Narcissism
Recent theoretical reviews are anchored in the writings of Kohut and Kernberg (see Jones & Paulhus, 2011a;
Levy, Ellison, & Reynoso, 2011 ). The characteristic grandiosity and attention seeking of narcissists was tradition-
ally explained by a tension between a superior surface identity and underlying insecurity: In short, compensatory
self-promotion. This maladaptive version remains the concern for modern clinicians dealing with pathological
cases of narcissism (see Morey et al., 2012; Cain, Pincus, & Ansell, 2008 ).
The advent of the NPI ( Raskin & Hall, 1979 ) redirected much research energy toward subclinical narcissism
(e.g., Emmons, 1987 ). The key element in this operationalization is grandiosity, that is, an exaggerated sense of
self-importance ( Miller & Campbell, 2011 ). In 2-factor solutions, one is variously labeled (self-attributed) leader-
ship or authority, and the other exploitative entitlement ( Kubarych, Deary, & Austin, 2004 ). Note that the inter-
personal difficulties created by grandiosity do not necessarily translate into personal maladjustment ( Campbell &
Foster, 2007; Wink, 1991 ).
After Wink (1991) sharpened up that distinction, the insecure element was encapsulated in several newer mea-
sures. First was the Hypersensitive Narcissism scale developed by Hendin and Cheek (1997) . More recently,
Pincus and colleagues teased apart the vulnerable from the grandiose component in their Pathological
Narcissism Inventory (e.g., Pincus et al., 2009 ).
Nonetheless, a large body of research has confirmed that the subclinical conception tapped by the NPI is
largely consistent with clinical conceptions of narcissism ( Miller & Campbell, 2008 ). For example, grandiosity
leads narcissistic individuals on a never-ending quest for ego-reinforcement ( Morf & Rhodewalt, 2001 ), often
resulting in self-destructive behaviors ( Vazire & Funder, 2006 ). Rather than deliberate, the cognitive processes of
narcissists are more self-deceptive: They seem to believe their own boasts even when the distortion seems self-
evident to others ( Robins & John, 1997 ). Narcissistic grandiosity can even precipitate aggression, if that grandios-
ity is threatened ( Bushman & Baumeister, 1998; Jones & Paulhus, 2010 ). By contrast, the notion of narcissistic
self-loathing has little support ( Campbell & Foster, 2007 )/C0at least in the construct captured by NPI.
It is this grandiose aspect of narcissism that is most r elevant to the Dark Triad. Whereas psychopaths and
Machiavellians are motivated by instrumental gain, ego-reinforcement is the all-consuming motive behind
narcissistic behavior ( Jones & Paulhus, 2011a ). The grandiose variant has subsequently been partitioned into
self-admiration and rivalry by Back et al. (2013) . According to these researchers, rivalry is the more toxic ele-
ment. A more ambivalent variant is the concept of communal narcissism : The notion is that some people
advance their grandiosity via claims of superiority in communal behavior ( Gebauer, Sedikides, Verplanken,
& Maio, 2012 ).
Several other conceptual variants have generated published scales. Campbell, Bonacci, Shelton, Exline, and
Bushman (2004) focused on measuring entitlement because of its toxic interpersonal consequences. Specifically
selfish is the concept of egoism (Weigel, Hessing, & Elffers, 1999 ). Most positive is Paunonen’s (2002) egotism
notion: Although operationalized as exaggerated self-positivity, its outcomes are sometimes adaptive.
Dark Triad as a Constellation
The members of the Dark Triad have much in common ( Jonason, Kavanagh, Webster, & Fitzgerald, 2011;
Paulhus & Williams, 2002 ). In our view, their similarities derive from a common interpersonal callousness (see
evidence from Douglas, Bore, & Munro, 2012; Jones & Figueredo, 2013; Jones & Paulhus, 2011a ). This common
feature helps explain why they share a reputation as socially aversive ( Rauthmann, 2012; Wai & Tiliopoulos,
2012 ). It seems that callousness (i.e., lack of empathy) leads inevitably to the tendency to manipulate others.
In other cases, the Dark Triad members exhibit markedly different behavior: Ego-promoting outcomes (e.g.,
relentless bragging) are best predicted by narcissism; those involving reckless antisocial behavior (e.g., vandal-
ism) are best predicted by psychopathy; and long-term scheming (e.g., elaborate fraud) are best predicted by
Machiavellianism ( Furnham et al., 2013 ). In sum, the literature suggests that: (a) ego-enhancement goals drive
narcissistic behavior, whereas instrumental goals drive Machiavellian and psychopathic behavior;
(b) Machiavellianism differs from psychopathy with respect to impulsivity; (c) all three have a callous core that
engenders manipulation of others ( Jones & Paulhus, 2011a ).
Although the notion of the Dark Triad frames much of this chapter, it is unlikely to be an exhaustive taxonomy
of dark personalities. Hence we will also cover everyday sadism ( Paulhus & Dutton, in press ), sensational inter-
ests ( Egan et al., 1999 ), and amoralism ( Kneˇzevi´c, 2003 ). Although they all overlap empirically with at least one
of the Dark Triad, these variables have rather different conceptual roots.563 20. MEASURES OF DARK PERSONALITIES
V. VICES AND VIRTUES