636 vI. SELF‑ AND S OCIAL P ROCESSES
One solution to this problem is to learn 
more about how the attributes associated 
with narcissism actually fluctuate on an ex -
periential basis. For example, do individu -
als who are high on measures of entitlement 
cycle between grandiose and vulnerable 
states, or do fluctuations in these states op -
erate independently? In an effort to begin 
addressing these questions, Gore and Widi -
ger (2016) asked individuals to identify and 
then rate individuals they knew who were 
similar to either a grandiose or vulnerable 
prototype. They then asked participants if 
the identified individuals had ever exhibited 
the converse state (i.e., if the grandiose nar -
cissist ever experienced feelings of vulner -
ability). Interestingly, those individuals who 
were identified as grandiose were seen as ex -
periencing periods of vulnerability, whereas 
those identified as vulnerable were not seen 
as exhibiting grandiose states. This suggests 
the possibility that narcissistic grandios -
ity might be dynamically linked to vulner -
ability, but that individuals who are chroni -
cally vulnerable may not necessarily exhibit 
signs of grandiosity. However, despite being 
highly innovative, this study was ultimate -
ly a between-  person design, and these are 
important questions that require a within- 
person perspective. For instance, Houben et 
al. (2016) used innovative statistical model -
ing approaches to study shifts between posi -
tive and negative affect states in borderline 
personality disorder. A similar approach 
might be profitably employed in narcissism 
research.
Dynamic and efficient scales for the as -
sessment of grandiose and vulnerable states 
have only recently been developed (e.g., Ed -
ershile et al., 2019; see also Crowe et al., 
2018). Edershile and Wright (in press) have 
since shown in three samples that individuals 
vary considerably in both grandiose and vul -
nerable momentary narcissistic states, and 
that individuals who were more variable in 
grandiose states were also more variable in 
vulnerable states. They also found that dis -
positional grandiosity predicted greater vari -
ability in momentary grandiose states and the 
same was true of dispositional vulnerability 
and momentary vulnerable states. However, 
they found no evidence for “switching” be -
tween narcissistic states (i.e., grandiosity at 
one moment predicting vulnerability at the next, or vice versa). Although these analy -
ses represent the first systematic efforts to 
study variability in grandiose and vulnerable 
states, many questions remain. To list a few 
of the most pressing ones: What are the time 
scales under which shifts occur, and what 
is their general duration (e.g., hours, days, 
weeks)? A major roadblock to this research 
is that existing theory does not provide clear 
guidance about the time scale for such fluc -
tuations.
In general, we believe studies are needed 
over diverse time scales using sensitive mea -
sures of context with relevant behaviors to 
fully integrate grandiosity and vulnerabil -
ity, and to provide a better match to clini -
cal theories of narcissism. Overall variabil -
ity is a relatively coarse outcome, providing 
evidence that there is a dynamic process at 
work. Additional analyses are needed to 
best reveal the nature of the psychological 
mechanisms driving the dynamic processes. 
Individuals do not just vary stochastically 
in their behavior; they respond to and elicit 
internal and external cues. Accordingly, an 
important research issue is to understand 
the circumstances when certain individu -
als shift between a grandiose and vulner -
able state, and vice versa. For instance, in a 
recent study, Wright and colleagues (2017) 
showed that psychiatric outpatients who 
were higher in NPD features were more 
likely to respond to perceptions of others’ 
dominance with antagonistic behavior, and 
this was accounted for by negative affect. 
Thus, dysregulation of behavior and affect 
tended to occur when narcissistic individu -
als perceived a challenge to their status. This 
study has several limitations, but it provides 
a starting point for future research. With the 
development of momentary scales suitable 
for dynamic modeling, this work has been 
extended to show that perceiving others as 
more dominant and colder/hostile in inter -
personal situations is associated with mo -
mentary vulnerability and one’s own cold/
hostile behavior in the same situation (Eder -
shile & Wright, 2019). Perceiving others as 
warmer and more submissive was associated 
with modestly higher grandiosity, which in 
turn was associated with one’s own domi -
nant and warm behavior. These promising 
findings bear replication and extension, es -
pecially with designs that have more tem -