Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36471815›Full record

ArticleCurrent psychology (New Brunswick, N.J.)2022

Lay theories of grandiose and vulnerable narcissism.

Tatjana Koepernik, Emanuel Jauk, Philipp Kanske

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current psychology (New Brunswick, N.J.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Tatjana KoepernikClinical Psychology and Behavioral Neuroscience, Faculty of Psychology, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-1708-5357
Emanuel JaukClinical Psychology and Behavioral Neuroscience, Faculty of Psychology, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Philipp KanskeClinical Psychology and Behavioral Neuroscience, Faculty of Psychology, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences · DETechnische Universität Dresden · DEUniversity of Graz · AT

Funding

Austrian Science Fund FWF J 4344
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In public discourse, narcissism is often portrayed one-sidedly and overly negative, rendering a picture of narcissistic individuals as "toxic people" or "evil characters". Beyond these salient associations, psychological theories point to a more complex phenomenon, and different developmental mechanisms are being discussed in relation to it. We investigated the prevalence of different implicit theories on narcissism including beliefs about its developmental antecedents. We put forward the question whether grandiose and vulnerable narcissistic behaviors are regarded as congruent or incongruent expressions of underlying feelings and motives, that is whether grandiose behavior is attributed to underlying grandiosity or underlying vulnerability, and vice versa. Results of an online survey ( Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12144-020-01296-w.

Indexed as

Grandiose narcissismImplicit theoriesLay theoriesParental coldnessParental overvaluationVulnerable narcissism

Identifiers

PMID36471815
PMCPMC9715512
OpenAlexW3125411734

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.