626 vI. SELF‑ AND S OCIAL P ROCESSES
affection, Narcissus took his own life. The 
myth of Narcissus illustrates the dangers of 
vanity, self-  absorption, and indifference to 
others. Not surprisingly, these attributes are 
featured in many contemporary phenotypic 
descriptions of narcissism.
Narcissism was first given serious attention 
in academic settings by researchers focused 
on sexuality and psychological disorders. 
Ellis (1898) used the term “Narcissus-  like 
tendency” (p. 280), to describe an extreme 
form of autoeroticism. Psychoanalytic theo -
rists (e.g., Freud, 1914/1955; Rank, 1911) 
later used the term narcissism  to describe 
normal and pathological personality pro -
cesses (for a more detailed review, see Mil -
lon, 2011), as well as various outcomes of 
these processes, such as sexual perversion, 
vanity, and self-  absorption. In the field of 
psychology, narcissism has become most 
closely associated with a specific type of per -
sonality disorder.
Narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) 
was defined when it first appeared in the 
third edition of the Diagnostic and Statisti -
cal Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-III; 
American Psychiatric Association, 1980). 
The description of NPD was ecumenical in 
that it drew from the phenotypic descrip -
tions of narcissism from leading theorists 
of the time (namely, Kohut, Kernberg, and 
Millon) while being agnostic about etiol -
ogy. In his writings on narcissism, Kohut 
(e.g., 1966, 1972) described both grandiose 
(e.g., exhibitionism, superiority) and vulner -
able (e.g., feelings of inferiority, narcissistic 
rage) features. Similarly, Kernberg (1998) 
suggested that the fundamental features of 
narcissistic personality included superior -
ity (which fluctuates with feeling inferior), 
grandiosity, exhibitionism, self-  absorption, 
envy, exploitativeness, lability in mood that 
is brought on by frustrations of narcissistic 
ambitions, and possession of childish values. 
Finally, Millon (e.g., 1969) argued that nar -
cissists’ most obvious problems lie within the 
realms of self-image (e.g., self-  absorption, 
entitlement) and interpersonal relations 
(e.g., exploitativeness). These characteristics 
directly influenced the list of features in the 
DSM-III. One concern, however, with con -
ceptualizations of narcissism in the subse -
quent revisions of the DSM was that themes 
related to grandiosity were emphasized at the expense of themes and content related to 
vulnerability (Pincus & Lukowitsky, 2010).
The description of NPD in the DSM-III 
influenced the development of the most 
widely used inventory of narcissism in social 
and personality psychology (see Cain et al., 
2008), the Narcissistic Personality Inven -
tory (NPI; Raskin & Terry, 1988; Raskin 
& Hall, 1979). Raskin and Hall developed 
an initial pool of 223 pairs of self-  relevant 
statements, with one statement of each pair 
reflecting narcissistic tendencies follow -
ing the description of NPD. The 223 pairs 
were eventually winnowed to 40 (Raskin 
& Terry, 1988). Based on their initial struc -
tural analyses of the NPI, Raskin and Terry 
concluded that narcissism is “best construed 
as a higher order construct that describes 
diverse yet interdependent mental and be -
havioral phenomena” (p. 892). Indeed, the 
NPI has a complicated factor structure, with 
different groups advocating anywhere from 
two to seven factors (e.g., Ackerman et al., 
2011; Corry, Merritt, Mrug, & Pamp, 2008; 
Emmons, 1984; Raskin & Terry, 1988) and 
the various dimensions seem to have some -
what distinct nomological networks (e.g., 
Ackerman et al., 2011; Barry, Frick, & 
Killian, 2003; Bradlee & Emmons, 1992; 
Emmons, 1984, 1987; Hickman, Watson, & 
Morris, 1996; Ruiz, Smith, & Rhodewalt, 
2001; Trzesniewski, Donnellan, & Robins, 
2008; Stanton et al., 2017; Watson & Mor -
ris, 1991).
Debates are ongoing as to which narcis -
sistic attributes are most central to the con -
struct. Measurement issues are relevant to 
these debates, as a number of groups have 
suggested that the NPI may have an overrep -
resentation of content related to leadership 
and authority compared to other arguably 
more central elements such as entitlement 
(Ackerman et al., 2011; Brown et al., 2009; 
but see Miller & Campbell, 2011). In addi -
tion, there is a concern that the NPI empha -
sizes grandiosity over other attributes that 
have traditionally been central to narcissism 
within clinical psychology (see Pincus & Lu -
kowitsky, 2010). In short, tensions exist over 
the importance of grandiosity and vulner -
ability when conceptualizing and measuring 
narcissism.
Fortunately, there are indications that a 
consensus model of narcissistic attributes is 