust (β = .15, p < .05), defectiveness (β = −.20, p < .01), dependence (β = .17, p < .05), failure to achieve (β = −.29, p < .001), abandonment (β = .17, p < .01), insufficient self-control (β = −.28, p < .001), entitlement (β = .40, p < .001), self-sacrifice (β = .12, p < .05), and unrelenting standards (β = −.21, p < .001) were significant predictors of self-absorption/self-admiration. Positive associations emerged for five early maladaptive schemas (i.e., mistrust, dependence, abandonment, entitlement, and self-sacrifice) and negative associations emerged for four schemas (i.e., defectiveness, failure to achieve, insufficient self-control, and unrelenting standards). The results of the regression analysis differed from the zero-order correlations in that the associations between self-absorption/self-admiration and schemas reflecting mistrust, dependence, self-sacrifice, and unrelenting standards reached conventional levels of significance in the regression even though their zero-order correlations were not significant. The association between self-absorption/self-admiration and social isolation was not significant in the regression despite their significant zero-order correlation. 3.3. Superiority/arrogance The following early maladaptive schemas emerged as significant predictors of superiority/arrogance: emotional inhibition (β = .14, p < .05), mistrust (β = .15, p < .05), social isolation (β = −.22, p < .001), defectiveness (β = .20, p < .01), failure to achieve (β = −.35, p < .001), enmeshment (β = .24, p < .001), insufficient self-control (β = −.12, p < .05), entitlement (β = .37, p < .001), and unrelenting standards (β = −.14, p < .01). Superiority/arrogance was positively associated with five early maladaptive schemas (i.e., emotional inhibition, mistrust, defectiveness, enmeshment, and entitlement) and negatively associated with four schemas (i.e., social isolation, failure to achieve, insufficient self-control, and unrelenting standards). The regression results differed from the basic correlations in that the associations between superiority/arrogance and schemas reflecting social isolation and failure to achieve were significant in the regression but their associations did not reach conventional levels of significance in the zero-order correlations. The associations between superiority/arrogance and the schemas reflecting emotional deprivation, subjugation, dependence, vulnerability to harm, abandonment, and self-sacrifice were not significant in the regression despite the fact that they had significant zero-order correlations. Interestingly, the associations between superiority/arrogance and schemas reflecting insufficient self-control and unrelenting standards shifted from positive associations in the zero-order correlations to negative associations in the regression which suggests that the systematic variance associated with these schemas that was not accounted for by the other schemas was negatively associated with superiority/arrogance. 3.4. Exploitation/entitlement The early maladaptive schemas that were significant predictors of exploitation/entitlement were emotional deprivation (β = .14, p < .05), mistrust (β = .20, p < .01), social isolation (β = −.22, p < .001), failure to achieve (β = −.23, p < .001), abandonment (β = .12, p < .05), and entitlement (β = .36, p < .001). Exploitation/entitlement was positively associated with four early maladaptive schemas (i.e., emotional deprivation, mistrust, abandonment, and entitlement) and negatively associated with the failure to achieve schema. The results of the regression analysis differed from the zero-order correlations in that the associations between exploitation/entitlement and schemas reflecting failure to achieve was significant in the regression even though their zero-order correlation was not significant. The associations between exploitation/entitlement and the schemas reflecting emotional inhibition, social isolation, defectiveness, subjugation, dependence, vulnerability to harm, enmeshment, insufficient self-control, and unrelenting standards were not significant in the regression despite their significant zero-order correlations. 3.5. Grandiose narcissism Early maladaptive schemas reflecting mistrust (β = .31, p < .001), insufficient self-control (β = −.14, p < .05), entitlement (β = .12, p < .05), self-sacrifice (β = .18, p < .01), and unrelenting standards (β = .13, p < .05) emerged as significant predictors of grandiose narcissism. Grandiose narcissism was positively associated with four early maladaptive schemas (i.e., mistrust, entitlement, self-sacrifice, and unrelenting standards) and negatively associated with the insufficient self-control schema. These results differed from the correlations because the associations between grandiose narcissism and the schemas reflecting emotional deprivation, emotional inhibition, social isolation, defectiveness, subjugation, dependence, failure to achieve, vulnerability to harm, abandonment, and enmeshment were not significant in the regression despite their significant zero-order correlations. 3.6. Vulnerable narcissism Vulnerable narcissism was associated with the following early maladaptive schemas: mistrust (β = .20, p < .001), subjugation (β = .19, p < .01), dependence (β = −.16, p < .05), abandonment (β = .23, p < .001), and entitlement (β = .13, p < .05). These results show that vulnerable narcissism was positively associated with four early maladaptive schemas (i.e., mistrust, subjugation, abandonment, and entitlement) and negatively associated with the dependence schema. Unlike the zero-order correlations, a negative association emerged between the dependence schema and vulnerable narcissism in the regression analysis rather than the positive association that was observed in the zero-order correlations. In addition, 10 schemas that were significantly correlated with vulnerable narcissism did not reach conventional levels of significance in the regression analysis (i.e., emotional deprivation, emotional inhibition, social isolation, defectiveness, failure to achieve, vulnerability to harm, enmeshment, insufficient self-control, self-sacrifice, and unrelenting standards). 4. Discussion The purpose of the present study was to extend what is currently known about the cognitive schemas associated with narcissism by examining how normal and pathological forms of narcissism are associated with the early maladaptive schemas. We were interested in examining these schemas because similarities and differences in the associations between these forms of narcissism and the early maladaptive schemas may help us understand how individuals with narcissistic personality features perceive and navigate their social environments. The observed results suggest that the associations between narcissism and the early maladaptive schemas are much more complex than was initially proposed by Young and his colleagues ([Young and Flanagan, 1998] and [Young et al., 2003]). That is, entitlement was found to be associated with all aspects of narcissism but the associations between narcissism and schemas reflecting emotional deprivation or defectiveness were less consistent than expected. In partial support of our hypotheses, the zero-order correlations showed that the scales representing normal and pathological forms of narcissism differed to some degree in their associations with the early maladaptive schemas. More specifically, these correlations showed that both grandiose and vulnerable forms of pathological narcissism were associated with each of the 15 early maladaptive schemas. These correlations revealed that the pathological forms of narcissism were associated with a wide array of maladaptive cognitive styles which may reflect the underlying distress experienced by these individuals. In contrast, the subscales of the NPI differed considerably in their associations with the early maladaptive schemas. The superiority/arrogance and exploitation/entitlement subscales were positively associated with the majority of the early maladaptive schemas (i.e., 13 and 14 schemas, respectively). However, the leadership/authority subscale was positively associated with the entitlement schema but negatively associated with four other schemas and the self-absorption/self-admiration subscale was positively correlated with the abandonment and entitlement schemas but negatively correlated with four other schemas. These patterns of correlations show that the subscales of the NPI had very different associations with the early maladaptive schemas which is consistent with previous research showing that certain subscales of the NPI appear to capture relatively adaptive aspects of narcissism (e.g., leadership/authority) whereas other subscales capture aspects of narcissism that are largely maladaptive (e.g., exploitation/entitlement; Brown et al., 2009). These results show that researchers who employ the NPI are forced to choose between using the total composite score which is problematic given that it consists of subscales that have quite different associations with relevant outcomes or they can use the individual subscale scores which is less than ideal because they have relatively weak psychometric properties (e.g., the internal consistency for the exploitation/entitlement subscale was less than .70 in the present study). Regression analyses were also conducted to examine the unique associations that each schema had with normal and pathological forms of narcissism. These results revealed a more nuanced view of the links between these forms of narcissism and the early maladaptive schemas. The only early maladaptive schema that had significant associations with each indicator of narcissism was the entitlement schema. The observed associations for the entitlement schema are consistent with the predictions of Young and his colleagues ([Young and Flanagan, 1998] and [Young et al., 2003]) as well as previous arguments that feelings of entitlement are at the very core of narcissism (e.g., [Bishop and Lane, 2002], [Campbell et al., 2004], [Dickinson and Pincus, 2003] and [Morf and Rhodewalt, 2001]). The mistrust schema was positively associated with both phenotypic expressions of pathological narcissism and three of the subscales from the NPI (i.e., self-absorption/self-admiration, superiority/arrogance, and exploitation/entitlement). These associations suggest the intriguing possibility that narcissism may largely serve as a defensive reaction for those who feel disconnected from others. This lack of connection may provide at least a partial explanation for the willingness of these individuals to use their interpersonal relationships to regulate their feelings of self-worth ([Campbell, 1999], [Campbell et al., 2002], [Campbell et al., 2000], [Morf, 2006] and [Morf and Rhodewalt, 2001]). The lack of trust that narcissistic individuals have in others may explain some of their interpersonal strategies such as their game-playing romantic styles (Campbell et al., 2002) and their tendency to serve their own self-interest rather than making sacrifices for the common good (e.g., Campbell, Bush, Brunell, & Shelton, 2005). That is, narcissistic individuals may treat others poorly because they anticipate being treated this way by others. A number of differences also emerged in the associations between the forms of narcissism and the early maladaptive schemas. For example, each of the four subscales of the NPI was negatively associated with the failure to achieve schema, whereas neither expression of pathological narcissism was associated with this particular schema. This suggests that normal narcissists may be relatively confident concerning their abilities and social standing. Interestingly, the confidence associated with normal narcissism is accompanied by the recognition that they are at least somewhat dependent on others as seen in the associations of various NPI subscales with schemas such as dependence and enmeshment. This pattern may reflect an underlying tension for normal narcissists such that the self-confidence they express to others may occur in the broader context of an uneasy sense of reliance on others. The grandiose and vulnerable forms of pathological narcissism were similar in that they were both associated with the entitlement and mistrust schemas but these expressions of pathological narcissism also had unique associations with the early maladaptive schemas. Grandiose narcissism was the only form of narcissism associated with unrelenting standards which may suggest that individuals with high levels of grandiose narcissism may be at least somewhat perfectionistic in the goals they set for themselves. Grandiose narcissism was also positively associated with the self-sacrifice schema which may be a subtle means for individuals with high levels of grandiose narcissism to express their grandiosity because they may perceive experiences of self-sacrifice as reflecting their special status or superior capabilities while showing that others are inferior and require their help and guidance (e.g., Nurse, 1998). This interpretation is supported by the positive association between the self-absorption/self-admiration subscale of the NPI and the self-sacrifice schema. Grandiose narcissism also had a negative association with the insufficient self-control schema which suggests that individuals with high levels of grandiose narcissism place a great deal of importance on self-discipline and emotional regulation. Similar associations were found between the insufficient self-control schema and three of the subscales from the NPI (i.e., leadership/authority, self-absorption/self-admiration, and superiority/arrogance). In contrast to grandiose narcissism, vulnerable narcissism was positively associated with the subjugation schema and negatively associated with the dependence schema which suggests that individuals with high levels of vulnerable narcissism believe that the needs and desires of others are more important than their own at the same time that they deny being overly reliant on others. This is very different from the pattern that emerged for the leadership/authority subscale of the NPI which found that individuals with high levels of this aspect of normal narcissism reported relatively little concern for the desires of others but recognized their dependence on other individuals. This suggests that individuals with high levels of vulnerable narcissism may differ considerably in how they view their connections with others compared to individuals who possess certain aspects of normal narcissism. Vulnerable narcissism was also positively associated with the abandonment schema which may provide a partial explanation for the high levels of interpersonal sensitivity and reactivity that is exhibited by individuals with high levels of this form of pathological narcissism (e.g., Pincus & Lukowitsky, 2010). Similar associations with the abandonment schema were observed for the self-absorption/self-admiration and exploitation/entitlement scales of the NPI. This is consistent with previous suggestions that one developmental pathway for narcissistic personality features may be early experiences with cold and rejecting caregivers ([Kernberg, 1975] and [Kohut, 1977]). The results of the present study offer further support for the distinction between normal and pathological forms of narcissism by showing that each form had a somewhat different pattern of associations with the early maladaptive schemas. These patterns of associations may have implications for the conceptualization of both normal and pathological narcissism. For example, each measure of narcissism was positively associated with entitlement which appears to be at the very core of both normal and pathological forms of narcissism. However, the measures of narcissism in the present study differed widely in their associations with the other schemas. This suggests that these different aspects of narcissism are associated with different ways of perceiving and navigating social environments. Although not explicitly tested here, our underlying process model was that the early maladaptive schemas contribute to the development of narcissistic characteristics. The present data, however, merely allowed us to examine the association between narcissism and these schemas rather than allowing for any sort of determination concerning causality. This correlational data cannot rule out the possibility that the direction of causality may be either bidirectional or reversed. For example, it is possible that the retrospective abilities of narcissists may be biased (e.g., [McCullough et al., 2003] and [Rhodewalt and Eddings, 2002]) and, as a result, the early maladaptive schemas reported by narcissists may reflect this bias rather than the actual experiences of narcissists. That is, narcissism may actually cause these cognitive distortions rather than being a consequence of such distortions. It is also possible that narcissism and early maladaptive schemas may both be by-products of some third variable such as childhood temperament which may independently account for the development of both narcissistic tendencies and early maladaptive schemas. A limitation of the present study is that it relied exclusively on self-report measures. Future researchers may want to extend these findings by including data from multiple reporters and incorporating behavioral information. Potential biases in the cognitive distortions reported by narcissists are important to consider given that these individuals are characterized by overly positive self-representations. For example, this sort of bias may explain why the expected effects for the emotional deprivation and defectiveness schemas were weaker than predicted by Young and Flanagan (1998). That is, narcissists may be selective in their acknowledgement of negative thoughts or emotions concerning themselves (e.g., feeling defective) on a face-valid measure such as the YSQ-SF (see Klonsky, Oltmanns, & Turkheimer, 2002, for a similar suggestion). Different results may have emerged if the measure of early maladaptive schemas had avoided self-presentational concerns through a less direct method of assessment such as the use of an implicit measure to capture these schemas. It is also possible that narcissism may be associated with early maladaptive schemas that are not adequately captured by the YSQ-SF. The schemas captured by this instrument are clearly not exhaustive and the current schemas appear to be more closely associated with early experiences of rejection rather than those reflecting overvaluation. One potential direction for future research would be to examine the degree to which these forms of narcissism are associated with schemas that are not included in the YSQ-SF such as those concerning parental overvaluation or aggression. By extending the scope of the schemas that are examined, future researchers may gain an even better understanding of the distorted cognitions that underlie these forms of narcissism. It is also important to mention that some of the observed effects may have been inflated as a result of overlapping constructs at the measurement level. For example, both the NPI and the PNI contain subscales that are specifically concerned with entitlement. As a result, it may not be terribly surprising that these measures would be associated with a schema that taps into feelings of entitlement. One final limitation involves the interpretation of the regression equations where the coefficients for certain schemas were negative while the zero-order correlations involving these predictors were positive. It is possible that this sign-reversal was due to systematic variance in the predictor that was negatively related to narcissism after variance already accounted for by the other predictors was controlled. If such is the case, then it may suggest that some of the schemas are actually multidimensional in nature. However, it is also possible that this reversal was merely a statistical artifact of multicollinearity and that the statistical significance of the non-multicollinear variance was due to sample-specific measurement error (Thompson & Borrello, 1985). The only way to determine whether these reversals were due to the former or latter explanation would be to evaluate whether this pattern of results would replicate in a new sample. 5. Conclusion The results of the present study found that aspects of normal and pathological narcissism differed in their associations with the early maladaptive schemas. These results are consistent with previous distinctions between normal and pathological forms of narcissism as well as providing additional support for the existence of two expressions of pathological narcissism (i.e., grandiose narcissism and vulnerable narcissism). Normal narcissism had somewhat inconsistent associations with these schemas which is consistent with previous findings showing that some of the NPI subscales reflect adjustment whereas others capture maladjustment (e.g., [Miller and Campbell, 2008] and [Pincus and Lukowitsky, 2010]). In contrast, the pathological forms of narcissism had more consistent associations with these early maladaptive schemas which may suggest that individuals with high levels of pathological narcissism may experience conflicting motivations concerning their interactions with others that may result in elevated levels of distress and uncertainty. These results provide additional support for treating these different facets of narcissism as distinct constructs that are worthy of further research examining their importance and clinical relevance. TRADUCEREA. Narcisism este un construct multe faţete, care este inconsecvent definit şi evaluat între psihologie clinică şi psihologia social-personalitate. Scopul studiului de faţă a fost de a examina asemănările şi diferenţele dintre schemele cognitive care stau la baza diferite forme de narcisism. Acest lucru a fost realizat prin examinarea asociaţiile de formele normale şi patologice de narcisism cu schemele devreme maladaptative. Rezultatele au arătat similarităţi importante în aceste asociaţii (de exemplu, toate scalele narcisism pozitiv au fost asociate cu schema dreptul), precum şi diferenţele (de exemplu, narcisismul vulnerabile a fost singura formă de narcisism, care a fost pozitiv asociat cu subjugării). Discuţia se concentrează pe implicaţiile acestor rezultate pentru modul în care persoanele cu aceste forme de narcisism percep şi a naviga în mediul lor social. Cercetare subliniază ► Ambele forme normale şi patologice de narcisism sunt asociate cu scheme privind revendicarea. ► diferenţe importante au apărut în asociaţii care formele de narcisism a avut cu scheme devreme maladaptative. ► Early scheme dezadaptative pot fi asociate cu modul în care persoanele cu diverse forme de narcisism percep şi a naviga în mediul lor social. Cuvinte cheie: Narcisismul; Grandiose, vulnerabile; Scheme Articolul Schiţă 1. Prezentare generală şi predicţii 2. Metoda 2.1. Participanţii şi procedura 2.2. Măsuri 2.2.1. Normal narcisism 2.2.2. Patologică narcisism 2.2.3. Early scheme maladaptative 3. Rezultate 3.1. Leadership / autoritatea 3.2. Self-absorption/Self-admiration 3.3. Superioritate / aroganta 3.4. Exploatare / dreptul 3.5. Grandios narcisism 3.6. Vulnerabile narcisism 4. Discuţie 5. Concluzie Referinte Personalitatea construi de narcisism - care ia numele de la vechiul mit grec de Narcissus (Ellis, 1898) - se referă la un model omniprezentă de grandoare şi de auto-importanţă. Narcisism este o construcţie care a fost de interes considerabil pentru atât clinic, cât şi social-personalitate psihologie în ultimii ani. Încercările de a integra aceste organisme de literatură, cu toate acestea, au fost îngreunate de incoerenţe în definirea şi măsurarea narcisism între aceste discipline (, [Miller şi Campbell, 2008] şi [Pincus et al., [Cain et al, 2008.] 2009 ]). psihologi clinicieni tind să conceptualizeze narcisism ca o tulburare de personalitate caracterizată prin comportamente arogant sau arogant, sentimente de drept, lipsa de empatie, şi dorinţa de a exploata altor persoane (American Psychiatric Association, 2000). Forma de narcisism studiate de către psihologi clinicieni este deseori asociată cu instabilitatea emoţională şi tendinţa de a trăi emoţii negative. În contrast, psihologi social-personalitate considera adesea niveluri subclinice de narcisism ca o trăsătură de personalitate în mod normal distribuite. Această formă de narcisism tinde să fie mai rezistente emoţional şi extravertit decât forma de narcisism, care este, în general, considerată de psihologi clinicieni (Miller & Campbell, 2008). Aceste diferenţe duc psihologi clinicieni pentru a sublinia elementele patologice de narcisism, în timp ce psihologii sociali-personalitate se concentreze mai mult atenţia asupra lor oarecum "normal" aspecte legate de narcisism (a se vedea Miller & Campbell, 2008 sau Pincus & Lukowitsky, 2010, pentru discuţii prelungite) . În concordanţă cu literatura anterioară (de exemplu, Pincus & Lukowitsky, 2010), ne vom referi la aceste tipuri de narcisism ca narcisismul patologic şi narcisism normale, respectiv. Este important să reţineţi că narcisism normala cuprinde atât elemente de adaptare şi maladaptativă, deci cu siguranta nu este un complet "sănătoasă" formă de narcisism. Asta este, ambele forme normale si patologice de narcisism au elemente dezadaptative, dar ele diferă în funcţie de accentul pe care fiecare locuri de pe aceste caracteristici. Distincţia dintre formele patologice şi normale de narcisism este complicată şi de posibilitatea ca narcisismul patologic poate fi un eterogen construi constând atât o grandioasă şi un formular de vulnerabile (de exemplu, [Akhtar şi Thompson, 1982], [Cooper, 1998], [ Dickinson şi Pincus, 2003], [Gabbard, 1989], [Gabbard, 1998], [Gersten, 1991], [Hendin şi obrazul, 1997], [Kohut, 1971], [Pincus şi Lukowitsky, 2010], [and Rathvon Holmstrom, 1996], [Rose, 2002], [Rovik, 2001], [Wink, 1991] şi [Wink, 1996]). narcisism Grandiose este forma cea mai uşor de recunoscut de narcisism patologic, deoarece este caracterizat prin strategii dezadaptative auto-accesoriu, cum ar fi deţine o excesiv de imagini de sine pozitive, exploatarea alţii, şi angajarea în comportamente exhibitionista (Pincus & Lukowitsky, 2010). Această formă de narcisism este clar reprezentat de criteriile de diagnostic pentru narcisist Tulburare de personalitate (American Psychiatric Association, 2000). narcisism vulnerabile este expresia două fenotipice de narcisism patologic şi acesta poate fi fie principala formă de narcisism exprimate sau afişate în alternanţă cu grandioase formă de narcisism. Forma vulnerabile de narcisism patologic se caracterizează prin dysregulation sine şi emoţionale, inclusiv o imagine de sine negativa, auto-critica, experiente afective negative (de exemplu, furie, ruşine, disforie), sensibilitate interpersonală, şi retragere socială (Pincus & Lukowitsky, 2010) . Existenţa unor expresii grandioase şi vulnerabile fenotipice de narcisism patologic a fost susţinută de o serie de studii folosind diferite măsuri de narcisism patologic (de exemplu, [Rathvon and Holmstrom, 1996] şi [Wink, 1991]; vedea Pincus & Lukowitsky, 2010, pentru o revizuire). Dezvoltarea şi întreţinerea de trăsături de personalitate narcisica poate fi datorată, cel puţin în parte, la schemele cognitive care persoanele fizice se bazează pe a organiza şi de a face sens din evenimentele care au loc în timpul vieţii lor (Beck, Freeman, & Davis, 2003 ). De-a lungul acestor linii, Young (1990) a propus un model în care circumstanţele care interfera cu dezvoltarea autonomiei, conectare, vrednicia, sau aşteptări realiste şi limitele (de exemplu, semnificativ interacţiuni traumatice sau repetate interacţiuni negative cu persoanele care îi îngrijesc) poate duce persoanele fizice să dezvolte scheme că stilurile sprijinul dezadaptative de a percepe ei înşişi, alţii, şi relaţii. De exemplu, indivizii pot găsi relaţii de pericol (conectare), devenit prea dependent de alţii (autonomie), simt defecte (demnitatea), sau se simt superiori altora (aşteptări nerealiste şi limite). Young a dezvoltat conceptul de scheme dezadaptative timpurii în încercarea de a înţelege mai bine relaţiile dintre interacţiunile negative timpuriu in viata si diversele manifestari de patologie personalitate, care sunt exprimate în maturitate. Early scheme dezadaptative se referă la convingerile adânc înrădăcinate negative despre sine, alţii, şi lumea care se pot dezvolta în cursul primii ani de viaţă şi duce la percepţii eronate si disfunctionale, emotiile, gandurile si comportamentele. Early scheme dezadaptative influenţa interpretarea evenimentelor ulterioare ca aceste experienţe sunt privite prin prisma negative de scheme care servesc pentru a include selectiv coroborarea informaţiilor şi de scont informaţii contradictorii ([McGinn şi Young, 1996] şi [Schmidt et al, 1995.]). Odată ce aceste scheme sunt formate, acestea sunt extinse şi elaborate pe tot parcursul vieţii individului şi, adesea, rezultat în gândurile negative automate şi stresul subiective din cauza naturii lor maladaptative. Conceptul de scheme dezadaptative timpurii reţine componenta de procesare a informaţiilor, care a fost centrală la definiţiile anterioare de scheme cognitive (de exemplu, Beck, 1967), dar locuri de concentreze mai mult pe continut tematic şi dezvoltarea timpurie (Young, 1990). Young (1990) a identificat iniţial 16 scheme devreme dezadaptative dar cercetări mai recente au sugerat că ar putea exista de fapt doar 15 scheme (de exemplu, [Lee et al., 1999] şi [Schmidt et al., 1995]). analize suplimentare a sugerat că aceste devreme dezadaptative cluster scheme în următoarele schema de ordin superior domenii (Hoffart et al, 2005.): deconectarea (privarea emoţional, inhibarea emotionala, neîncrederea, izolarea socială, precum şi defectele), autonomia cu insuficienţă renală (subjugare, dependenţă, eşec pentru a realiza, vulnerabilitatea la vătămare, abandonul, şi enmeshment), limitele de insuficienţă renală (insuficiente de auto-control şi de drept), şi standardele exagerat (sacrificiu de sine şi a standardelor severa). Tabelul 1 prezintă o descriere a fiecărui domeniu şi scheme asociate acesteia. Tabelul 1. Early domenii maladaptative schemă. Deconectarea: speranţa că are nevoie de securitate, siguranta, stabilitate, ingrijire, şi acceptarea nu vor fi îndeplinite. 1. privarea emoţională: convingerea că nivelurile minime de sprijin emoţional nu vor fi primite. 2. inhibare emoţională: credinţa că exprimarea emoţiilor şi va duce la consecinţe negative, cum ar fi jenă sau rău altora. 3. Neîncrederea: convingerea că şi alţii vor fi abuziv şi manipulativ. 4. Izolarea socială: credinţa că unul este înstrăinat şi oarecum diferit de alte persoane. 5. Defectele: credinţa că unul este defect şi neiubit la un anumit nivel fundamental. Alterarea Autonomie: capacitatea de convingeri cu privire la a fi separat de ceilalţi şi funcţionează independent. 6. Subjugarea: Crezând că preferinţele altora sunt mai importante decât dorinţe personale. 7. Dependenţa: credinţa că o are nevoie de ajutor considerabil de la alţii de gestionare a responsabilităţilor de zi cu zi. 8. Nerealizarea: credinţa că unul este destinat să eşueze în zonele de realizare din cauza deficienţe fundamentale. 9. Vulnerabilitatea la vătămare: temerile exagerate în ceea ce priveşte capacitatea de a preveni "aleatoriu" catastrofe. 10. Abandon: credinţa că alte persoane vor fi în măsură să ofere suport emoţional, deoarece sunt instabili emotional sau pentru că aceste persoane vor muri sau renunţa la persoana. 11. Enmeshment: implicarea emoţională excesivă şi apropierea cu unul sau mai multe altele semnificative la cheltuiala de individuaţie complete şi dezvoltării sociale normale. Limite Afectarea: Deficienţe în auto-disciplina şi în stabilirea unor limite emoţionale şi interpersonale. 12. Insuficientă de auto-control: credinţa că auto-disciplina este lipsit de importanţă şi că reţinere mic este necesară pentru emoţii şi impulsuri. 13. Dreptul: credinţa că unul ar trebui să poată să facă sau au ce o vrea, indiferent de ceea ce altii considera rezonabil sau costul altora. Exagerate Standarde: credinţe în ceea ce priveşte auto-privarea şi perfecţionismul. 14. Sacrificiul de sine: credinţe exagerate de datoria şi responsabilitatea de a altor persoane. 15. Inexorabil standarde: credinţa că trebuie să respecte standardele nerealist de mare. Full-size de masă Notă. Descrieri ale schemelor dezadaptative timpurii şi domenii sunt bazate pe cele prezentate în (Young, 1990) şi (Hoffart et al., 2005), si Schmidt et al. (1995). Vezi În articolul Young şi colegii săi ([Young si Flanagan, 1998] şi [Young et al., 2003]) au propus ca schemele de bază începutul maladaptiv care stau la baza narcisism sunt dreptul, privarea emoţional şi defectele. Schema Dreptul este situat în domeniu depreciat limitele şi se crede să se manifeste în comportamente, cum ar fi insistând că unul ar trebui să poată să facă sau au ce o vrea cu prea puţină consideraţie pentru bunăstarea de alte persoane. Aceste sentimente de drept sunt gândit să se dezvolte ca un rezultat de părinţi prea indulgent stabilirea unor limite prea puţine pentru copiii lor sau, poate, ca supracompensare pentru sentimentele de defectele care decurg din părinţi rece şi respingere. Privarea emoţional şi scheme defectele atât intră sub incidenţa domeniului de deconectare. Schemele în domeniul deconectare se crede ca ar interfera cu persoane dezvoltarea capacităţii de a experimenta intimitate, dragoste, şi acceptarea, în relaţiile lor cu alţii. Schema emoţională Privarea este gândit să rezulte dintr-o lipsa de ingrijire părinteşti, empatie, şi de protecţie. Această schemă de multe ori rezultate în dorul persoanelor fizice pentru o conexiune emotionala cu alţii, dar, în acelaşi timp, fiind incomod cu apropierea cauza o teamă că alţii nu vor putea sau nu doresc să răspundă nevoilor lor de sprijin emoţional continuat. Schema defectele, la rândul său, se referă la sentimente de ruşine care provin de la individ creadă că el sau ea este greşită, în unele mod fundamental. Se crede că această schemă rezultatele de la părinţi, care este sever critic sau respingere. Young et al. (2003) a propus o stare de tensiune între privarea emotionala (contact dorinţă) şi defectele (retragerea de la contact) pentru narcisisti care împiedică capacitatea lor de a forma relaţii stabile intime. În schimb, narcisisti, poate încearcă adesea să umple nevoile lor emotionale prin auto-creştea exigente de atenţie (dreptul). Aceste speculaţii cu privire la care schemele dezadaptative timpurii pot fi asociate cu narcisism sunt interesante şi pot furniza detalii suplimentare în structurile cognitive care stau la baza tendinte narcisiste. Pentru a cunoştinţelor noastre, studiul de faţă este prima încercare de a examina empiric aceste previziuni. 1. Prezentare generală şi predicţii Scopul studiului de faţă a fost de a examina modul în care formele normale şi patologice de narcisism ar compara în asociaţiile lor cu domeniile devreme maladaptative schemă. predicţie nostru pentru forma de narcisism grandioase - care a fost în concordanţă cu speculaţiile de Young şi Flanagan (1998) - a fost că ar fi pozitiv asociat cu o serie de scheme dezadaptative timpurii, inclusiv cele care reflectă dreptul, privarea emoţional şi defectele. Am prezis că narcisism vulnerabile ar fi pozitiv asociată cu o gamă mai largă de scheme dezadaptative timpurii, deoarece observaţiile anterioare au aratat ca narcisistii vulnerabile au tendinţa de a raporta o varietate de probleme şi îmbunătăţire a rezista în scopul de a menţine statutul special pe care le conferă o urmare a suferinţei lor (şi [Sarasohn, 2004] [Pincus et al, 2009.]). predictia noastra pentru narcisism normală a fost că ar fi asociaţii mai puţin în concordanţă cu schemele dezadaptative devreme în comparaţie cu forme patologice de narcisism, deoarece narcisism normală a fost dovedit a fi asociate cu o combinaţie de adaptare (de exemplu, convingeri, pozitiv cu privire la poziţia dominantă de sine, sociale ) şi rezultatele dezadaptative (de exemplu, relaţii, turbulente interpersonale, agresiune; a se vedea Morf & Rhodewalt, 2001, pentru o revizuire). 2. Metoda 2.1. Participanţii şi procedura Participanţii au fost 442 elevi (94 bărbaţi şi 348 femei), înscrişi la cursuri de psihologie de licenţă care au participat în schimbul pentru îndeplinirea parţială a unei cerinţe de participare de cercetare. Vârsta medie a participantilor a fost de 20.92 ani (SD = 4.78). Compoziţia rasială / etnică a fost de 56% alb, 40% negru, iar alte 4%. Participanţii finalizat măsurile de narcisism normala, narcisism grandios, narcisism vulnerabile, şi scheme devreme maladaptative. 2.2. Măsuri 2.2.1. Normal narcisism narcisism normală a fost măsurată cu ajutorul narcisist Inventarul de Personalitate (NPI; [Raskin şi Hall, 1979] şi [Raskin şi Hall, 1981]). NPI a fost elaborat în conformitate cu criteriile de diagnostic, dar apare pentru a evalua o formă emotional elastic şi extravertit de narcisism (Miller & Campbell, 2008). Forma de narcisism capturat de NPI este de cel puţin oarecum adaptive cu aspectele sale dezadaptative fiind limitat pentru cea mai mare parte la sentimente de drept şi tendinţa de a exploata alţii. Versiunea de NPI folosite în cercetarea de faţă conţine 37 de piese adevărat-fals, care Morf şi Rhodewalt (1993), adaptat de la analiza lui Emmons factor (1987) a instrumentului original, 54-element. Această versiune a NPI constă din următoarele patru factori: leadership / autoritate (α = 0.75), self-absorption/self-admiration (α = 0.71), superioritatea / aroganţa (α = 0.70), şi exploatarea / dreptul (α = 0.68). În ciuda nivelului lor scăzut de coerenţă internă, am folosit punctajelor individuale subscalei, mai degrabă decât scor general compozit, datorită faptului că exploatarea / subscala dreptul de a beneficia de multe ori un model diferit de asociaţii cu constructe conexe (de exemplu, stima de sine) decât se observă pentru subscale sau alte scorul total NPI (a se vedea Brown, Budzek, si Tamborski, 2009, pentru o revizuire). Construct valabilitatea şi coerenţa internă a NPI a fost demonstrat anterior ([Emmons, 1987], [Raskin şi Hall, 1981] şi [Raskin şi Terry, 1988]). 2.2.2. Patologică narcisism Narcisismul patologic Inventory (PNI;. Pincus et al, 2009) este o măsură de 52 de element dezvoltat pentru a evalua aspectele grandioase şi vulnerabile de narcisism patologic. Răspunsurile pentru PNI au fost făcute pe scale de la 1 (nu la toate ca mine) la 6 (foarte mult ca mine). PNI Măsurile şapte dimensiuni de narcisism patologic: contingent de sine (de exemplu, "Este greu pentru mine să se simtă bine despre mine dacă ştiu că alţi oameni ca mine"), exploatare (de exemplu, "eu pot face pe oricine crede nimic din ceea ce le doresc la "), sacrificiul de sine auto-accesoriu (de exemplu," am încerca să arate ceea ce o persoană bună eu sunt prin sacrificii meu "), ascunderea de sine (de exemplu," Când alţii obţine o bucatica de nevoile mele, mă simt neliniştit şi ruşine "), fantasy grandioase (de exemplu," de multe ori am fantezii despre a fi recunoscut pentru realizarile mele "), devalorizarea (de exemplu," Când alţii nu satisface aşteptările mele, eu de multe ori simt rusine despre ceea ce am vrut "), precum şi dreptul de furie (de exemplu, "Ma irita cand oamenii nu observa cât de bine o persoana sunt eu?"). După cum sa subliniat în studiile recente ([Tritt et al., 2010] şi [Wright et al., În presa]), aceste încărcare şapte dimensiuni pe doi factori de ordin superior de narcisism grandioase (de exploatare, de sacrificiu de sine auto-îmbunătăţire, şi fantezie grandios) şi narcisismul vulnerabile (contingent stima de sine, ascunderea furie de sine, drept, şi devalorizarea). informaţiile iniţiale privind fiabilitatea şi valabilitatea PNI a arătat că este corelat în direcţia aşteptat cu alte măsuri de narcisism (de exemplu, NPI), precum şi legate de construcţii, cum ar fi nivelul stimei de sine, stil interpersonale, rezultatele clinice, precum şi contingente stimei de sine ([Pincus et al, 2009.] şi [Zeigler-Hill et al., 2008]). Consitenţă internă a grandiozitate PNI si subscalelor de vulnerabilitate au fost 0.86 and 0.95, respectiv. 2.2.3. Early scheme maladaptative reprezentări internă de sine şi altele au fost evaluate cu ajutorul tinere Schema Chestionar - Short Form (YSQ-SF; Young, 1998). The YSQ-SF este un chestionar de 75 de element care este proiectat pentru a evalua începutul anului 15 scheme dezadaptative: privarea emoţional (de exemplu, "În general, oamenii nu au fost acolo să-mi dea caldura, deţinerea, şi afecţiune"; α = 0.91) , inhibarea emoţional (de exemplu, "m-am control atât de mult încât oamenii cred ca eu sunt unemotional"; α = 0.89), neîncredere (de exemplu, "Este doar o chestiune de timp până când cineva mă trădează"; α = 0.92), izolarea socială (de exemplu, "Mă simt înstrăinat de la alte persoane"; α = 0.93), defectele (de exemplu, "Sunt prea inacceptabile în moduri foarte de bază, să mă dezvălui cu alte persoane"; α = 0.94), subjugarea (de exemplu, , "Am o mulţime de probleme cere ca drepturile mele să fie respectate şi că sentimentele mele să fie luate în considerare"; α = 0.89), dependenţa (de exemplu, "nu ma simt capabil de a obţine de pe cont propriu in viata de zi cu zi" ; α = 0.83), imposibilitatea de a realiza (de exemplu, "Cele mai multe alte persoane sunt mai capabili decat mine, în domenii de activitate şi realizare"; α = 0.95), vulnerabilitatea la prejudicii (de exemplu, "Eu nu pot par să scăpa de sentimentul că ceva rău este pe cale să se întâmple "; = 0.90) α, abandon (de exemplu," mi-e teamă că oamenii mă simt aproape de a mă va părăsi sau abandona mine "; = 0.93) α, enmeshment (de exemplu," eu de multe ori simt că nu am o identitate separată de meu mamă [s] sau partener "; α = 0.83), insuficiente auto-control (de exemplu," eu nu mă pot forţa să facă lucruri pe care nu se bucură, chiar şi atunci când ştiu că e pentru binele meu "; α = 0.85), dreptul (de exemplu," simt că nu ar fi trebuit să urmeze regulile normale şi convenţiile alţi oameni să facă "; α = 0.81), auto- sacrificiu (de exemplu, "Sunt o persoană bună pentru că eu cred mai mult de alţii decât de mine"; α = 0.86), şi neîncetat norme (de exemplu, "mă simt există o presiune constanta pentru mine pentru a realiza şi de a lua lucruri de facut"; α = 0.88). Răspunsurile la YSQ-SF au fost efectuate pe scale de la 1 (total neadevărate de mine) la 6 (mă descrie perfect), cu scoruri mai mari indicând niveluri mai disfuncţionale de scheme. YSQ SF-a demonstrat fiabilitatea adecvate de testare-retestare şi coerenţei interne, precum şi validitatea convergentă şi discriminantă (, [Schmidt et al., 1995] [Lee et al, 1999.] Şi [Stopa et al., 2001]). 3. Rezultate Tabelul 2 prezintă mijloacele, deviaţiile standard, precum şi intercorrelations pentru măsurile în studiul de faţă. Bărbaţii au fost găsite la raport scoruri mai mari decât femeile pentru următoarele măsuri de narcisism: leadership / autoritate (t [440] = 3.25, p <0.001), superioritatea / aroganţa (t [440] = 3.94, p <0.001), exploatare / drept (t [440] = 2.34, p <0.05), şi narcisismul grandioase (t [440] = 2.17, p <0.05). Diferenţele de gen a apărut, de asemenea, pentru un număr de scheme dezadaptative timpurii, astfel încât oamenii au raportat scoruri mai mari decât femeile pentru privarea emoţionale (t = 2.63, p <0.01 [440]), inhibarea emotionala (t [440] = 3.25, p <. 001), neîncredere (t [440] p = 2.71, <0.01), defectele (t [440] p = 4.05, <0.001), subjugarea (t [440] = 3.23, p <0.001), şi insuficienţă pentru a atinge (t [440] = 2.74, p <0.01). În ciuda acestor diferenţe între bărbaţi şi femei, includerea de gen în analizele preliminare nu sa calificat nici rezultatelor raportate în secţiunile de mai târziu, astfel de gen nu vor fi discutate în continuare. Tabelul 2. Corelaţii şi statisticii descriptive de narcisism şi schemele Early maladaptative. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 1. L / A - 2. S / S 0.50 *** - 3. S / A 0.57 0.40 *** *** - 4. E / E *** 0.38 0.30 0.53 *** *** - 5. Grandios narcisism *** 0.27 0.20 0.47 *** *** *** 0.40 - 6. narcisism vulnerabile 0.05 02 0.19 *** -. 0.43 *** 0.52 *** - 7. privarea emoţională -. 04 0.00 0.19 0.25 *** *** 0.20 *** 0.34 *** - 8. inhibarea emotionala 02 -. -. 02 0.26 0.20 *** *** *** 0.30 0.43 0.52 *** *** - 9. Neîncredere -. 01 0.08 0.24 0.35 *** *** *** 0.46 0.56 0.50 *** *** *** 0.52 - 10. Izolarea socială 27 *** -. -. 15 ** 0.05 0.16 0.21 *** *** *** 0.43 0.53 0.50 *** *** *** 0.53 - 11. Defectele 15 18 *** *** -. 0.18 *** ** 0.15 0.19 0.38 *** *** *** -. 0.49 0.54 0.52 *** *** 0.70 * ** - 12. Subjugarea 14 ** -. 09 0.18 0.20 *** *** *** -. 0.30 0.52 0.53 *** *** *** 0.53 0.55 0.69 *** ***. 67 *** - 13. Dependenţa 02 -. -. 04 *** 0.18 0.17 0.19 *** *** *** 0.34 0.49 0.40 *** *** *** 0.42 0.56 0.62 *** * ** 0.65 *** - 14. Nerealizarea -. -. 16 *** 21 *** 0.06 0.09 0.21 0.41 *** *** *** 0.51 0.54 0.51 *** *** *** 0.69. 78 *** 0.66 *** 0.70 *** - 15. Vulnerabilitatea la vătămare -. 03 03 .21 .26 -. *** *** *** 0.31 0.50 0.42 *** *** *** 0.44 0.63 0.51 *** ***. 58 *** *** 0.66 0.60 0.58 *** *** - 16. Abandonul -. 02 * 0.11 0.13 0.30 *** ** *** 0.36 0.54 0.43 *** *** *** 0.35 0.59 0.50 *** *** 0.44 ** * 0.54 *** *** 0.43 0.43 0.54 *** *** - 17. Enmeshment 0.08 0.01 0.29 0.22 *** *** *** 0.25 0.38 0.39 *** *** *** 0.37 0.35 0.46 *** *** 0.45 *** *** *** 0.56 0.57 0.51 0.56 *** *** *** 0.35 - 18. Insuficientă de auto-control 06 -. -. 12 ** *** 0.15 0.24 0.20 *** *** *** 0.47 0.37 0.43 *** *** *** 0.45 0.45 * *** ** 0.46 0.58 0.52 *** *** *** 0.53 0.57 0.46 *** *** *** 0.48 - 19. Dreptul 0.24 0.23 *** *** *** 0.40 0.45 0.35 *** *** *** 0.46 0.29 0.42 *** *** 0.46 *** 0.26 ** * 0.33 *** *** 0.38 0.38 0.31 *** *** *** 0.45 0.38 0.41 *** *** *** 0.51 - 20. Sacrificiul de sine 0.03 0.07 0.10 * 0.09 0.39 0.28 *** *** *** 0.22 0.22 0.33 *** *** *** 0.27 0.23 0.34 *** * *** ** 0.18 0.20 0.28 *** *** *** 0.39 0.30 0.22 *** *** *** 0.18 - 21. standarde inexorabil 0.09 0.08 0.14 0.24 ** *** 0.38 *** 0.31 *** 0.11 * 0.23 0.29 *** *** * 0.11 0.06 0.19 0.12 *** * 0.03 0.24 0.26 *** *** *** 0.21 0.22 0.48 *** *** *** 0.48 - Medie 5,56 6,02 4,40 3,31 4,54 3,42 2,10 2,29 2,92 2,30 1,82 2,13 1,98 2,03 2,26 2,66 1,95 2,55 2,66 3,58 3,77 Abaterea standard 2,36 1,90 2,54 1,88 1,03 1,18 1,30 1,23 1,41 1,36 1,21 1,18 1,07 1,21 1,32 1,47 1,08 1,14 1,10 1,25 1,28 Full-size de masă Notă. L / A leadership = / autoritate, S / S = self-absorption/self-admiration, S / A = superioritate / aroganta, E / E = exploatare / dreptul. * P <0.05, ** p <0.01; *** p <0.001. Vezi În articolul Conducerea / Subscalele autoritatea şi self-absorption/self-admiration de la NPI au fost atât corelat cu narcisism grandioase (RS> 0.20, ps <0.001), narcisism, dar nu vulnerabile (| RS | <0.05, ns). În contrast, superioritatea / aroganţa şi exploatare / subscale dreptul de NPI au fost corelate cu ambele narcisism grandioase (RS> 0.19, ps <0.001) şi vulnerabile narcisismul (RS> 0.40, ps <0.001). Acest lucru sugerează că forma de narcisism normala capturat de NPI în mod clar elemente grandios, dar că legătura dintre narcisism normale şi narcisismul vulnerabile este mult mai complexe, cum că anumite elemente ale narcisism normal sunt asociate cu narcisism vulnerabile (, şi anume superioritate / aroganta si exploatare / dreptul), dar altele nu sunt (de exemplu, conducerea / autoritatea şi self-absorption/self-admiration).

Am inceput examinarea noastră a asociaţiilor dintre aceste forme de narcisism şi schemele începutul dezadaptative prin inspectarea lor corelaţii de ordin zero. Aceste corelaţii au relevat că atât narcisism grandios şi narcisismul vulnerabile au avut asocieri semnificative cu toate cele 15 de scheme care sugerează că formele patologice de narcisism au fost asociate cu stiluri largă, nediferenţiată cognitive indicative de primejdie. În contrast, subscale de NPI a avut un model mai complex de asociaţii cu schemele dezadaptative timpurii care sugerează specificitate oarecum mai mare în termeni de distorsiuni cognitive. De exemplu, schema doar începutul dezadaptative pentru care toate cele patru subscale de NPI au asociatii similare a fost schema dreptul.

O serie de analize ierarhice regresie multiplă au fost utilizate pentru a obţine o înţelegere mai clară a asociaţiilor între narcisism şi schemele începutul maladaptative. Aceste analize ne-a permis să determine asociaţiilor unic între fiecare dintre scheme şi forme de narcisism. Fiecare forma de narcisism a fost examinată într-un model de regresie separat cu schemele dezadaptative timpurii servind ca predictori. Principalele efecte pentru cele 15 scheme dezadaptative timpurii au fost introduse simultan, astfel încât orice efecte observate ar reflecta asociaţie unică între care schema special şi narcisismul, mai degrabă decât pur şi simplu reflectă stiluri cognitive indicativ de primejdie. Rezultatele acestor analize sunt prezentate în tabelul 3.

Tabelul 3. Ierarhică de regresie multiplă Analiza de narcisism pe Early schemele maladaptative.

NPI Leadership / NPI Self-Absorption/Self-Admiration NPI Autoritatea Superioritatea / NPI Exploatarea aroganta / PNI Dreptul Grandiose Narcisismul Narcisismul PNI vulnerabile

Β β R2 R2 R2 R2 β β β R2 R2 β
Predictori 0.23 ***
0.25 ***
0.28 ***
0.28 ***
0.33 ***
0.47 ***

Retragerea emoţională
.04
.03
.07
0.14 *
-. 07
-. 05
Emoţională Inhibiţie
.08
.06
0.14 *
-. 06
.10
.07
Neîncredere
.07
0.15 *
0.15 *
0.20 **
0.31 ***
0.20 ***
Izolarea socială
-. 35 ***
-. 08
-. 22 ***
.01
-. 09
.06
Defectuozitate
-. 03
-. 20 **
0.20 **
.01
-. 10
-. 11
Subjugare
-. 13 *
-. 03
.05
-. 04
.08
0.19 **
Dependenţă
0.15 *
0.17 *
.08
-. 01
-. 01
-. 16 *
Nerealizarea
-. 14 *
-. 29 ***
-. 35 ***
-. 23 ***
.06
.09
Vulnerabilitatea la vătămare
-. 03
-. 06
-. 03
.00
-. 04
.03
Abandon
.04
0.17 **
-. 06
0.12 *
.11
0.23 ***
Enmeshment
0.19 **
.07
0.24 ***
.08
.07
.07
Insuficientă Self-Control
-. 14 *
-. 28 ***
-. 12 *
.00
-. 14 *
.09
Dreptul
0.35 ***
0.40 ***
0.37 ***
0.36 ***
0.12 *
0.13 *
Abnegaţie
.10
0.12 *
.04
-. 09
0.18 **
-. 03
Inexorabil Standarde
-. 12 *
-. 21 ***
-. 14 **
.01
0.13 *
.07

Full-size de masă
* P <0.05, ** p <0.01; *** p <0.001.


Vezi În articolul



3.1. Leadership / autoritatea
Schemele următoarele devreme dezadaptative a apărut ca predictori semnificative ale conducerii / autorităţii: izolarea socială (β = -. 35, p <0.001), subjugarea (β = -. 13, p <0.05), dependenţa (β = 0.15, p <0.05), nu reuşesc să obţină (β = -. 14, p <0.05), enmeshment (β p = 0.19, <0.01), insuficient de auto-control (β = -. 14, p <0.05 ), dreptul (β = 0.35, p <0.001), şi neîncetat standarde (β = -. 12, p <0.05). Asta este, conducerea / autoritatea a fost pozitiv asociat cu trei scheme precoce maladaptativă (, dependenţa de exemplu, enmeshment, şi dreptul) şi negativ asociată cu cinci scheme (de exemplu izolarea, sociale, subjugare, nu reuşesc să obţină, insuficiente de auto-control, şi standardele neîncetat ). Rezultatele analizei de regresie diferit de la corelaţii de ordin zero, în sensul că asociaţiile dintre conducerea / autoritate şi scheme care reflectă dependenţa, enmeshment, şi insuficiente de auto-control a atins niveluri convenţionale de semnificaţie în regresie, chiar dacă corelaţiile lor la zero, pentru a nu au fost semnificative. În schimb, corelaţia între conducerea / autoritate şi defectele nu a fost semnificativă în regresie, în ciuda lor corelaţie semnificativă de ordin zero.

3.2. Self-absorption/Self-admiration
Neîncredere (β = 0.15, p <0.05), defectele (β = -. 20, p <0.01), dependenţa (β p = 0.17, <0.05), nu reuşesc să obţină (β = -. 29, p <0.001), abandon (β = 0.17, p <0.01), insuficient de auto-control (β = -. 28, p <0.001), dreptul (β = 0.40, p <0.001), auto -sacrificiu (β = 0.12, p <0.05), şi neîncetat standarde (β = -. 21, p <0.001) au fost predictori semnificative ale self-absorption/self-admiration. asociaţii pozitive au apărut, timp de cinci scheme maladaptativă precoce (de exemplu, neîncredere, dependenţă, abandon, dreptul, şi auto-sacrificiu) şi asociaţii negative au apărut pentru patru scheme (, defectele de exemplu, imposibilitatea de a realiza, insuficiente de auto-control, şi standardele de severa). Rezultatele analizei de regresie diferit de la corelaţii de ordin zero, în sensul că asociaţiile dintre self-absorption/self-admiration şi scheme care reflectă lipsa de încredere, dependenţa sacrificiu de sine, şi standardele neîncetat atins niveluri convenţionale de semnificaţie în regresie, chiar dacă lor corelaţii de ordin zero nu au fost semnificative. Asocierea dintre self-absorption/self-admiration şi izolarea socială nu a fost semnificativă în regresie, în ciuda lor de corelaţie semnificativă de ordin zero.

3.3. Superioritate / aroganta
Schemele următoarele devreme dezadaptative a apărut ca predictori semnificative de superioritate / aroganta: inhibarea emotionala (β p = 0.14, <0.05), neîncredere (β p = 0.15, <0.05), izolarea socială (β = -. 22, p <0.001), defectele (β = 0.20, p <0.01), nu reuşesc să obţină (β = -. 35, p <0.001), enmeshment (β p = 0.24, <0.001), insuficient de sine -control (β = 12, -. p <0.05), dreptul (β p = 0.37, <0.001), precum şi standardele neîncetat (β = -. 14, p <0.01). Superioritate / aroganta a fost pozitiv asociat cu cinci scheme maladaptativă precoce (de exemplu, inhibiţie emoţională, neîncredere, defectele, enmeshment, şi dreptul) şi negativ asociată cu patru scheme (de exemplu, izolarea socială, nu reuşesc să obţină, insuficiente de auto-control, precum şi standardele neîncetat ). Rezultatele regresiei se deosebeau de corelaţiile de bază, în sensul că asociaţiile dintre superioritatea / aroganţă şi scheme care să reflecte izolarea socială şi nu reuşesc să obţină au fost semnificative în regresia dar şi asociaţiile lor nu a ajuns la niveluri convenţionale de semnificaţie în corelaţii de ordin zero.
3.4.
3.5.
3.6.
4. Discuţie
5. Concluzie

Rezultatele studiului de faţă a constatat că aspectele legate de narcisism normale şi patologice diferite, în asociaţiile lor cu schemele devreme maladaptative. Aceste rezultate sunt în concordanţă cu distincţii anterioare dintre formele normale şi patologice de narcisism, precum şi furnizarea unui sprijin suplimentar pentru existenţa a două expresii de narcisism patologic (de exemplu, narcisism grandioasă şi narcisismul vulnerabile). narcisism normală a trebuit asociaţii oarecum în contradicţie cu aceste scheme, care este în concordanţă cu concluziile anterioare arată că unele dintre subscale NPI reflecta ajustare în timp ce alţii dereglării de captare (de exemplu, [Miller şi Campbell, 2008] şi [Pincus şi Lukowitsky, 2010]). În contrast, forme patologice de narcisism a avut mai multe asociaţii în concordanţă cu aceste scheme dezadaptative timpurii, care ar putea sugera că persoanele cu un nivel ridicat de narcisism patologic poate experienţă motivaţii contradictorii privind interacţiunile lor cu altele, care poate duce la niveluri ridicate de stres şi incertitudine. Aceste rezultate oferi un sprijin suplimentar pentru tratarea acestor aspecte diferite de narcisism ca distincte constructe care sunt demni de cercetări ulterioare examinarea importanţa şi relevanţa lor clinică.

Filosofii de viata in relatiile intime

Uneori, ramanem implicati intr-o relatie care nu ne satisface doar de teama de a nu gresi. Ne macina acel „dar daca…”. Ne place sa ne amagim ca partenerul se va schimba... In momentul in care recunoastem care ne este temerea (bazata pe propria „filosofie de viata") nu ne ramane decat sa o infruntam, tocmai pentru a ne demonstra noua sau celorlalti ca suntem capabili sa ne asumam destinul. Niciodata nu e momentul potrivit de a renunta la cineva fara de care credem ca nu putem trai. Gasim mii de motive pentru a mai trage de timp, dar asta nu poate dura o viata. Este cazul sa actionam, fara a lasa ca lucrurile placute sa ne orbeasca, mai ales daca acestea sunt de domeniul trecutului.

O data ce l-ai indepartat/ai indepartat-o de langa tine, alunga-l/alung-o si din mintea ta! Ai nevoie de ceva timp pentru a te impaca cu ideea ca s-a sfarsit. Aceasta e ca o perioada de „doliu” in care iti este permis sa plangi, sa tipi, sa vorbesti singur/a, dar cel mai bine ar fi sa ai un umar pe care sa plangi sau o persoana dispusa sa te asculte. Nu are sens sa pastrezi aproape obiecte sau fotografii care sa nu te lase sa-l/sa o uiti, nu mai vorbi atat despre ce a fost, nu te lasa obsedat/a de amintiri. Nici nu cauta sa mai frecventezi locurile voastre, doar-doar de l-ai gasi/ai gasi-o pe-acolo sau, mai rau, sa-l suni/sa o suni numai pentru a-i auzi vocea.

Incearca ceva nou, ocupa-te de tine! Avand diverse activitati iti este usor sa-ti consumi energia si timpul pe care obisnuiai sa i-l oferi. Invata sa fii „egoist/a” caci, iubindu-te suficient de mult, poti sta departe de el/ea!

La fel cum anumite credinte de viata ne impiedica sa renuntam sau sa finalizam o relatie, tot asa (la cealalta extrema)... relatia extraconjugala pare sa devina o normalitate a zilelor noastre. Chiar daca nu ne propunem, sunt dese situatiile in care, aparand ca posibilitate, nu avem taria de a o refuza.

Acest fenomen social starneste destule controverse. Unii il considera un fapt imoral, religia il considera pacat, iar altii sustin ca aventurile sunt o modalitate prin care indivizii isi cauta propria identitate sau isi demonstreaza independenta. Cert este ca adulterul devine o cauza constanta in destramarea cuplurilor, indiferent de vechimea acestora.Daca in trecut casatoriile erau adesea aranjate de parinti, tinerii neavand posibilitatea sa se cunoasca prea bine sau sa traiasca impreuna anterior casatoriei, rezultau nenumarate incompatibilitati fizice si psihice intre cei doi. In acest caz, extraconjugalitatea aparea firesc, ca solutie la nevoia de implinire afectiva personala si... oarecum, ca un resort sau „supliciu” al oferirii de siguranta si certitudine ca aleasa/alesul este/va fi persoana potrivita. Astazi suntem insa stapanii deciziilor noastre, casatorindu-ne cand vrem, unde vrem si, mai ales, cu cine vrem. Asezam pasiunea, iubirea si satisfactia la baza oricarei relatii, ceea ce face ca adulterul contemporan sa para lipsit de sens. Dar se petrece atat de des, incat si cauzele care-l sustin sunt cu totul altele. O prima cauza: nenumaratele contacte interpersonale pe care le avem. Este aproape imposibil sa nu fim atrasi, la un moment dat, de altcineva. Si atunci spunem direct ca ne dorim o relatie fara obligatii. O alta cauza este si cea care (aproape) a ruinat casnicii: maternitatea. Atunci cand sotul se simte neglijat, nu-si va face prea multe griji ca se refugiaza in bratele alteia. El nu poate spune ca s-a casatorit cu persoana nepotrivita, ci se asteapta sa aiba o casatorie incitanta fara a o face insa incitanta. In opinia mea „adulterul” se petrece intotdeauna mai intai in gand, si apoi in realitate...

CUM SA DEVII AFIRMATIV

Afirmativitatea este o tehnica comportamentala care s-a nascut în Statele Unite
si mai poarta denumirea si de afirmare de sine. Ea are
avantajul simplitatii si ne propune tehnici simple, folositoare si eficiente
pentru a adresa o întrebare, a refuza o anumita cerere, a formula
o nemultumire, a rezolva relatii conflictuale, a raspunde la critici si chiar
a accepta complimente.
Afirmativitatea este o tehnica comportamentala care s-a nascut în Statele Unite
si mai poarta denumirea si de afirmare de sine. Ea are
avantajul simplitatii si ne propune tehnici simple, folositoare si eficiente
pentru a adresa o întrebare, a refuza o anumita cerere, a formula
o nemultumire, a rezolva relatii conflictuale, a raspunde la critici si chiar
a accepta complimente.

Cu alte cuvinte, folosind afirmativitatea raporturile umane devin armonioase
si pline de respect reciproc. Este întotdeauna preferabil, atunci când îti exprimi
nemultumirea, sa folosesti cuvântul „ eu”, mai degraba decât cuvintele „tu” sau
„voi”. Cel mai bun mod de a te face ascultat este sa spui simplu
si precis ceea ce vrei si ceea ce nu vrei. Nu te rusina sa simti si sa exprimi
emotii negative, pe care le formulezi în nume propriu si fara animozitate.
Apara-ti punctul de vedere folosind expresia „Va înteleg, dar….”. Daca ceea ce
trebuie sa anunti nu este usor de spus foloseste expresia: „O sa va ia prin
surprindere ceea ce vreau sa va spun…”. Nu te simti obligat sa-ti justifici
mereu hotarârile. Termina discutia în mod politicos si pozitiv.

Tehnici afirmative

Una dintre cele mai simple tehnici afirmative este tehnica discului zgâriat.
Aceasta tehnica este la îndemâna tuturor, este simpla de aplicat si chiar amuzanta.
Ea a fost elaborata de un psiholog american, Zev Wanderer. Asa cum un disc învechit
si prafuit repeta la nesfârsit o anumita bucata muzicala,
asa si tu trebuie sa fii consecvent in timpul conduitelor afirmative. Ceea ce
înseamna ca este necesar sa perseverezi în exprimarea unei opinii, a unei dorinte
sau a unui sentiment, fara a devia de la punctul de vedere pe care vrei sa îl sustii.
Astfel, interlocutorul va ajunge sa înteleaga ca ai o idee bine închegata, pe care nu
vrei sa o abandonezi. Îti poti modifica forma discursului, poti varia timbrul vocii,
dar continutul mesajului tau trebuie sa ramâna identic. Sustine-ti ideile calm,
politicos, surâzator si serios. Gratie acestei tehnici vei putea sa-ti exprimi cu
usurinta opiniile si nevoile.

Perseverenta cererii si claritatea mesajului creeaza o presiune asupra interlocutorului.
Indiferent de raspunsul sau, daca te fixezi pe ceea ce doresti, pâna
la urma mesajul tau va fi înteles.

Erotismul cucereste adolescentii

Adolescentii

Erotismul, indiferent de categorie, cucereste adolescentii. Cati dintre dvs au acasa o “pustoaica” de 14-16 ani care imbraca numai bluze decoltate, pentru a atrage privirile colegilor sai? Ciorapii colorati sunt la moda, mai ales daca se vad pana deasupra pulpelor, adevarat? Sa vedem acum si partea “masculina” a monezii. Cati dintre dvs nu au acasa un “pusti” de 14-16 ani, pasionat de pc-uri si internet, care detine peste 10 mii fotografii erotice? Nu trebuie sa luati decizii definitive care sa influenteze negativ, viata adolescentului, ci trebuie sa procedati delicat, influentand din umbra orice tip de atitudine pro erotica. Rabdarea si temperarea, sunt cuvintele ce definesc comportamentul dvs fata de reactiile si micile obraznicii ale adolescentului.

Ce provoaca informatia de tip erotic in adolescent?

DORINTA! Dorinta de a face sex, de a experimenta, de a avea orgasm, excitare si frustrare.

In functie de educatia aplicata, adolescentului, pana in momentul critic al varstei de 14/16 ani, informatia erotica are impact mediu sau inalt. Niciodata nu o sa fie vorba despre lipsa impactului. Nu spera ca adolescentul tau sa fie “asesxuat”, asta chiar nu se poate. Un specialist, homofob, spunea in urma cu 30 de ani “M-am bucurat cand baiatul meu, la 14 ani fura revista mea erotica. Eram fericit ca nu era gay”.

In functie de tipul de informatie de tip erotic(soft, hard), adolescentul reactioneaza, trecand prin stadiile “interesat, foarte interesat, pasionat, interesat, mai putin interesat, neutru”. Orice tip de informatie devine interesanta si provoaca pasiuni nebanuite, daca si numai daca are rezonanta in subiect. Orice adolescent va sustine intr-o discutie “relativ seriosa” despre sex, in prezenta parintiilor, scarba si lipsa de interes, simtita fata de erotism si derivatele sale. Tocmai pentru asta, relatia dezvoltata de tine cu adolescentul trebuie sa fie bazata pe prietenie si sinceritate.

Cum pot cenzura informatia erotica?

Nu o poti cenzura, dar o poti controla. Daca il faci pe adolescent sa adopte o atitune pro informatie corecta si de calitate, in conformitate cu pozitia si valoarea ta in viata lui, poti sa incerci sa-i recomanzi, informatia de tip controlat. Este exclusa atitudinea razboinica sau cea bazata pe impunerea propriilor valori. Disperare, simtita fata de prezenta trivialitatii, in “educatia colectiva” a copilului tau, nu ar trebui sa reprezinte motorul actiuniilor tale viitoare. Educatia pe care doreai sa o regasesti in copilul tau, a depins doar de tine, ca si implementare corecta. Este, in parte, doar o impresie daca crezi, ca tot ceea ce este in jurul copilului tau, provoaca rau. Nu uita, daca tu te simti multumit de ce i-ai oferit adolescentului pana la 14 ani, ca educatie si sustinere sufleteasca, ceea ce urmeaza, nu il va schimba radical.

Ce trebuie sa fac, sa pot discuta, de la egal la egal, cu fata mea?

Cum este fata ta, trista, detasata, absenta, grasa, fardata, poarta pierce, are prieteni?

Cum este fata ta, vesela, prezenta in toate, subtirica, eleganta, curata, are prieteni?

Se mai pot face inca 50 de categorii, dar nu cred ca o sa fie in folosul cuiva. Adevar: fiecare parinte, pofida greselilor facute de copil, isi vizualizeaza “pruncul” ca fiind pozitiv si educat. Nu pun intrebarea “Daca copilul tau este supraponderal, de ce nu faci nimic sa-l ajuti” sau intrebarea “Daca fata ta la 14 ani, are prieten care isi doreste sa ramana la voi peste noapte, de ce nu te intrebi la ce varsta si-a inceput viata sexuala “produsul tau ecologic”?

Egalitatea, fiindca despre ea vorbim in cadrul acestui raspuns, se gastiga in timp si se pierde, incredibil, de usor. Adolescentul te simte egalul sau, daca atitudinea venita din partea ta, fata de anumite lucruri(sex, masturbare, erotism), are rezonanta pozitiva in sine. Discutiile, ca intre mama si fata, tata si fata, trebuie sa isi schimbe raportul interfamily, punand pret pe notiunea de prieten/prietena. Un prieten poate discuta cu adolescentii, o mama autoritara sau hipersensibila, nu.

1. Nu o trata de sus.

2. Nu o trata cu umilinta.

3. Impui notiunea de prieten, nu de dusman.

4. Nu esti NICIODATA, la concurenta cu copilul tau.

5. De fiecare data cand copilul tau vrea sa iti vorbeasca, lasa tot si asculta-l. Nu reactiona emotional inalt, nu tipa, nu plange in fata lui, ofera-i modelul calmului si a sinceritatii.

6. Nu cere raspunsuri pe loc.

7. Nu facilita instaorarea neincrederii. Prezenta secretelor intre voi(mama- fiica, tata- fiica), nu trebuie tradata.

Cum ii prezint baiatului meu, informatia erotica corecta? De la ce varsta, trebuie sa interactionez cu adolescentul, pentru ca relatia tata/mama - discutii despre sex si erotism - sa nu sufere transformari?

Cuvantul cautat este ALTERNATIVA.

Un personaj gol pe net, intotdeauna o sa aiba trecere in alimentarea autoerotismului, decat o carte de specialitate. Asa ca(si pentru asta am combinat cele doua intrebari) discutiile despre si cu sex, erotism, informatie clara, trebuie sa debuteze la varsta de 12 ani.

Preadolescenta, usurinta cu care asimileaza infromatia, pierderea in timp a interesului, prin ciocnirea repetata cu informatia erotica, il pot transforma pe copilul tau, in adolescentul echilibrat ce isi canalizeaza energia catre studiu si normalitate.

Nu uita “Normalitatea ta, nu este normalitatea lui”. nu te astepta ca lucrurile ce tie iti suna bine sa aiba acelasi impact si in el.

Orice tip de incluziune in universul sau, inseamna tradare si revolta, asa ca, ori ii arati ca ii esti prieten de pe la 12 ani, discutand orice, ori asteapta-te sa faca totul impotriva ta. Cenzurarea informatiei, conduce la dorinta exacerbata de cercetare.

Tot ceea ce este interzis, este interesant.

Unde este modelul de viata

Cum ii impun fetei mele, in varsta de 15 ani, detasare fata de sex si erotism? Cum ii impun baiatului meu, in varsta de 14 ani, neutralitate fata de tot ceea ce inseamna informatie triviala?

Nu poti impune nimic cu forta sau cu tonul autoritar. Nu poti constrange un subiect tanar si plin de initiative si intrebari personale intime, sa nu mai gandeasca. Ne aflam in anul 2009, peste 10 ani lucrurile din jurul nostru vor fi atat de schimbate, incat orice tip de tentativa directa sau indirecta de intruziune in “comunitatea lor” o sa fie taxata. Te astepti ca produsul tau sa iti semene si interior, total gresit. Te astepti sa reactioneze ca si tine la “ispitele aparute”, gresit. Permite-mi sa te intreb, acum 10 ani aveai internet? Internetul a schimbat societatea la nivel mondial. Cum ai putea concura cu o forma de “Inteligenta virtuala” care ofera aproape gratuit, tot ceea ce tu cenzurezi?

Erotismul cucereste adolescentii si nu se poate face nimic in aceasta privinta.

Poti impune reguli de fier, ce vor fi incalcate. Poti cere raspunsuri “adevarate” la pasiuni aparute in lipsa libertatii. Nu poti cenzura, nu poti speria, nu poti face slalom printre raspunsuri catalogate “corecte”, “triviale”. De ce? Fiindca, pana la urma, tot iti vei pierde copilul.

Erotismul nu indepartea copilul din familie.

Erotismul nu favorizeaza sarcini nedorite.

Erotismul virtual, teribil de liber si in cantitati imense, poate fi controlat, dar nu si interzis.

Copilul tau are nevoie de sustinere, din partea ta. Intotdeauna trebuie sa regasesca in tine, tot ceea ce ceilalti “oameni de bine” nu sunt capabili sa daruiasca.