Types of Narcissism Explained

Narcissism is one of the most searched and most misunderstood concepts in contemporary psychology. It is simultaneously overused as a casual insult and underestimated as a clinical phenomenon — which means that the people most affected by it, the ones living inside relationships with narcissistic people or recovering from narcissistic abuse, often have the least accurate picture of what they are actually dealing with.

This guide explains the major types of narcissism with clinical precision and without jargon — not as an academic taxonomy but as a practical map for anyone trying to understand a specific person, recognize a pattern in their own history, or make sense of what happened to them.

Understanding which type of narcissism you encountered matters for recovery. The injury produced by grandiose narcissism is not identical to the injury produced by vulnerable narcissism. The tactics differ, the relational dynamics differ, and what recovery from each requires differs. The more precisely you can name what happened, the more accurately you can address it.

If you are a survivor of narcissistic abuse in an intimate partner context, the narcissistic abuse guide and the Definitive Guide to Coercive Control provide the fuller context. If you grew up with a narcissistic parent and are navigating the specific developmental injury that produces, the TENEL™ recovery page is written for you.

Narcissism as a Spectrum

Before examining the types, it is important to understand that narcissism exists on a spectrum rather than as a binary category.^{1 2 3} At one end sits healthy narcissism — the ordinary self-regard, confidence, and capacity to advocate for one’s own needs that functional adult life requires.⁴ At the other end sits Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD), a clinically recognized condition characterized by pervasive grandiosity, an impaired capacity for empathy, and an entitlement that functions as a core organizing principle of the personality.⁵

Between these poles exists a range of narcissistic presentations — traits, patterns, and adaptations that cause varying degrees of harm to the people in relationship with them, without necessarily meeting the full diagnostic threshold for NPD.

What matters more than where on the spectrum someone sits is the pattern of behavior they exhibit and the impact of that pattern on others. A person who does not meet the diagnostic criteria for NPD can still cause profound psychological harm through narcissistic behavior. A clinical diagnosis in the person who hurt you is not required for your experience to be valid or your injury to be real.

The types described below reflect the major narcissistic presentations identified in clinical research and behavioral literature. They are not mutually exclusive — many individuals exhibit elements of more than one type — and they are not static. Narcissistic presentations can shift across relationships, life stages, and contexts.⁶ To learn more, read Acquired Situational Narcissism: When Fame and Power Corrupt.

Grandiose Narcissism

Grandiose narcissism is the most recognizable type — the one most people picture when they hear the word narcissist. Grandiose narcissists present with overt superiority, entitlement, dominance, and an expansive self-image that demands constant external validation.⁷ They tend to be extroverted, charming, and socially confident, which frequently earns them admiration and success in contexts that reward boldness and self-promotion.

What distinguishes grandiose narcissism from ordinary confidence is the structural role that superiority plays in the personality. For someone with genuine self-esteem, external validation is pleasant but not necessary. For the grandiose narcissist, it is oxygen.⁸ The self-image is not actually secure — it is a construction that requires continuous reinforcement, which is why the grandiose narcissist responds to criticism, disagreement, or the perception of being disrespected with a disproportionate intensity that can include rage, contempt, or sustained punitive behavior.⁹

• In relationship, grandiose narcissism typically manifests through love bombing in the early stages — the overwhelming pursuit and idealization that creates a powerful attachment bond before the targeted person has had the opportunity to see the person clearly.¹⁰ As the relationship progresses, idealization gives way to devaluation: the criticism, the contempt, the expectation of compliance, and the systematic erosion of the targeted person’s confidence and sense of reality.¹¹ Control is maintained through dominance and the targeted person’s fear of the narcissist’s displeasure.

• The injury it produces is often experienced as bewildering — the contrast between the idealization phase and the devaluation phase creates profound confusion and grief. Survivors frequently describe feeling as though the person they fell in love with disappeared and was replaced by someone unrecognizable. The task of recovery involves understanding that the idealization was a tactic rather than a genuine reflection of the relationship, and dismantling the self-blame that the devaluation installed.

• In a narcissistic parent, grandiose narcissism produces a child who is required to exist as an extension of the parent — a reflection of their superiority rather than a separate person with their own developing identity. The child may be used as a source of narcissistic supply (the golden child) or as a target for the parent’s aggression and contempt (the scapegoat).¹² In both cases the child’s authentic self is systematically suppressed in service of the parent’s needs. This is the presentation most directly addressed by the TENEL™ framework.

Vulnerable Narcissism

Vulnerable narcissism — sometimes called covert narcissism — is the type most frequently missed, both by those experiencing it and by practitioners attempting to identify it. Where grandiose narcissism is overt and domineering, vulnerable narcissism operates through apparent sensitivity, victimhood, hypersensitivity to criticism, and a fragile self-image that nonetheless demands the same special treatment and exemption from accountability as its grandiose counterpart.^{13 14 15}

The paradox of vulnerable narcissism is that it presents as its opposite. The vulnerable narcissist often appears self-deprecating, anxious, and easily hurt — which makes it genuinely difficult for those in relationship with them to identify the entitlement and manipulative dynamics operating beneath the surface.¹⁶ The self-image is not inflated through overt grandiosity but protected through a sustained narrative of victimhood, moral superiority, and the implicit demand that others manage their emotional fragility.

• In relationship, vulnerable narcissism typically operates through guilt, emotional withdrawal, and passive aggression rather than overt dominance. The targeted person finds themselves constantly managing the vulnerable narcissist’s emotional state, walking on eggshells around their sensitivity, and taking responsibility for conflict that the vulnerable narcissist generates but never acknowledges. The lack of overt hostility makes it significantly harder to name what is happening — which is one reason survivors of vulnerable narcissists are among the most likely to question their own perceptions and carry the most self-blame.

• Key behaviors include: chronic victimhood narratives; hypersensitivity to perceived slights that others would not notice; passive-aggressive communication; emotional shutdown as punishment; the weaponization of vulnerability to avoid accountability; projection — attributing to the targeted person the very behaviors the vulnerable narcissist is exhibiting; and a deep resentment toward those they perceive as having more than they deserve.^{17 18}

• The injury it produces is characterized by profound confusion — the targeted person often cannot reconcile the apparent fragility of the person who hurt them with the recognition that they have been systematically manipulated. Recovery frequently involves rebuilding trust in one’s own perception of events that the vulnerable narcissist consistently reframed as misunderstandings, overreactions, or the targeted person’s own failures of empathy.

• The gaslighting dimension of vulnerable narcissism deserves particular attention. Because the vulnerable narcissist appears so obviously wounded, their account of events — in which they are always the one who has been wronged — carries a surface plausibility that grandiose narcissism’s account often doesn’t. This makes gaslighting by a vulnerable narcissist particularly effective and particularly difficult to recover from. For more on how DARVO operates in this context, see our DARVO guide.

Malignant Narcissism

Malignant narcissism sits at the most severe end of the narcissistic spectrum. It combines narcissistic grandiosity with antisocial traits — a calculated disregard for others, sadistic pleasure in domination, paranoia, and an absence of the guilt or remorse that might otherwise function as a brake on harmful behavior.

The term was introduced by psychoanalyst Erich Fromm and elaborated by Otto Kernberg, who described malignant narcissism as a hybrid of narcissistic personality disorder and antisocial personality disorder, with paranoid features.^{19 20 21 22} It is distinguished from ordinary grandiose narcissism by its intentionality and its enjoyment of harm — where other narcissistic types may damage those around them as a byproduct of their self-focus, the malignant narcissist frequently derives satisfaction from the damage itself.^{23 24 25}

• In relationship, malignant narcissism produces the most dangerous and the most entrenched coercive control dynamics. The tactics are deliberate and often sophisticated. Isolation, financial abuse, surveillance, threats, and the systematic destruction of the targeted person’s support network, self-esteem, and connection to reality are all deployed as instruments of control. Post-separation abuse — the continuation of coercive control through legal proceedings, harassment, and smear campaigns after the relationship ends — is particularly common with malignant narcissism, and the post-separation period carries the highest statistical risk of physical danger.^{26 27} For more on this, see our Post-Separation Abuse section and the Global Coercive Control Legislation Index.

• The injury it produces is among the most severe and the most complex to recover from — not only because the abuse itself is more extensive, but because the targeted person has often been so thoroughly isolated and their perception of reality so thoroughly distorted that the resources and clarity needed for recovery have been systematically removed. Specialist support is not optional in this context. It is essential.

Healthy Narcissism

Before narcissism became synonymous with harm, it described something necessary — the ordinary self-regard without which functioning adult life is not possible. The concept of healthy narcissism has a long clinical history, originating with Heinz Kohut, who used the term to describe the developmental outcome when a child’s early narcissistic needs are adequately met: a stable, authentic sense of self-worth that does not require constant external validation to maintain itself.^{28 29}

Kohut’s formulation of healthy narcissism includes several core features that distinguish it sharply from its pathological counterparts: a strong but realistic self-regard; genuine empathy for others and recognition of their separate needs; an authentic rather than performed self-concept; the courage to tolerate criticism without collapsing or retaliating; confidence to pursue one’s own goals without requiring them to be at others’ expense; emotional resilience; and the capacity to both admire and be admired without either becoming a source of threat or a requirement for survival.³⁰

What is critical to understand is that healthy narcissism is not simply a diluted version of pathological narcissism.³¹ It is qualitatively different — organized around genuine self-knowledge rather than a constructed self-image that requires constant reinforcement. Where pathological narcissism is fundamentally defensive — a structure built to protect an underlying experience of inadequacy or shame — healthy narcissism rests on a foundation that does not need defending in the same way.^{32 33}

In clinical psychologist Dr. Michael Kinsey’s model — drawing on the work of Harvard psychologist and researcher Dr. Craig Malkin, whose research on the narcissism continuum and echoism has significantly advanced the field’s understanding of healthy self-regard — narcissism exists on a continuum as a personality trait.³⁴ At one end sits echoism: the suppression of self so thorough that the person exists primarily in relation to others’ needs and desires, often as a direct consequence of early narcissistic exposure. At the other end sits Narcissistic Personality Disorder, in which the need for specialness and external validation has become a consuming, organizing principle of the personality. Healthy narcissism occupies the balanced center of that continuum — the state in which the self is present, grounded, and capable of genuine reciprocity.³⁵

Communal Narcissism

Communal narcissism is one of the least recognized types precisely because it presents through behaviors that society rewards and admires — generosity, helpfulness, self-sacrifice, and moral concern for others.³⁶ The communal narcissist’s sense of superiority and entitlement is organized not around personal achievement or status but around being the most caring, the most generous, the most morally attuned person in any given context.³⁷

The grandiosity is real, but it is expressed through the communal domain rather than the agentic one. The communal narcissist needs to be recognized as the best helper, the most selfless giver, the most compassionate presence — and reacts to any challenge to that identity with the same dysregulation that grandiose narcissism exhibits when its overt superiority is questioned.

• What distinguishes communal narcissism from genuine altruism is the conditionality of the care and the resentment that emerges when appreciation is perceived as insufficient. The communal narcissist gives — but the giving creates an implicit debt.³⁸ When that debt is not repaid through sufficient recognition and gratitude, the warmth withdraws and the resentment surfaces. Over time the targeted person finds themselves exhausted by the emotional labor of providing adequate appreciation for care they did not request and cannot refuse.

• In family systems, communal narcissism is particularly common in parents and may be especially difficult for children to recognize because the parent genuinely believes in their own selflessness. The child who grows up with a communal narcissist may carry profound guilt around any need that the parent cannot meet with visible magnanimity, and may struggle to identify their experience as abuse precisely because the parent’s care was so publicly evident. The TENEL™ framework addresses this presentation specifically within the adult child of narcissists (ACON) population.

Elinor Greenberg, author of Borderline, Narcissistic, and Schizoid Adaptations: The Pursuit of Love, Admiration, and Safety, distinguishes between “pro-social” and “anti-social” narcissistic adaptations based on individuals’ intentions, the ways they seek narcissistic supply, and the image they wish to project to others.  In a Psychology Today article, she uses Arthurian legend as a metaphor, describing two broad narcissistic styles: “White Knights” and “Black Knights.” The “White Knight” narcissist resembles what contemporary psychology often describes as a communal narcissist — someone who seeks admiration through appearing helpful, moral, or altruistic — whereas the “Black Knight” narcissist aligns more closely with exploitative or malignant forms of narcissism.³⁹

Antagonistic Narcissism

Antagonistic narcissism is characterized by a competitive, oppositional relational stance in which the self is elevated through the diminishment of others.^{40 41} Where grandiose narcissism seeks admiration, antagonistic narcissism seeks superiority through conflict, rivalry, and the systematic undermining of those perceived as competitors or threats.

The antagonistic narcissist is argumentative, contemptuous, and exploitative — not primarily for the pleasure of domination (as in malignant narcissism) but as an expression of a deeply entrenched belief that relationships are fundamentally competitive and that one’s own position must be secured at others’ expense.

• In relationship, antagonistic narcissism produces environments of chronic tension, one-upmanship, and the relentless undermining of the targeted person’s confidence, achievements, and social connections. The targeted person frequently finds that any success, competence, or positive attention they receive triggers an escalation in the antagonistic narcissist’s contempt or competitive behavior.

• In workplaces, antagonistic narcissism is particularly damaging to team dynamics — credit is appropriated, contributions are minimized, and colleagues are managed as threats to be neutralized rather than collaborators to be engaged.⁴²

To learn more about how antagonistic narcissism can show up in intimate relationships, read Narcissistic Cheating Patterns: Signs & Recovery featuring insights from betrayal trauma expert Jeni Woodfin, LMFT..

Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD)

Narcissistic Personality Disorder is the formal clinical diagnosis — defined by the DSM-5 as a pervasive pattern of grandiosity, need for admiration, and lack of empathy, beginning by early adulthood and present across contexts.^{43 44} To meet the diagnostic threshold, an individual must exhibit at least five of nine specified criteria, including a grandiose sense of self-importance, preoccupation with fantasies of unlimited success or power, a belief in their own special status, a need for excessive admiration, a sense of entitlement, interpersonal exploitation, a lack of empathy, envy of others, and arrogance.

The DSM-5 recognizes NPD as a single diagnosis, though research consistently identifies grandiose and vulnerable subtypes as the two primary presentations.⁴⁵ The ICD-11, which reflects European clinical tradition and the training background relevant to the TENEL™ framework, takes a somewhat different approach — addressing personality disorders through dimensional trait specifications rather than categorical diagnoses, which better captures the overlapping, hybrid presentations that are most common in clinical practice.^{46 47 48}

What a diagnosis means — and doesn’t mean — is worth stating clearly. A formal diagnosis of NPD in the person who harmed you is not required for your experience to be valid or for the pattern you experienced to constitute abuse.⁴⁹ Many people who cause significant harm through narcissistic behavior do not meet the full diagnostic threshold for NPD. Equally, a diagnosis of NPD does not make the person who has it evil, irredeemable, or incapable of being in relationship. What it does indicate is a pervasive, entrenched pattern that is resistant to change without sustained, specialized clinical intervention — which almost never happens without the person’s genuine recognition of the problem and motivated engagement in treatment.

What Type of Narcissism Did You Experience?

For survivors trying to make sense of their experience, identifying the type of narcissism involved can be clarifying — not as a way of diagnosing someone else, but as a way of understanding the specific pattern that operated on them and why it produced the effects it did.

Some useful orienting questions:

• Was the person overtly confident and domineering, or did they appear fragile and victimized while still managing to be the center of every dynamic? That distinction points toward grandiose versus vulnerable narcissism.

• Was the harm calculated and deliberate, with evidence of pleasure in the damage caused? That points toward malignant narcissism.

• Did the person present publicly as exceptionally caring and generous while the private dynamic was characterized by conditional affection and resentment? That points toward communal narcissism.

• Was the relational environment defined by constant competition and the undermining of your achievements and connections? That points toward antagonistic narcissism.

If the narcissism was in a parent, and the injury is a developmental one — a self organized around the parent’s needs rather than your own, a persistent flatness or emptiness, a pattern of recreating familiar dynamics in adult relationships — the TENEL™ framework addresses that specific presentation.

For survivors of narcissistic abuse in intimate partner or coercive control contexts, the Coercive Trauma Recovery Method™ provides a structured framework for recovery that addresses the neurological, perceptual, and identity-level dimensions of the injury.

Related Links

• What is Covert Narcissism?
• What Is Vulnerable Narcissism?
• Malignant Narcissism: How It Differs From Narcissism
• What is Covert Malignant Narcissism?
• Benevolent Flying Monkey

Frequently Asked Questions

References

1. Malkin, C. (2015). Rethinking narcissism: The bad — and surprising good — about feeling special. Harper Wave. ISBN: 978-0-06-234810-4. ↩︎
2. Krizan, Z., & Herlache, A. D. (2018). The narcissism spectrum model: A synthetic view of narcissistic personality. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 22(1), 3–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868316685018 ↩︎
3. Ronningstam, E. (2011). Narcissistic personality disorder: A current review. Current Psychiatry Reports, 13(1), 68–75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11920-010-0181-0 ↩︎
4. American Psychiatric Association. (2022). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed., text rev.). https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.books.9780890425787 ↩︎
5. Pincus, A. L., & Lukowitsky, M. R. (2010). Pathological narcissism and narcissistic personality disorder. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 6, 421–446. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.clinpsy.121208.131215 ↩︎
6. Caligor, E., Levy, K. N., & Yeomans, F. E. (2015). Narcissistic personality disorder: Diagnostic and clinical challenges. American Journal of Psychiatry, 172(5), 415–422. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.2014.14060723 ↩︎
7. Wink, P. (1991). Two faces of narcissism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61(4), 590–597. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.61.4.590 ↩︎
8. Back, M. D., Küfner, A. C. P., Dufner, M., Gerlach, T. M., Rauthmann, J. F., & Denissen, J. J. A. (2013). Narcissistic admiration and rivalry: Disentangling the bright and dark sides of narcissism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 105(6), 1013–1037. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034431 ↩︎
9. Krizan, Z., & Johar, O. (2015). Narcissistic rage revisited. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 108(5), 784–801. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000013 ↩︎
10. Kacel, E. L., Ennis, N., & Pereira, D. B. (2017). Narcissistic personality disorder in clinical health psychology practice: Case studies of comorbid psychological distress and life-limiting illness. Behavioral Medicine, 43(3), 156–164. https://doi.org/10.1080/08964289.2017.1301875 ↩︎
11. Dutton, D. G., & Goodman, L. A. (2005). Coercion in intimate partner violence: Toward a new conceptualization. Sex Roles, 52(11–12), 743–756. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-005-4196-6 ↩︎
12. Kerig, P. K., & Swanson, J. A. (2010). Ties that bind: Triangulation, boundary dissolution, and the effects on adjustment in families with interparental conflict. In M. S. Schulz, M. K. Pruett, P. K. Kerig, & R. D. Parke (Eds.), Strengthening couple relationships for optimal child development (pp. 59–76). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/12058-005 ↩︎
13. Wink, P. (1991). Two faces of narcissism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61(4), 590–597. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.61.4.590 ↩︎
14. Pincus, A. L., & Lukowitsky, M. R. (2010). Pathological narcissism and narcissistic personality disorder. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 6, 421–446. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.clinpsy.121208.131215 ↩︎
15. Dickinson, K. A., & Pincus, A. L. (2003). Interpersonal analysis of grandiose and vulnerable narcissism. Journal of Personality Disorders, 17(3), 188–207. https://doi.org/10.1521/pedi.17.3.188.22146 ↩︎
16. Cain, N. M., Pincus, A. L., & Ansell, E. B. (2008). Narcissism at the crossroads: Phenotypic description of pathological narcissism across clinical theory, social/personality psychology, and psychiatric diagnosis. Clinical Psychology Review, 28(4), 638–656. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2007.09.006 ↩︎
17. Kaufman, S. B., Weiss, B., Miller, J. D., & Campbell, W. K. (2020). Clinical correlates of vulnerable and grandiose narcissism: A personality perspective. Journal of Personality Disorders, 34(1), 107–130. https://doi.org/10.1521/pedi_2018_32_384 ↩︎
18. Mahadevan, N., Gregg, A. P., & Sedikides, C. (2024). Conceptualizing grandiose and vulnerable narcissism as alternative status-seeking strategies: Insights from hierometer theory. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 18(6), e12977. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12977 ↩︎
19. Fromm, E. (1964). The heart of man: Its genius for good and evil. Harper & Row. ↩︎
20. Kernberg, O. F. (1984). Severe personality disorders: Psychotherapeutic strategies. Yale University Press. ↩︎
21. Kernberg, O. F. (1989). The narcissistic personality disorder and the differential diagnosis of antisocial behavior. Psychiatric Clinics of North America, 12(3), 553–570. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0193-953X(18)30394-2 ↩︎
22. Hare, R. D., & Neumann, C. S. (2010). Psychopathy: Assessment and forensic implications. In L. Malatesti & J. McMillan (Eds.), Responsibility and psychopathy (pp. 93–123). Oxford University Press. ↩︎
23. Poeppl, T. B., Donges, M. R., Mokros, A., Rupprecht, R., Fox, P. T., Laird, A. R., Bzdok, D., Langguth, B., & Eickhoff, S. B. (2019). A view behind the mask of sanity: meta-analysis of aberrant brain activity in psychopaths. Molecular Psychiatry, 24(3), 463–470. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41380-018-0122-5 ↩︎
24. Millon, T., & Davis, R. D. (2000). Personality disorders in modern life. John Wiley & Sons. ↩︎
25. Yakeley, J. (2018). Current understanding of narcissism and narcissistic personality disorder. BJPsych Advances, 24(5), 305–315. https://doi.org/10.1192/bja.2018.20 ↩︎
26. Campbell, J. C., Webster, D., Koziol-McLain, J., Block, C., Campbell, D., Curry, M. A., Gary, F., Glass, N., McFarlane, J., Sachs, C., Sharps, P., Ulrich, Y., Wilt, S. A., Manganello, J., Xu, X., Schollenberger, J., Frye, V., & Laughon, K. (2003). Risk factors for femicide in abusive relationships: Results from a multisite case control study. American Journal of Public Health, 93(7), 1089–1097. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.93.7.1089 ↩︎
27. Stark, E. (2007). Coercive control: How men entrap women in personal life. Oxford University Press. ↩︎
28. Kohut, H. (1971). The analysis of the self: A systematic approach to the psychoanalytic treatment of narcissistic personality disorders. International Universities Press. ↩︎
29. Kohut, H. (1977). The restoration of the self. International Universities Press. ↩︎
30. Kohut, H. (1966). Forms and transformations of narcissism. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 14(2), 243–272. https://doi.org/10.1177/000306516601400201 ↩︎
31. Brown, R. P., Budzek, K., & Tamborski, M. (2009). On the meaning and measure of narcissism. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 35(7), 951–964. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167209335461 ↩︎
32. Kernberg, O. F. (1975). Borderline conditions and pathological narcissism. Jason Aronson. ↩︎
33. Ronningstam, E. (2009). Narcissistic personality disorder: Facing DSM-V. Psychiatric Annals, 39(3), 111–121. https://doi.org/10.3928/00485713-20090301-09 ↩︎
34. Malkin, C. (2015). Rethinking narcissism: The bad — and surprising good — about feeling special. Harper Wave. ↩︎
35. Malkin. 2015. ↩︎
36. Gebauer, J. E., Sedikides, C., Verplanken, B., & Maio, G. R. (2012). Communal narcissism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103(5), 854–878. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029629 ↩︎
37. Nehrlich, A. D., Gebauer, J. E., Sedikides, C., & Schoel, C. (2019). Agentic narcissism, communal narcissism, and prosociality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 117(1), 142–165. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000190 ↩︎
38. Gebauer, J. E., Sedikides, C., Verplanken, B., & Maio, G. R. (2012). Communal narcissism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103(5), 854–878. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029629 ↩︎
39. Greenberg, E. (2018). White Knights & Black Knights: Pro-Social & Anti-Social NPD. Psychology Today. ↩︎
40. Back, M. D., Küfner, A. C. P., Dufner, M., Gerlach, T. M., Rauthmann, J. F., & Denissen, J. J. A. (2013). Narcissistic admiration and rivalry: Disentangling the bright and dark sides of narcissism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 105(6), 1013–1037. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034431 ↩︎
41. Krizan, Z., & Herlache, A. D. (2018). The narcissism spectrum model: A synthetic view of narcissistic personality. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 22(1), 3–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868316685018 ↩︎
42. Grijalva, E., Harms, P. D., Newman, D. A., Gaddis, B. H., & Fraley, R. C. (2015). Narcissism and leadership: A meta-analytic review of linear and nonlinear relationships. Personnel Psychology, 68(1), 1–47. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12072 ↩︎
43. American Psychiatric Association. 2022. ↩︎
44. Caligor, E., Levy, K. N., & Yeomans, F. E. (2015). Narcissistic personality disorder: Diagnostic and clinical challenges. American Journal of Psychiatry, 172(5), 415–422. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.2014.14060723 ↩︎
45. Miller, J. D., Hoffman, B. J., Gaughan, E. T., Gentile, B., Maples, J., & Campbell, W. K. (2011). Grandiose and vulnerable narcissism: A nomological network analysis. Journal of Personality, 79(5), 1013–1042. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2010.00711.x ↩︎
46. Tyrer, P., Reed, G. M., & Crawford, M. J. (2015). Classification, assessment, prevalence, and effect of personality disorder. The Lancet, 385(9969), 717–726. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(14)61995-4 ↩︎
47. Bach, B., & First, M. B. (2018). Application of the ICD-11 classification of personality disorders. BMC Psychiatry, 18(1), 351. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-018-1908-3 ↩︎
48. Day, N. J. S., Townsend, M. L., & Grenyer, B. F. S. (2024). Narcissistic personality disorder in the ICD-11: Severity and trait profiles of grandiosity and vulnerability. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 80(7), 1499–1514. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.23701 ↩︎
49. Pincus, A. L., Ansell, E. B., Pimentel, C. A., Cain, N. M., Wright, A. G. C., & Levy, K. N. (2009). Initial construction and validation of the Pathological Narcissism Inventory. Psychological Assessment, 21(3), 365–379. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016530 ↩︎