Narcissism and the Pursuit of Status

Abstract

Objective:
The purpose of the present studies was to examine the connections that narcissistic admiration and narcissistic rivalry had with various aspects of status.

Method:
Study 1 examined the associations that narcissism had with the motivation to seek status in a sample of 1,219 community members. Study 2 examined whether narcissism interacted with the status seeking motive to predict how individuals pursued status in a sample of 760 community members and college students. Study 3 used a daily diary approach to examine whether narcissism moderated the associations that daily perceptions of status and affiliation had with state self-esteem in 356 college students.

Results:
Our results revealed that narcissistic admiration and narcissistic rivalry were somewhat similar in their desire for status but had divergent associations with other aspects of status (e.g., strategies employed to attain status, perceptions of status, reactions to perceived status).

Conclusion:
The results of the present studies suggest that narcissistic admiration is associated with an agentic orientation to the pursuit of status, whereas narcissistic rivalry is associated with an antagonistic orientation to the pursuit of status. Discussion focuses on the implications of these results for our understanding of the connections between narcissism and status. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Full text

ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Narcissism and the pursuit of status
Virgil Zeigler-Hill
1
|
Jennifer K. Vrabel
1
|
Gillian A. McCabe
2
|
Cheryl A. Cosby
1
|
Caitlin K. Traeder
1
|
Kelsey A. Hobbs
1
|
Ashton C. Southard
1
1
Oakland University
2
University of Kentucky
Correspondence
Virgil Zeigler-Hill, Department of
Psychology, Oakland University, 654
Pioneer Drive, Rochester, MI 48309.
Email: zeiglerh@oakland.edu
Abstract
Objective: The purpose of the present studies was to examine the connections that
narcissistic admiration and narcissistic rivalry had with various aspects of status.
Method: Study 1 examined the associations that narcissism had with the motivation
to seek status in a sample of 1,219 community members. Study 2 examined whether
narcissism interacted with the status-seeking motive to predict how individuals pur-
sued status in a sample of 760 community members and college students. Study 3
used a daily diary approach to examine whether narcissism moderated the associa-
tions that daily perceptions of status and affiliation had with state self-esteem in 356
college students.
Results: Our results revealed that narcissistic admiration and narcissistic rivalry were
somewhat similar in their desire for status but had divergent associations with other
aspects of status (e.g., strategies employed to attain status, perceptions of status, reac-
tions to perceived status).
Conclusions: The results of the present studies suggest that narcissistic admiration is
associated with an agentic orientation to the pursuit of status, whereas narcissistic
rivalry is associated with an antagonistic orientation to the pursuit of status. Discus-
sion focuses on the implications of these results for our understanding of the
connections between narcissism and status.
KEYWORDS
admiration, motivation, narcissism, rivalry, status
1
|
INTRODUCTION
Narcissism is a complex and controversial personality con-
struct, but the general consensus among researchers is that it
concerns grandiosity, vanity, self-absorption, feelings of enti-
tlement, and a willingness to exploit others (for reviews, see
Krizan & Herlache, 2018; Morf & Rhodewalt, 2001; Wright
& Edershile, 2018).
1
Individuals with narcissistic personality
features demonstrate a strong desire for external validation,
which they pursue through various strategies that may serve to
elevate their positions within their local status hierarchies,
such as bragging about their abilities and accomplishments
(Buss & Chiodo, 1991), displaying wealth and material goods
(Sedikides, Gregg, Cisek, & Hart, 2007), affiliating with high-
status individuals (Campbell, 1999), and pursuing leadership
positions (e.g., Brunell et al., 2008; Grijalva, Harms, Newman,
Gaddis, & Fraley, 2015; see Zeigler-Hill, McCabe, Vrabel,
Raby, & Cronin, in press, for a review). In fact, this desire for
status seems to be so intense and pervasive that it appears to
play a role in shaping much of their social lives. For example,
narcissistic individuals tend to be highly responsive to events
that could be perceived as threats to their status, such as failure
feedback or social rejection (e.g., increased aggression, blam-
ing others; e.g., Baumeister, Bushman, & Campbell, 2000;
Bushman & Baumeister, 1998; Bushman & Thomaes, 2012;
Campbell, Reeder, Sedikides, & Elliot, 2000; Jones &
Paulhus, 2010). Further, this desire for status is readily
observed in how narcissistic individuals describe their desires
Received: 11 November 2017
|
Revised: 31 March 2018
|
Accepted: 2 April 2018
DOI: 10.1111/jopy.12392
310
|
© 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/jopy Journal of Personality. 2019;87:310–327.

(Bradlee & Emmons, 1992), respond to projective tests (Car-
roll, 1987), talk about their fantasies (Raskin & Novacek,
1991), and describe their sexual behavior (Foster, Shrira, &
Campbell, 2006).
Certain aspects of narcissism may be beneficial for navi-
gating status hierarchies. This is important because the ability
to successfully navigate status hierarchies would most likely
have been vital throughout the course of human evolution
because hierarchical structures are pervasive across human
social groups (see Anderson, Hildreth, & Howland, 2015, for
a review). The ubiquitous nature of status hierarchies may be
explained, at least in part, by the benefits these social struc-
tures provide for both individuals and the larger social
groups to which they belong. However, it is important to rec-
ognize that status hierarchies do not benefit everyone
equally. Rather, this sort of vertical social structure tends to
provide far more advantages for individuals who are near the
top of the hierarchy than it does for individuals who are
closer to the bottom. As a result, individuals who were suc-
cessful in ascending their local status hierarchies would have
been likely to experience considerable survival and reproduc-
tive benefits (e.g., greater access to scarce resources, height-
ened attractiveness as a potential mate; see Anderson et al.,
2015, for a review). This suggests that psychological systems
may have developed over the course of human evolution to
help individuals successfully navigate these status hierarchies
(e.g., Cheng, Tracy, & Henrich, 2010; Gilbert, Price, &
Allan, 1995). Overall, the internal and interpersonal proc-
esses that characterize narcissism may reflect this sort of sta-
tus navigation system because narcissistic individuals are
likely to experience the sorts of motivations, cognitions, and
emotional responses that are likely to be beneficial—at least
in the short term—for the successful navigation of status
hierarchies (e.g., narcissistic individuals may be highly moti-
vated to gain status).
The connection between narcissism and the navigation of
status hierarchies may explain why the self-presentational
goals of narcissistic individuals often focus on issues sur-
rounding self-promotion (being perceived as competent) or
intimidation (being perceived as a potential threat) rather
than ingratiation (being perceived as likable; Leary, Bednar-
ski, Hammon, & Duncan, 1997). This intense focus on status
—and relative lack of concern for affiliation—may also help
explain why narcissistic individuals tend to engage in various
behaviors that others find irritating and aversive (e.g., being
selfish or arrogant; Leary, Jongman-Sereno, & Diebels,
2014; Morf & Rhodewalt, 2001). In essence, it appears that
the self-promotional efforts of narcissistic individuals are not
held in check by the typical concerns about also being liked
that generally regulate the behaviors of other individuals.
Recognizing that narcissistic individuals seem to enter social
situations with the singular goal of gaining status rather than
being liked may help us understand many of their
interpersonal behaviors that are intended to elicit the respect
and admiration of others (e.g., frequent self-promotion) but
are often unsuccessful because these behaviors unintention-
ally upset and alienate those individuals who are actually
capable of granting them status (Morf & Rhodewalt, 2001).
The intense narcissistic desire for status may play a vital role
in the cycle of paradoxical and counterproductive interperso-
nal behaviors that results in narcissistic individuals having a
great deal of difficulty achieving and maintaining the level of
status they seem to crave so desperately. This perspective
may also help shed some light on the tendency for narcissis-
tic individuals to be perceived negatively by others over time
despite their initial charm and attractiveness (e.g., Back,
Schmukle, & Egloff, 2010; Paulhus, 1998).
In addition to showing a strong desire to elevate their
own positions within their social groups, narcissistic individ-
uals tend to show support for hierarchical structures in gen-
eral (Zitek & Jordan, 2016). This support for hierarchical
social structures is consistent with the observation that indi-
viduals who are near the top of the hierarchy—or who
believe they will soon be near the top of the hierarchy—tend
to favor hierarchical structures (Lee, Pratto, & Johnson,
2011). The overly positive self-views of narcissistic individu-
als may lead them to believe that they will soon ascend the
status hierarchy even if they are not currently near the top.
For example, narcissistic individuals believe they are more
intelligent and attractive than others (Gabriel, Critelli, & Ee,
1994), inflate their self-ratings of their own performance
(John & Robins, 1994), tend to be overconfident (Campbell,
Goodie, & Foster, 2004), make overly optimistic predictions
for their future performance (Farwell & Wohlwend-Lloyd,
1998), and believe they are unique and special (Emmons,
1984). The overly positive self-views that are held by narcis-
sistic individuals tend to be focused on agentic qualities and
domains that are relevant to the acquisition of status (e.g.,
Campbell, Rudich, & Sedikides, 2002). Zitek and Jordan
(2016) provide a compelling argument that narcissistic indi-
viduals may show such strong support for hierarchical social
structures for the simple reason that they think doing so will
be beneficial for them because they are either already near
the top of the hierarchy or believe they will be at some point
in the future.
Most traditional models of narcissism treat it as a unitary
construct despite evidence that it is almost certainly multidi-
mensional (e.g., Ackerman et al., 2011; Brown, Budzek, &
Tamborski, 2009; Miller et al., 2016; Tamborski, Brown, &
Chowning, 2012). However, the Narcissistic Admiration and
Rivalry Concept (NARC) model (Back et al., 2013) provides
a two-dimensional conceptualization of grandiose narcissism
that includes narcissistic admiration (an agentic form of nar-
cissism that is characterized by assertive self-enhancement
and self-promotion) and narcissistic rivalry (an antagonistic
form of narcissism that is characterized by self-protection
ZEIGLER-HILL ET AL.
|
311

and self-defense). These two forms of narcissism represent
quite different—but not mutually exclusive—social strategies
for maintaining grandiose self-views (i.e., an agentic strategy
vs. an antagonistic strategy). The NARC model has provided
insights into some of the seemingly paradoxical interpersonal
behaviors that are associated with narcissism, including the
tendency to be self-assured and charming (which is consist-
ent with narcissistic admiration; e.g., Campbell & Campbell,
2009; Carlson, Vazire, & Oltmanns, 2011; K€
ufner, Nestler,
& Back, 2013; Raskin & Terry, 1988) as well as defensive,
insensitive, and aggressive when threatened (which is con-
sistent with narcissistic rivalry; e.g., Bushman & Baumeister,
1998; Campbell, Bush, Brunell, & Shelton, 2005; Kernis &
Sun, 1994; K€
ufner et al., 2013; Morf & Rhodewalt, 1993;
Twenge & Campbell, 2003). Although research concerning
the NARC model is still in its earliest stages, narcissistic
admiration and narcissistic rivalry have been found to have
opposing associations with a wide variety of outcomes such
that narcissistic admiration tends to be linked with relatively
positive outcomes (e.g., high self-esteem, assertiveness, the
benign form of envy, romantic appeal), whereas narcissistic
rivalry is often associated with relatively negative outcomes
(e.g., unstable self-esteem, arrogance, the malicious form of
envy, romantic problems; Back et al., 2013; Geukes et al.,
2017; Lange, Crusius, & Hagemeyer, 2016; Leckelt, K€
ufner,
Nestler, & Back, 2015; Wurst et al., 2017; Zeigler-Hill &
Trombly, 2018).
Narcissistic admiration and narcissistic rivalry activate
distinct sets of affective-motivational, cognitive, and behav-
ioral pathways (e.g., Back et al., 2013). Narcissistic admira-
tion is believed to result in a form of social potency that
bolsters the grandiose self via ego boosts. In contrast, narcis-
sistic rivalry is believed to result in social conflict that weak-
ens the grandiose self via ego threats. The present studies
examined the possibility that both narcissistic admiration and
narcissistic rivalry may share a desire for status but that the
distinct affective-motivational, cognitive, and behavioral
pathways for these expressions of narcissism may lead to
very different consequences with regard to how individuals
go about attaining status, perceive their status, and respond
to changes in their status. Narcissistic admiration has largely
positive social consequences (Back et al., 2013), so it is
likely that it will be linked with an agentic form of status
pursuit that involves the use of assertive self-enhancement
and self-promotion in order to gain social admiration from
others. This agentic form of status pursuit may result in ego
boosts (e.g., feeling special or admired) that serve to bolster
and stabilize the individual’s grandiose self-views. Narcissis-
tic rivalry, on the other hand, has largely negative social con-
sequences (Back et al., 2013), so it is likely that it will be
linked with an antagonistic form of status pursuit that
involves a preemptive form of self-protection in which indi-
viduals strive to establish their superiority over others
because they anticipate threats to their own social standing.
This antagonistic form of status pursuit may unintentionally
result in ego threats (e.g., feeling unappreciated or disre-
spected) that may serve to further destabilize the grandiose
self-views that individuals with high levels of narcissistic
rivalry are so desperate to maintain. A modified version of
the NARC model from Back et al. (2013) is presented in Fig-
ure 1.
1.1
|
Overview and predictions
The purpose of the present studies was to use the NARC
model (Back et al., 2013) as an organizing framework to
gain a more nuanced understanding of the connections that
narcissism has with various aspects of status. The NARC
model may have important implications for our understand-
ing of the connections between narcissism and status because
narcissistic admiration and narcissistic rivalry may be similar
in the desire for status but quite different with regard to other
aspects of status. Based on this view of the distinction
between narcissistic admiration and narcissistic rivalry, we
developed the following hypotheses:
Hypothesis 1: Narcissistic admiration and narcis-
sistic rivalry will be similar in their associations
with the desire to attain status. That is, both
forms of narcissism will be positively associated
with the motivation to be admired by others.
The rationale for this hypothesis is that the
attainment of status may be beneficial for the
maintenance of grandiose self-views for both
expressions of narcissism.
Hypothesis 2: Narcissistic admiration and narcis-
sistic rivalry will differ in their associations with
the strategies that individuals employ to attain
status. More specifically, narcissistic admiration
will be characterized by an agentic form of sta-
tus pursuit that will involve individuals using
flexible strategies for seeking status by either
displaying their competence to others or resort-
ing to the use of fear and intimidation. In con-
trast, narcissistic rivalry will be characterized by
an antagonistic form of status pursuit that will
involve them focusing exclusively on the use of
fear and intimidation rather than attempting to
gain status through displays of competence.
Hypothesis 3: Narcissistic admiration and narcis-
sistic rivalry will have divergent associations
with perceptions of status. Narcissistic admira-
tion involves the use of agentic strategies to gain
social admiration from others (e.g., assertive
self-enhancement, self-promotion), so it seemed
ZEIGLER-HILL ET AL.
312
|

likely that individuals with high levels of narcis-
sistic admiration would view themselves as hav-
ing relatively high levels of status. In contrast,
narcissistic rivalry involves the use of antagonis-
tic strategies that appear to be a form of preemp-
tive self-protection stemming from anticipated
threats to one’s social standing. This led us to
predict that narcissistic rivalry would be nega-
tively associated with perceptions of status.
Hypothesis 4: Narcissistic admiration and narcis-
sistic rivalry will be similar in their associations
with responses to perceived status. We expected
individuals with high levels of narcissistic admi-
ration or high levels of narcissistic rivalry to be
extremely reactive to their perceived status
because of their concerns about maintaining
their grandiose self-views. More specifically, we
expected that individuals with high levels of nar-
cissistic admiration or high levels of narcissistic
rivalry would report changes in their feelings of
self-worth that aligned with their perceived sta-
tus. The rationale for this hypothesis is that self-
esteem serves a status-tracking function such
that it is an indicator of an individual’s current
level of perceived status (Mahadevan, Gregg, &
Sedikides, 2019; Mahadevan, Gregg, Sedi-
kides, & De Waal-Andrews, 2016). Given the
potential importance that perceived status may
play in the maintenance of grandiose self-views,
we anticipated that both narcissistic admiration
and narcissistic rivalry would be associated with
heightened self-esteem reactions in response to
changes in perceived status.
2
|
STUDY 1: FUNDAMENTAL
SOCIAL MOTIVES
Our goal for Study 1 was to examine the connections that
narcissistic admiration and narcissistic rivalry had with the
fundamental social motives (e.g., Neel, Kenrick, White, &
Neuberg, 2016). Fundamental social motives refer to psycho-
logical systems that have been shaped over the course of
evolutionary history to manage the sorts of recurrent social
opportunities and threats that have been experienced by
humans. This is important because narcissism is often
accompanied by interpersonal difficulties, and the present
study may provide some insight into the role that fundamen-
tal social motives play in these difficulties (e.g., individuals
with high levels of narcissistic rivalry may be highly moti-
vated by the desire for status but may have relatively little
concern about gaining acceptance or maintaining warm inter-
personal relationships). Our predictions for narcissistic admi-
ration were that it would be positively associated with a
broad range of fundamental social motives (e.g., affiliation,
mate seeking) but that it would have an especially strong
association with the status-seeking motive. In contrast, we
expected narcissistic rivalry to have a positive association
with the status-seeking motive but to have negative associa-
tions with the affiliation and kin care motives.
2.1
|
Method
2.1.1
|
Participants and procedure
Participants were 1,230 community adults from the United
States who were recruited using Amazon’s Mechanical Turk
(MTurk). We report how we determined our sample size, all
FIGURE 1 A modified version of the NARC model from Backet al. (2013)
ZEIGLER-HILL ET AL.
|
313

data exclusions (if any), all manipulations, and all measures
in the study (Simmons, Nelson, & Simonsohn, 2012). We
decided that the sample size for this study should be at least
250 based on a power analysis (>.80) for the average effect
size in social-personality psychology (r.21; Richard,
Bond, & Stokes-Zoota, 2003) in conjunction with the guide-
lines for reducing estimation error in social-personality psy-
chology (N250; Sch€
onbrodt & Perugini, 2013), but we
deliberately oversampled in an effort to increase the statistical
power of the study. More specifically, we used a financially
based stopping rule for data collection such that we collected
data from MTurk participants in small batches until the funds
for the study were exhausted. Participants were asked to com-
plete measures concerning narcissism and the fundamental
social motives—along with other measures that are not rele-
vant to the present study (e.g., aggression)—via a secure Web
site. Data were excluded for 11 participants who failed to suc-
cessfully complete two or more of the directed response items
that were included in the instruments to identify inattentive
responding (e.g., “Answer this item with ‘Strongly Dis-
agree’”). The final sample consisted of 1,219 participants
(554 men, 664 women, and 1 who did not disclose their gen-
der). The mean age of the participants was 36.02 years
(SD 511.44), and their racial/ethnic composition was 76%
White, 8% Black, 6% Asian, 5% Hispanic, and 5% other.
2.1.2
|
Measures
Narcissism
Narcissism was assessed using the Narcissistic Admiration
and Rivalry Questionnaire (NARQ; Back et al., 2013). The
NARQ includes 18 items that capture two basic dimensions
of narcissism: narcissistic admiration (nine items; e.g., “Iam
great”;a5.90) and narcissistic rivalry (nine items; e.g., “I
take pleasure in the failure of my rivals”;a5.90). Partici-
pants were asked to rate how well each statement described
them using scales ranging from 1 (not agree at all)to6
(agree completely).
Fundamental social motives
Fundamental social motives were assessed with the Funda-
mental Social Motives Inventory (Neel, Kenrick, White, &
Neuberg, 2016). The Fundamental Social Motives Inventory
is a 66-item instrument designed to assess the following
motives: self-protection (six items; e.g., “I think a lot about
how to stay away from dangerous people”;a5.88), disease
avoidance (six items; e.g., “I avoid places and people that
might carry diseases”;a5.87), affiliation (18 items; e.g.,
“Being part of a group is important to me”;a5.71), status
seeking (six items; e.g., “It’s important to me that others
respect my rank or position”;a5.81), mate seeking (six
items; e.g., “I spend a lot of time thinking about ways to
meet possible dating partners”[a5.88]), mate retention (12
items; e.g., “It is important to me that my partner is sexually
loyal to me”;a5.76), and kin care (12 items; e.g., “Caring
for family members is important to me”;a5.91). Partici-
pants were asked to rate their level of agreement with each
statement using scales ranging from 1 (strongly disagree)to
7(strongly agree).
2.2
|
Results
Descriptive statistics and zero-order correlations for Study 1
are presented in Table 1.
2
A path analysis was used to exam-
ine the unique associations that narcissistic admiration and
narcissistic rivalry had with the fundamental social motives.
The advantages of using a path analysis over a series of mul-
tiple regression analyses include the ability to account for
shared variance among outcome variables that are examined
simultaneously. We used a more conservative alpha for
Study 1 due to our large sample size and the number of path
coefficients that were being estimated in our path analysis
(i.e., our adjusted alpha was .01). The results of this analysis
are illustrated in Figure 2. The results revealed that narcissis-
tic admiration had unique positive associations with each of
the fundamental social motives, with the exceptions of the
mate retention motive and the disease avoidance motive:
self-protection motive (b5.11, t53.41, p<.001), affilia-
tion motive (b5.20, t56.18, p<.001), status-seeking
motive (b5.54, t521.07, p<.001), mate-seeking motive
(b5.15, t54.93, p<.001), and kin care motive (b5.26,
t58.63, p<.001). In contrast, narcissistic rivalry had
unique positive associations with the status-seeking motive
(b5.18, t56.95, p<.001), mate-seeking motive (b5.31,
t510.01, p<.001), and mate retention motive (b5.14,
t54.06, p<.001), as well as a negative association with the
kin care motive (b5–.52, t5–17.46, p<.001). In sum-
mary, both narcissistic admiration and narcissistic rivalry
were positively associated with the status-seeking motive,
but a comparison of these zero-order correlations revealed
that the association between narcissistic admiration and the
status-seeking motive was stronger than the association
between narcissistic rivalry and the status-seeking motive
(Fisher’sz58.14, p<.001).
2.2.1
|
Additional analysis using the overall
NARQ composite score
The NARQ was specifically developed to capture two dis-
tinct forms of narcissism (i.e., narcissistic admiration and
narcissistic rivalry), but we thought it may be informative to
examine the association that the overall NARQ composite
score (i.e., a blend of narcissistic admiration and narcissistic
rivalry) had with each of the fundamental social motives.
This path analysis revealed that the NARQ composite score
was positively associated with the affiliation motive
ZEIGLER-HILL ET AL.
314
|

(b5.21, t57.59, p<.001), status-seeking motive (b5.62,
t527.91, p<.001), mate-seeking motive (b5.40,
t515.10, p<.001), and mate retention motive (b5.11,
t53.94, p<.001), whereas the NARQ composite score was
negatively associated with the kin care motive (b5–.22,
t5–8.00, p<.001). The NARQ composite score did not
have unique associations with the self-protection motive or
the disease avoidance motive.
2.3
|
Discussion
The results of Study 1 were largely consistent with our pre-
dictions such that narcissistic admiration had unique positive
associations with a variety of fundamental social motives. As
expected, narcissistic admiration had its strongest association
with the status-seeking motive. This is consistent with the
argument that individuals with high levels of narcissistic
TABLE 1 Intercorrelations and descriptive statistics
Study 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1. Narcissistic admiration —
2. Narcissistic rivalry .52*** —
3. Self-protection .09** .01 —
4. Disease avoidance .08** .04 .60*** —
5. Affiliation .22*** .15*** .29*** .12*** —
6. Status seeking .63*** .45*** .13*** .10*** .46*** —
7. Mate seeking .31*** .38*** –.11*** –.04 .10*** .34*** —
8. Mate retention .07* .13*** .30*** .19*** .35*** .19*** .05 —
9. Kin care –.01 –.39*** .27*** .16*** .14*** –.05 –.28*** .09** —
Mean 2.99 2.27 4.48 4.33 4.25 3.54 2.77 4.18 5.14
Standard deviation 1.11 1.05 1.43 1.42 0.70 1.26 1.54 0.94 1.34
Study 2 1 2 3 4 5
1. Narcissistic admiration —
2. Narcissistic rivalry .39*** —
3. Status seeking .58*** .33*** —
4. Dominance-based status .45*** .56*** .42*** —
5. Prestige-based status .57*** –.03 .38*** .20*** —
Mean 3.34 2.23 4.09 2.98 4.65
Standard deviation 1.00 0.92 1.14 1.03 0.88
Study 3 1 2 3 4 5
1. Narcissistic admiration —
2. Narcissistic rivalry .33*** —
3. Average perception of status .42*** –.21*** —
4. Average perception of inclusion .30*** –.30*** .80*** —
5. Average state self-esteem .28*** –.37*** .66*** .71*** —
Mean 3.56 2.35 3.39 3.73 7.22
Standard deviation 0.81 0.88 0.76 0.72 1.67
Note.*p<.05. **p<.01. ***p<.001.
ZEIGLER-HILL ET AL.
|
315

admiration are motivated to pursue status in order to bolster
their grandiose self-views. The associations that narcissistic
rivalry had with the fundamental social motives were some-
what similar to those observed for narcissistic admiration.
More specifically, narcissistic rivalry had a unique positive
association with the status-seeking motive (which was con-
sistent with our prediction), but it is important to note that
this association was weaker than the association observed for
narcissistic admiration. In addition, narcissistic rivalry had
unique positive associations with the mate-seeking and mate
retention motives, as well as being negatively associated
with the kin care motive, which was quite different from the
association that narcissistic admiration had with the kin care
motive (i.e., no zero-order correlation and a unique positive
association in the path analysis). This pattern of associations
suggests that narcissistic admiration and narcissistic rivalry
may have somewhat similar motivational profiles. However,
the especially strong association between narcissistic admira-
tion and the status-seeking motive suggests that the desire
for status may play a somewhat larger role for narcissistic
admiration than it does for narcissistic rivalry. We also com-
bined narcissistic admiration and narcissistic rivalry into an
overall NARQ composite score, but this obscured some of
the differences in the associations that narcissistic admiration
and narcissistic rivalry had with the fundamental social
motives. For example, the overall NARQ composite score
was negatively associated with the kin care motive, which
was similar to the negative association that narcissistic
rivalry had with this motive but was quite different from the
positive association that narcissistic admiration had with this
motive.
3
|
STUDY 2: DOMINANCE-BASED
STATUS AND PRESTIGE-BASED
STATUS
The purpose of Study 2 was to examine whether narcissistic
admiration and narcissistic rivalry would interact with the
status-seeking motive to predict how individuals go about
the pursuit of status. This is important because personality
traits may impact the strategies that individuals adopt in
order to satisfy their fundamental social motives (e.g., Neel
et al., 2016; Zeigler-Hill & Hobbs, 2017). There are two
basic strategies for pursuing status that have been identified
(e.g., Cheng et al., 2010). One strategy is focused on gaining
status through dominance (based on the use of conflict),
whereas the second strategy is focused on gaining status
through prestige (based on displays of competence). We
hypothesized that individuals who have an especially strong
motivation to acquire status may employ the dominance-
based strategy (e.g., attempt to intimidate others) if they have
high levels of either narcissistic admiration or narcissistic
rivalry. The rationale for this prediction was that individuals
with high levels of narcissistic admiration or narcissistic
FIGURE 2 Study 1: Path model indicating the associations that narcissistic admiration and narcissistic rivalry had with the fundamental social
motives. Rectangles indicate measured variables, and circles indicate disturbance terms. The significant positive associations are indicated by solid black
arrows. The significant negative associations are indicated by dashed black arrows. The dottedgray lines represent nonsignificant associations. The correla-
tions are included for the relationshipsbetween the predictors (i.e., narcissistic admiration and narcissistic rivalry) as well as among the outcome variables
(i.e., fundamental social motives) and are indicated by curved bidirectional arrows
ZEIGLER-HILL ET AL.
316
|

rivalry may be willing to use aversive strategies if they are
highly motivated to pursue status. We also hypothesized that
narcissistic admiration would be positively associated with
the tendency to employ prestige-based strategies for gaining
status because narcissistic admiration involves an agentic
form of self-enhancement that should align with the desire to
display valuable skills and competence. We did not have a
clear prediction for the connection that narcissistic rivalry
would have with prestige-based status because we were
uncertain as to whether the particular blend of uncertainty
and antagonism that characterizes individuals with high lev-
els of narcissistic rivalry would promote the use of prestige-
based strategies for attaining status.
3.1
|
Method
3.1.1
|
Participants and procedure
Participants were 848 individuals who were either undergrad-
uates at a university in the midwestern region of the United
States who participated in exchange for partial fulfillment of
a research participation requirement (n5594) or community
adults from the United States who were recruited using
MTurk (n5254). We report how we determined our sample
size, all data exclusions (if any), all manipulations, and all
measures in the study (Simmons et al., 2012). As in Study 1,
we decided that the sample size for this study should be at
least 250 based on a power analysis for the average effect
size in social-personality psychology in conjunction with the
guidelines for reducing estimation error in social-personality
psychology (Richard et al., 2003; Sch€
onbrodt & Perugini,
2013). However, we deliberately oversampled in an effort to
increase the statistical power of the study. More specifically,
we used a time-based stopping rule for data collection for the
undergraduate participants (i.e., collected data from as many
undergraduate participants as possible during the course of a
single academic semester) and a financially based stopping
rule for data collection for the MTurk participants (i.e., col-
lected data from MTurk participants in small batches until
the funds for the study were exhausted). Participants were
asked to complete measures concerning narcissism, status-
seeking motivation, dominance-based status, and prestige-
based status—along with other measures that are not relevant
to the present study (e.g., spitefulness)—via a secure Web
site. Data were excluded for 28 participants who failed to
provide complete data and 60 participants who failed to suc-
cessfully complete two or more of the directed response
items that were included in the instruments to identify inat-
tentive responding (e.g., “Answer this item with ‘Strongly
Disagree’”). The final sample consisted of 760 participants
(192 men, 568 women). The mean age of the participants
was 25.69 years (SD 510.95), and their racial/ethnic
composition was 79% White, 8% Black, 4% Asian, 4% His-
panic, and 5% other.
3.1.2
|
Measures
Narcissism
Narcissistic admiration (a5.87) and narcissistic rivalry
(a5.88) were assessed using the NARQ as in Study 1.
Status-seeking motive
The status-seeking motive was assessed using the Status
Seeking subscale of the Fundamental Social Motives Inven-
tory as in Study 1 (Neel et al., 2016; a5.76).
Dominance and prestige
The Dominance-Prestige Scales (Cheng et al., 2010) were
used to capture the extent to which individuals employed
dominance (eight items; e.g., “I am willing to use aggressive
tactics to get my way”;a5.83) and prestige (nine items;
e.g., “I am considered an expert on some matters by others”;
a5.76) in their pursuit of status. Participants were asked to
rate their level of agreement with each statement using scales
ranging from 1 (not at all)to7(very much).
3.2
|
Results
Descriptive statistics and zero-order correlations for Study 2
are presented in Table 1. To examine whether narcissistic
admiration and narcissistic rivalry interacted with the status-
seeking motive to predict dominance-based status and
prestige-based status, we conducted two hierarchical moder-
ated multiple regression analyses in which dominance-based
status and prestige-based status were regressed onto narcis-
sistic admiration, narcissistic rivalry, and the status-seeking
motive. The main effects for narcissistic admiration, narcis-
sistic rivalry, and the status-seeking motive were entered on
Step 1, and the interactions that narcissistic admiration and
narcissistic rivalry had with status-seeking motivation were
entered on Step 2. The predictors were centered for the pur-
pose of testing interactions. The regression analyses were fol-
lowed by simple slopes tests to describe the interaction of
continuous variables. These simple slopes tests were con-
ducted using values that were one standard deviation above
and below their respective means (e.g., a high level of narcis-
sistic admiration was represented by a value that was one
standard deviation above its mean, whereas a low level of
narcissistic admiration was represented by a value that was
one standard deviation below its mean). We used a more
conservative alpha for Study 2 due to our large sample size
and our use of separate regression models for dominance-
based status and prestige-based status (i.e., our adjusted
alpha was .01).
ZEIGLER-HILL ET AL.
|
317

3.2.1
|
Dominance-based status
The analysis concerning dominance-based status revealed
main effects for narcissistic admiration (b5.19, t55.22,
p<.001), narcissistic rivalry (b5.44, t514.10, p<.001),
and status-seeking motivation (b5.16, t54.70, p<.001).
These main effects showed that individuals who reported
higher levels of narcissistic admiration, narcissistic rivalry,
and status-seeking motivation tended to report greater use of
dominance-based strategies for seeking social status. How-
ever, the main effect of narcissistic admiration was qualified
by its interaction with status-seeking motivation (b5.10,
t53.07, p5.002). Simple slopes tests for this interaction
revealed that the association between narcissistic admiration
and dominance-based status was significant for individuals
who reported higher levels of status-seeking motivation
(b5.28, t55.97, p<.001) and for those who reported
lower levels of status-seeking motivation (b5.11, t52.49,
p5.01). These results suggest that narcissistic admiration is
positively associated with the use of dominance-based strat-
egies as a way to gain status but that this association is espe-
cially strong for those individuals with a high level of
motivation to seek status.
3.2.2
|
Prestige-based status
The analysis concerning prestige-based status revealed posi-
tive associations for narcissistic admiration (b5.61,
t517.23, p<.001) and status-seeking motivation (b5.14,
t53.90, p<.001), as well as a negative association for nar-
cissistic rivalry (b5–.32, t5–10.29, p<.001). These main
effects showed that individuals who reported higher levels of
narcissistic admiration and status-seeking motivation tended
to report greater use of prestige-based strategies to pursue
status, whereas individuals who reported higher levels of nar-
cissistic rivalry tended to report less use of these prestige-
based strategies. No interactions emerged from this analysis.
3
3.2.3
|
Additional analyses using the overall
NARQ composite score
We also conducted similar analyses to examine whether the
overall NARQ composite score interacted with the status-
seeking motive to predict dominance-based status and
prestige-based status. The analysis concerning dominance-
based status revealed main effects for the overall NARQ
composite score (b5.54, t515.70, p<.001) and status-
seeking motivation (b5.12, t53.45, p<.001). However,
these main effects were qualified by their interaction
(b5.06, t52.07, p5.04), which was near to but was not
beyond our restricted level of statistical significance. Simple
slopes tests for this interaction revealed that the association
between the overall NARQ composite score and dominance-
based status was significant for individuals who reported
higher levels of status-seeking motivation (b5.59,
t514.19, p<.001) and for those who reported lower levels
of status-seeking motivation (b5.48, t511.06, p<.001).
These results suggest that the overall NARQ composite score
is positively associated with the use of dominance-based
strategies as a way to gain status but that this association is
especially strong for those individuals with a high level of
motivation to seek status. The analysis concerning prestige-
based status revealed main effects for the overall NARQ
composite score (b5.18, t54.48, p<.001) and status-
seeking motivation (b5.29, t57.21, p<.001), but the
Overall NARQ Composite Score 3Status-Seeking Motiva-
tion interaction did not reach conventional levels of statistical
significance (b5–.06, t5–1.75, p5.08).
3.3
|
Discussion
The results of Study 2 showed that the status-seeking motive
was positively associated with both dominance-based and
prestige-based strategies for gaining status. Consistent with
our predictions, narcissistic admiration and narcissistic
rivalry were both positively associated with dominance-
based status. The unique association that narcissistic admira-
tion had with dominance-based status was moderated by the
status-seeking motive such that the highest levels of
dominance-based status were reported by individuals with
high levels of narcissistic admiration who were also highly
motivated to seek status. This is consistent with the idea that
personality traits may impact the strategies that individuals
employ to satisfy their motivations (e.g., Zeigler-Hill &
Hobbs, 2017). The association that narcissistic rivalry had
with dominance-based status was not moderated by the
status-seeking motive, which suggests that individuals with
high levels of narcissistic rivalry employ the dominance-
based strategy to pursue status regardless of whether their
motivation to pursue status is particularly strong.
Narcissistic admiration and narcissistic rivalry differed in
their associations with prestige-based status. More specifi-
cally, narcissistic admiration was positively associated with
prestige-based status, whereas narcissistic rivalry had a
unique negative association with prestige-based status when
controlling for narcissistic admiration, as well as a zero-order
correlation with prestige-based status that was not significant.
This suggests that individuals with high levels of narcissistic
admiration are likely to pursue strategies for gaining status
that involve gaining the admiration of others (e.g., displaying
competence), whereas individuals with high levels of narcis-
sistic rivalry are not inclined to employ prestige-based strat-
egies for gaining status. Taken together, these results suggest
that narcissistic admiration is linked with a willingness to
employ either dominance-based or prestige-based strategies
ZEIGLER-HILL ET AL.
318
|

to gain status, whereas narcissistic rivalry is linked with a
tendency to rely exclusively on dominance-based strategies.
Combining narcissistic admiration and narcissistic rivalry
into the overall NARQ composite revealed positive associa-
tions with both dominance-based and prestige-based strat-
egies for pursuing status. As in Study 1, this overall NARQ
composite obscured some of the important differences
between narcissistic admiration and narcissistic rivalry. For
example, the overall NARQ composite was positively associ-
ated with prestige-based strategies for pursuing status, which
was similar to the association that narcissistic admiration had
with prestige-based strategies but was quite different from
the association that narcissistic rivalry had with this strategy
for pursuing status (i.e., a unique negative association when
controlling for narcissistic admiration or a nonsignificant
zero-order correlation).
4
|
STUDY 3: REACTIONS TO
DAILY PERCEPTIONS OF STATUS
AND INCLUSION
Status and affiliation have frequently emerged as the two
most basic dimensions underlying human social behavior
(see Zeigler-Hill et al., in press, for an extended discussion).
The purpose of Study 3 was to develop a better understand-
ing of the consequences that narcissistic individuals experi-
ence when they are successful—or unsuccessful—in their
attempts to attain status or affiliate with others. We focused
on the implications that status and affiliation have for the
state self-esteem levels of narcissistic individuals because the
sociometer model (e.g., Leary, Tambor, Terdal, & Downs,
1995) argues that state self-esteem reflects current levels of
perceived relational value (which is closely tied to affilia-
tion), whereas the recently developed hierometer model
(Mahadevan et al., 2016, 2019) argues that state self-
esteem reflects current levels of perceived status. Although
the desire for status and for affiliation appear to serve as the
basis for a great deal of human social behavior, individuals
may still differ in the degree to which they emphasize the
pursuit of status or affiliation in their own lives. In fact, there
is sometimes a trade-off between status and affiliation such
that it may be difficult for an individual to completely satisfy
both of these motivations simultaneously. For example, a
professor who behaves in a highly professional manner when
interacting with her students may be admired by her students
(high status), but she may not be especially liked by them
(low affiliation). In contrast, a professor who desperately
tries to befriend his students may be well liked by them
(high affiliation), but he may fail to earn their admiration
(low status). Individuals with narcissistic personality features
tend to resolve potential trade-offs between status and affilia-
tion by focusing more of their effort on attaining status than
pursuing affiliation (e.g., Campbell, 1999; Campbell, Foster,
& Finkel, 2002; Raskin & Novacek, 1991). That is, it
appears that narcissistic individuals may care a great deal
about being admired, but they may not be overly concerned
about whether people like them. Consistent with the idea that
narcissistic individuals care a great deal about being admired,
we predicted that the state self-esteem of individuals with
high levels of narcissistic admiration or narcissistic rivalry
would be highly responsive to perceived status. In contrast,
we did not expect the state self-esteem of individuals with
high levels of narcissistic admiration or narcissistic rivalry to
be especially responsive to perceived affiliation.
4.1
|
Method
4.1.1
|
Participants and procedure
Participants were 594 undergraduates at a university in the
midwestern region of the United States who were enrolled in
psychology courses and participated in exchange for partial
fulfillment of a research participation requirement. We report
how we determined our sample size, all data exclusions (if
any), all manipulations, and all measures in the study (Sim-
mons et al., 2012). As in Studies 1 and 2, we decided that
the sample size for this study should be at least 250 based on
a power analysis for the average effect size in social-
personality psychology in conjunction with the guidelines
for reducing estimation error in social-personality psychol-
ogy (Richard et al., 2003; Sch€
onbrodt & Perugini, 2013).
However, we deliberately oversampled in an effort to
increase the statistical power of the study. More specifically,
we used a time-based stopping rule for data collection such
that we collected data from as many undergraduate partici-
pants as possible during the course of a single academic
semester. Participants completed a measure of narcissism—
along with other measures that are not directly relevant to the
present study (e.g., basic personality features)—via a secure
Web site. Participants were offered additional research credit
for completing measures concerning perceived status, per-
ceived inclusion, and state self-esteem each evening for up to
7 consecutive days via the Internet. Of the 594 initial partici-
pants, 356 participants (124 men, 232 women) completed at
least one of the daily measures and contributed a total of
1,415 daily reports (i.e., an average of 4.19 reports for each
participant). This was a completion rate of 60%, which may
seem somewhat low, but it is important to note that comple-
tion of the daily measures was optional for participants rather
than being a required element of their participation (i.e., it
was simply a way for them to earn additional research cred-
its). The mean age of the participants who completed the
daily measures was 19.83 years (SD 53.90), and their racial/
ethnic composition was 83% White, 6% Black, 4% Asian,
2% Hispanic, and 5% other. The participants who completed
ZEIGLER-HILL ET AL.
|
319

the daily measures did not differ from those who did not
complete the daily measures in terms of their level of narcis-
sistic admiration, t(592) 51.53, p5.13, and narcissistic
rivalry, t(592) 50.37, p5.71. However, women were more
likely than men to complete at least one of the daily meas-
ures, v
2
(1) 513.95, p<.001.
4.1.2
|
Measures
Narcissism
Narcissistic admiration (a5.81) and narcissistic rivalry
(a5.87) were assessed using the NARQ as in the previous
studies.
Daily perceptions of status and inclusion
Daily perceptions of status and inclusion were measured at
the end of each day using a modified version of the Social
Relations Inventory (Huo, Binning, & Molina, 2010; Maha-
devan et al., 2016), which captures status (eight items; e.g.,
“I feel that people see me as an important person”; between-
person reliability 5.99, within-person reliability 5.78) and
inclusion (nine items; e.g., “I feel that people like me as a
person”; between-person reliability 5.99, within-person
reliability 5.79).
4
This modified instrument captured daily
perceptions of status and inclusion by asking participants to
provide the response that best reflected how they felt at that
particular moment rather than how they typically or generally
felt about themselves. Responses to these items were made
on scales ranging from 1 (strongly disagree)to5(strongly
agree).
State self-esteem
State self-esteem was measured at the end of each day using
a modified version of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale
(Rosenberg, 1965), which consists of 10 items (e.g., “I feel
that I have a number of good qualities”; between-person
reliability 5.99, within-person reliability 5.74). This modi-
fied instrument captured state self-esteem by asking partici-
pants to provide the response that best reflected how they felt
at that particular moment rather than how they typically or
generally felt about themselves. Responses to these items
were made on scales ranging from 1 (strongly disagree)to
10 (strongly agree).
4.2
|
Results
Descriptive statistics and zero-order correlations for Study 3
are presented in Table 1. A series of multilevel models were
used to examine whether narcissistic admiration and narcis-
sistic rivalry moderated the associations that daily percep-
tions of status and inclusion had with state self-esteem. The
data constituted a multilevel data structure because observa-
tions at one level of analysis were nested within another level
of analysis (i.e., daily measures were nested within individu-
als; Bryk & Raudenbush, 1992). Multilevel models were
used to analyze these data because these models account for
the violation of the independence assumption that occurs
with a nested data structure. At a conceptual level, these
models involved two steps. In the first step, a regression
equation was estimated for each individual at Level 1 (the
within-person level) to yield intercept and slope coefficients
that serve as an index of the association between variables at
the daily level (e.g., does state self-esteem tend to be higher
on days when individuals perceive themselves to have higher
levels of status?). For the second step, Level 2 analyses (the
between-persons level) examined whether the regression
slopes obtained from the Level 1 analyses differed across
individuals depending on their level of narcissistic admira-
tion and narcissistic rivalry (e.g., is the association between
perceptions of status and state self-esteem especially strong
for those individuals with high levels of narcissistic admira-
tion?). We used a more conservative alpha for Study 3 due
to our large sample size and the number of analyses that we
conducted (i.e., our adjusted alpha was .01).
4.2.1
|
The associations that daily
perceptions of status and inclusion had with
state self-esteem
The first analysis examined the within-person relationships
that daily perceptions of status and inclusion had with state
self-esteem. For this analysis, the daily perceptions of status
and inclusion were person-mean-centered. This technique
was used because there was considerable variability in the
perceptions of status and inclusion that were reported across
days (i.e., participants reported higher levels of perceived sta-
tus and inclusion on some days than others), as well as the
perceptions of status and inclusion that were reported across
participants (i.e., some participants reported higher levels of
perceived status and inclusion than were reported by other
participants). Person-mean-centering reduces the influence of
habituation to the average perceptions of status and inclusion
in the lives of participants and adjusts for possible self-report
biases. The use of person-mean-centering for daily percep-
tions of status and inclusion allowed us to examine the asso-
ciation between state self-esteem and deviations from the
normal daily experiences of the participant (e.g., do partici-
pants report higher levels of state self-esteem on those days
when they report higher levels of perceived status than is
typical for them?). Participants reported higher levels of state
self-esteem on the days when they perceived themselves to
have higher levels of status (B50.14, SE 50.03, t54.61,
p<.001) and higher levels of inclusion (B50.25,
SE 50.03, t58.21, p<.001). These results show that indi-
viduals tend to report higher levels of state self-esteem on
ZEIGLER-HILL ET AL.
320
|

the days when they feel admired by others and when they
feel included by others.
4.2.2
|
The associations that narcissism had
with daily perceptions of status, daily
perceptions of inclusion, and state self-esteem
The Level 2 (between-person) analyses first examined
whether narcissistic admiration and narcissistic rivalry were
associated with the average daily perceptions of status, daily
perceptions of inclusion, and state self-esteem. This type of
analysis is referred to as a means as outcomes analysis (Bryk
& Raudenbush, 1992).
Perceptions of status
Narcissistic admiration had a positive association with the
average level of perceived status reported by participants
(B50.51, SE 50.05, t59.82, p<.001), whereas narcissis-
tic rivalry had a negative association with the average level
of perceived status reported by participants (B5–0.35,
SE 50.04, t5–7.89, p<.001).
Perceptions of inclusion
Narcissistic admiration had a positive association with the
average level of perceived inclusion reported by participants
(B50.42, SE 50.05, t57.62, p<.001), whereas narcissis-
tic rivalry had a negative association with the average level
of perceived inclusion reported by participants (B5–0.41,
SE 50.05, t5–8.72, p<.001).
State self-esteem
Narcissistic admiration had a positive association with the
average level of state self-esteem reported by participants
(B50.44, SE 50.05, t58.19, p<.001), whereas narcissis-
tic rivalry had a negative association with the average level
of state self-esteem reported by participants (B5–0.49,
SE 50.04, t5–12.01, p<.001).
4.2.3
|
Narcissism as a moderator of the
associations that daily perceptions of status
and inclusion have with state self-esteem
The second purpose of the Level 2 (between-person) analy-
ses was to examine whether narcissistic admiration and nar-
cissistic rivalry moderated the associations that daily
perceptions of status and inclusion had with state self-esteem
(e.g., is the association between perceived status and state
self-esteem especially strong for those individuals with high
levels of narcissistic admiration?). This type of analysis is
referred to as a slopes as outcomes analysis (Bryk & Rauden-
bush, 1992). The expected cross-level interaction between
narcissistic admiration and daily perceptions of status was
near to but was not beyond our restricted level of statistical
significance (B50.10, SE 50.04, t52.25, p5.02). How-
ever, given the importance of this interaction, we still exam-
ined the pattern using simple slopes tests that have been
adapted for multilevel models (Curran, Bauer, & Wil-
loughby, 2006). These analyses revealed that daily percep-
tions of status were positively associated with state self-
esteem for individuals with high levels of narcissistic admira-
tion (B50.25, SE 50.07, t53.57, p<.001) but not for
individuals with low levels of narcissistic admiration
(B50.05, SE 50.05, t51.09, p5.28). These results show
that individuals with high levels of narcissistic admiration
tend to experience greater changes in their state self-esteem
based on their daily perceptions of status than individuals
with low levels of narcissistic admiration. Narcissistic admi-
ration did not moderate the association that daily perceptions
of inclusion had with state self-esteem (B5–0.07,
SE 50.04, t5–1.56, p5.12), nor did narcissistic rivalry
moderate the associations that daily perceptions of status had
with state self-esteem (B5–0.06, SE 50.04, t5–1.53,
p5.13) or that daily perceptions of inclusion had with state
self-esteem (B50.02, SE 50.04, t50.53, p5.59).
5,6
4.2.4
|
Additional analyses using the overall
NARQ composite score
We also conducted similar multilevel analyses to examine
whether the overall NARQ composite score was associated
with daily perceptions of status, daily perceptions of inclu-
sion, or daily reports of state self-esteem. The overall NARQ
composite score was not associated with the average levels
of perceived status (B50.11, SE 50.05, t52.08, p5.04),
perceived inclusion (B5–0.01, SE 50.05, t5–0.17,
p5.87), or state self-esteem (B5–0.06, SE 50.05, t5–
1.11, p5.27). Further, the overall NARQ composite score
did not moderate the association that daily perceptions of sta-
tus (B50.02, SE 50.03, t50.71, p5.48) or daily percep-
tions of inclusion (B5–0.03, SE 50.03, t5–0.98, p5.33)
had with state self-esteem.
4.3
|
Discussion
The results of Study 3 showed that state self-esteem tended
to be higher when individuals perceived themselves to have
higher levels of status (consistent with the hierometer model)
and social inclusion (consistent with the sociometer model).
Narcissistic admiration and narcissistic rivalry had opposing
associations with daily perceptions of status, daily percep-
tions of inclusion, and daily levels of state self-esteem (i.e.,
positive associations emerged for narcissistic admiration, and
negative associations emerged for narcissistic rivalry), which
explains why the overall NARQ composite was not associ-
ated with any of these outcomes. These results provide addi-
tional evidence for the importance of distinguishing between
ZEIGLER-HILL ET AL.
|
321

narcissistic admiration (characterized by positive views of
oneself and one’s position within the social environment)
and narcissistic rivalry (characterized by relatively negative
views of others and one’s position within the social environ-
ment). Also, narcissistic admiration moderated the associa-
tion that daily perceptions of status had with state self-
esteem such that individuals with high levels of narcissistic
admiration reported especially high levels of state self-
esteem on days when they felt admired. These results are
consistent with the possibility that individuals with high lev-
els of narcissistic admiration are particularly attuned to their
positions within status hierarchies, which, in turn, has impor-
tant implications for their feelings of self-worth.
5
|
GENERAL DISCUSSION
The purpose of the present studies was to examine the asso-
ciations that narcissism had with various aspects of status.
Across three studies, we found support for the idea that nar-
cissism is intimately entwined with the pursuit of status.
More specifically, we found that narcissistic admiration was
associated with an agentic orientation for pursuing status,
whereas narcissistic rivalry was associated with an antagonis-
tic orientation for pursuing status. Our first hypothesis was
that narcissistic admiration and narcissistic rivalry would
both have positive associations with the motivation to seek
status. This was supported by the results of Studies 1 and 2,
which showed that both forms of narcissism were associated
with the motivation to seek status but that this association is
especially strong for narcissistic admiration. Our second
hypothesis was that narcissistic admiration and narcissistic
rivalry would differ in their associations with the strategies
that individuals employ to attain status. This was supported
by the results of Study 2, which showed that narcissistic
admiration was associated with a willingness to employ
either dominance-based or prestige-based strategies to gain
status, whereas narcissistic rivalry was associated with a
tendency to rely exclusively on dominance-based strategies.
Our third hypothesis was that narcissistic admiration and
narcissistic rivalry would have opposing associations with
perceptions of status. This prediction was generally sup-
ported by the results from Study 3, which showed that nar-
cissistic admiration had positive associations with daily
perceptions of status, whereas narcissistic rivalry had nega-
tive associations with daily perceptions of status. Our fourth
hypothesis was that narcissistic admiration and narcissistic
rivalry would be similar in their associations with responses
to perceived status. This prediction was not supported by our
results. Rather, the results of Study 3 showed that the state
self-esteem levels of individuals with high levels of narcissis-
tic admiration were highly reactive to daily perceptions of
status, but this pattern did not emerge for individuals with
high levels of narcissistic rivalry. Additional research con-
cerning the interplay between narcissism, status, and self-
esteem may help resolve the inconsistent results that have
emerged concerning the fragile nature of narcissistic self-
esteem (see Southard, Zeigler-Hill, Vrabel, & McCabe, in
press, for a review). This research may be especially impor-
tant given the recent development of the hierometer model of
self-esteem (Mahadevan et al., 2016, 2019), along with
the idea that status may provide a less consistent basis for
feelings of self-worth across situations than is the case for
affiliation (Leary et al., 2014). This pattern suggests the
intriguing possibility that the tendency for narcissistic indi-
viduals to focus their attention on gaining status rather than
enhancing their affiliation may actually contribute to their
constant need for external validation and heightened reactiv-
ity to negative events that threaten their tenuous perceptions
of status. That is, narcissistic individuals may pursue status
in an attempt to affirm their value and worth, but their
extreme focus on status may unintentionally create an esca-
lating pattern in which their increasingly desperate pursuit of
status makes it even more difficult for them to feel secure
about their value and place within their social environment.
In some ways, the narcissistic pursuit of status may be simi-
lar to a stranded sailor who is left adrift in the middle of the
ocean and eventually succumbs to the temptation to drink
saltwater in an effort to quench his thirst even though doing
so just serves to make him even thirstier.
In summary, narcissistic admiration and narcissistic
rivalry are similar in terms of their desire for status. Despite
this similarity in the desire for status, these two forms of nar-
cissism differed considerably in their associations with other
aspects of status (e.g., how they go about pursuing status,
reactions to perceived status). These results provide addi-
tional support for the need to distinguish the relatively
agentic aspects of narcissism that are captured by narcissistic
admiration from the insecure and antagonistic features of nar-
cissism that are captured by narcissistic rivalry. Distinguish-
ing between these two aspects of narcissism allows for a
more nuanced understanding of the links between narcissism
and various aspects of status that are obscured when narcis-
sistic admiration and narcissistic rivalry are combined into an
overall NARQ composite. This is important because previ-
ous research that did not distinguish between narcissistic
admiration and narcissistic rivalry has led to the general con-
clusion that narcissism is something akin to a “mixed bless-
ing”in terms of gaining status (e.g., Anderson & Cowan,
2014; Cheng et al., 2010; Paulhus, 1998). In contrast, the
present results suggest that the status-related benefits of nar-
cissism generally stem from its agentic qualities (e.g., self-
confidence), which are likely to promote the attainment of
status, whereas the status-related costs of narcissism appear
to largely stem from its insecure and antagonistic qualities,
which are likely to hinder—or even completely undermine—
ZEIGLER-HILL ET AL.
322
|

the attainment of status. The failure to recognize the multidi-
mensional nature of narcissism may obscure the divergent
associations that different aspects of narcissism may have
with a wide range of outcomes (see Brown et al., 2009, for a
review).
6
|
FUTURE RESEARCH
DIRECTIONS AND LIMITATIONS
The present studies have provided additional insight into the
connections that narcissism has with various aspects of sta-
tus, but it would be helpful for future studies to expand on
these results. For example, the present results suggest the
intriguing possibility that individuals with high levels of nar-
cissistic admiration may be highly approach-oriented with
regard to status. This pattern is consistent with previous
results showing that narcissistic individuals tend to be
approach-oriented in general (e.g., Foster, Misra, & Reidy,
2009; Foster & Trimm, 2008). One possibility is that individ-
uals with high levels of narcissistic admiration may be so
focused on potential opportunities to increase their status that
they may be at least somewhat inattentive to situations that
may cause them to experience a loss of status. It would also
be beneficial for future studies to consider the boundary con-
ditions for some of these results. For example, it would pro-
vide additional clarity about the connections between
narcissism and status if future researchers examined potential
moderators that may play a role in whether narcissistic indi-
viduals decide to employ dominance-based strategies or
prestige-based strategies in their pursuit of status (e.g., being
physically larger or stronger than potential rivals, already
having greater control over valuable resources). This research
is important because it is possible that individuals with high
levels of narcissistic admiration may show a general prefer-
ence for utilizing prestige-based strategies and may only
resort to dominance-based strategies when they believe they
will be unsuccessful in their efforts to gain prestige. How-
ever, it is also possible that narcissistic individuals simply
enjoy exerting their power over others by using dominance-
based strategies rather than dominance’s being something
akin to a strategy of last resort.
Future research could also clarify the potential status-
related benefits of narcissistic admiration and narcissistic
rivalry in different contexts. Gaining status is certainly desir-
able given its many benefits (e.g., Anderson et al., 2015), but
the indiscriminate pursuit of ever-increasing levels of status
is unlikely to be beneficial. The reason is that the pursuit of
status is inherently risky because each opportunity to gain
status is accompanied by the potential to lose status as well.
As a consequence, all individuals—including those with nar-
cissistic personality features—must be at least somewhat
judicious in their pursuit of status. It appears that narcissistic
admiration may be characterized by flexibility regarding the
strategies that individuals employ in the pursuit of status
(i.e., dominance-based strategies or prestige-based strat-
egies). This may result in narcissistic admiration’s being
highly beneficial for individuals who are operating in a rela-
tively stable status hierarchy that has at least somewhat
clearly defined rules for how individuals can ascend the hier-
archy (e.g., a middle manager in a business who is able to
display her competence to her supervisors may be able to
earn a promotion). In contrast, narcissistic rivalry may be
most beneficial for individuals who are operating in an unsta-
ble environment without any clear rules for ascending the
status hierarchy or for those individuals who find themselves
on the lowest levels of the status hierarchy and have rela-
tively little to lose. Future research that addresses these sorts
of questions has the potential to improve our understanding
of narcissism because the pursuit of status may be a founda-
tional element of narcissism rather than simply being one of
the many ways in which narcissistic individuals go about
regulating their feelings of self-worth.
Although the present studies had a number of strengths
(e.g., the studies involved large samples), it is important to
acknowledge some of their potential limitations. The first
limitation is that the direction of causality between narcis-
sism and various aspects of status cannot be determined due
to the correlational nature of these studies. The underlying
process model for the present studies was that narcissism
would influence how individuals think about status (e.g.,
show a stronger desire for status, be more responsive to indi-
cators of a lack of status). However, this causal sequence
cannot be established from the present studies. For example,
it is quite possible that the heightened reactivity of individu-
als to perceived status may have actually influenced the
development of narcissism or that a third variable may have
impacted the development of both narcissism and status-
related outcomes (e.g., early experiences with an overly
indulgent caregiver may contribute to the development of
both narcissistic personality traits and heightened reactivity
to changes in one’s perceived status). Future research should
attempt to gain a better understanding of the causal links
between narcissism and status-related outcomes using experi-
mental designs or longitudinal studies. The second limitation
is that the present studies relied heavily on self-report meas-
ures of narcissism and status, which makes it possible that
these results may have been distorted by socially desirable
responding. For example, it is certainly possible that some
individuals may have had views of their own status that may
not have aligned with how others in their social environ-
ments perceive them (e.g., individuals with high levels of
narcissistic admiration perceived themselves as having high
status, but this does not necessarily mean that they are
viewed in this way by others). In addition, individuals may
have been reluctant to admit how important the opinions of
ZEIGLER-HILL ET AL.
|
323

others actually are to them, or they may have simply lacked
adequate insight into their own motivations concerning sta-
tus. Future research would benefit from utilizing strategies
that are designed to capture narcissism and various aspects of
status without being so reliant on self-reports (e.g., observer
ratings, clinical interviews, real-world behaviors).
7
|
CONCLUSIONS
Despite these limitations, the results of the present studies
expand the current understanding of the connections between
narcissism and status. More specifically, the present studies
indicate that narcissistic admiration and narcissistic rivalry
are somewhat similar in terms of the desire for status, but
these expressions of narcissism diverge with regard to the
strategies that are used to pursue status, the perception of
one’s own status, and reactions to perceived status. Consist-
ent with the NARC model (Back et al., 2013), these results
suggest that narcissistic admiration tends to be aligned with
an agentic orientation regarding status, whereas narcissistic
rivalry is aligned with an antagonistic orientation regarding
status.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The author(s) received no financial support for the
research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
CONFLICT OF INTERESTS
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest
with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication
of this article.
NOTES
1
We will use the term narcissism to refer to a continuous and normally
distributed trait in the general population. We focus exclusively on
grandiose narcissism rather than vulnerable narcissism (see Miller &
Maples, 2011, for a review of the distinctions between grandiose nar-
cissism and vulnerable narcissism).
2
Preliminary analyses for each study included sex as a potential modera-
tor of the associations that narcissistic admiration and narcissistic
rivalry had with the outcome variables. Sex did not moderate any of
these associations, so it was trimmed from the final analyses that are
reported for each study.
3
We were concerned that including narcissistic admiration and narcissis-
tic rivalry as predictors in the same model could make it difficult to
interpret their unique associations with dominance-based status and
prestige-based status, so we conducted additional analyses in which
narcissistic admiration and narcissistic rivalry served as predictors in
separate analyses (see Lynam, Hoyle, & Newman, 2006, or Sleep,
Lynam, Hyatt, & Miller, 2017, for a review of concerns related to the
partialing of related predictor variables from each other). In its own set
of analyses, narcissistic admiration was positively associated with
dominance-based status (b5.32, t58.20, p<.001) and prestige-
based status (b5.52, t514.12, p<.001). In addition, the Narcissistic
Admiration3Status-Seeking Motivation interaction was significant for
dominance-based status (b5.10, t53.13, p5.002). The pattern that
emerged from this interaction was very similar to the pattern that
emerged from the model that included both narcissistic admiration and
narcissistic rivalry as predictors. The status-seeking motive did not
moderate the association that narcissistic admiration had with prestige-
based status (b5–.06, t5–1.87, p5.06). The analyses for narcissis-
tic rivalry revealed that it was positively associated with dominance-
based status (b5.48, t515.74, p<.001) but negatively associated
with prestige-based status (b5–.18, t5–5.10, p<.001). The status-
seeking motive did not moderate the association that narcissistic rivalry
had with dominance-based status (b5.00, t5–0.09, p5.93) or
prestige-based status (b5.02, t50.71, p5.48). Taken together, these
results were quite similar to those observed when narcissistic admira-
tion and narcissistic rivalry were included as predictors in the same
models.
4
Between-person reliability and within-person reliability for the daily
measures were calculated using the approach outlined in Shrout and
Lane (2012).
5
As in Study 2, we were concerned that including narcissistic admira-
tion and narcissistic rivalry as predictors in the same multilevel analy-
ses could make it difficult to interpret their unique associations with
daily perceptions of status, daily perceptions of inclusion, and daily
reports of state self-esteem, so we conducted additional analyses in
which narcissistic admiration and narcissistic rivalry served as predic-
tors in separate analyses. In its own set of analyses, narcissistic admira-
tion was positively associated with the average level of perceived
status (B50.39, SE50.06, t56.89, p<.001), the average level of
perceived inclusion (B50.28, SE 50.06, t54.49, p<.01), and the
average level of state self-esteem (B50.27, SE 50.06, t54.31,
p<.001). Further, narcissistic admiration moderated the association
that daily perceptions of status had with state self-esteem (B50.08,
SE 50.03, t52.05, p5.04) but not the association that daily percep-
tions of inclusion had with state self-esteem (B5–0.06, SE 50.04,
t5–1.62, p5.11). In its own set of analyses, narcissistic rivalry was
negatively associated with the average level of perceived status (B5–
0.17, SE 50.05, t5–3.83, p<.001), the average level of perceived
inclusion (B5–0.27, SE 50.04, t5–6.06, p<.001), and the average
level of state self-esteem (B5–0.34, SE 50.05, t5–7.06, p<.001).
However, narcissistic rivalry did not moderate the associations that
daily perceptions of status (B5–0.02, SE 50.03, t5–0.72, p5.48)
or daily perceptions of inclusion (B5–0.01, SE50.04, t5–0.20,
p5.84) had with state self-esteem. Taken together, these results were
quite similar to those observed when narcissistic admiration and narcis-
sistic rivalry were included as predictors in the same models.
6
Narcissistic admiration and narcissistic rivalry have been shown to
have strong associations with basic personality dimensions (e.g., extra-
version, agreeableness; Back et al., 2013; Rogoza, Wyszy
nska, Maćk-
iewicz, & Cieciuch, 2016; Rogoza, _
Zemojtel-Piotrowska, Rogoza,
Piotrowski, & Wyszy
nska, 2016). We conducted additional multilevel
analyses for Study 3 that controlled for the basic personality dimen-
sions that are included in the HEXACO model of personality (Ashton
& Lee, 2009). The results of these analyses revealed that the patterns
observed for narcissistic admiration and narcissistic rivalry persisted
even when controlling for these basic personality dimensions (e.g., nar-
cissistic admiration had significant positive associations with the aver-
age level of perceived status, whereas narcissistic rivalry had
ZEIGLER-HILL ET AL.
324
|

significant negative associations with the average level of perceived
status).
ORCID
Virgil Zeigler-Hill http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9260-9806
REFERENCES
Ackerman, R. A., Witt, E. A., Donnellan, M. B., Trzesniewski, K.
H., Robins, R. W., & Kashy, D. A. (2011). What does the Narcis-
sistic Personality Inventory really measure? Assessment,18,67–
87. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191110382845
Anderson, C., & Cowan, J. (2014). Personality and status attainment:
A micropolitics perspective. In J. T. Cheng, J. L. Tracy, & C.
Anderson (Eds.), The psychology of social status (pp. 99–117).
New York, NY: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-
0867-7_5
Anderson, C., Hildreth, J. A. D., & Howland, L. (2015). Is the desire
for status a fundamental human motive? A review of the empiri-
cal literature. Psychological Bulletin,141, 574–601. https://doi.
org/10.1037/a0038781
Ashton, M. C., & Lee, K. (2009). The HEXACO-60: A short mea-
sure of the major dimensions of personality. Journal of Personal-
ity Assessment,91, 340–345. https://doi.org/10.1080/
00223890902935878
Back, M. D., K€
ufner, A. P., Dufner, M., Gerlach, T. M., Rauthmann,
J. F., & Denissen, J. A. (2013). Narcissistic admiration and
rivalry: Disentangling the bright and dark sides of narcissism.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,105, 1013–1037.
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034431
Back, M. D., Schmukle, S. C., & Egloff, B. (2010). Why are narcis-
sists so charming at first sight? Decoding the narcissism-
popularity link at zero acquaintance. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology,98, 132–145. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016338
Baumeister, R. F., Bushman, B. J., & Campbell, W. K. (2000). Self-
esteem, narcissism, and aggression: Does violence result from low
self-esteem or from threatened egotism? Current Directions in
Psychological Science,9,26–29. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-
8721.00053
Bradlee, P. M., & Emmons, R. A. (1992). Locating narcissism within
the interpersonal circumplex and the five-factor model. Personal-
ity and Individual Differences,13, 821–830. https://doi.org/10.
1016/0191-8869(92)90056-U
Brown, R. P., Budzek, K., & Tamborski, M. (2009). On the meaning
and measure of narcissism. Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin,35, 951–964. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167209335461
Brunell, A. B., Gentry, W. A., Campbell, W. K., Hoffman, B. J.,
Kuhnert, K. W., & DeMarree, K. G. (2008). Leader emergence:
The case of the narcissistic leader. Personality and Social Psy-
chology Bulletin,34, 1663–1676. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0146167208324101
Bryk, A. S., & Raudenbush, S. W. (1992). Hierarchical linear mod-
els in social and behavioral research: Applications and data
analysis methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Bushman, B. J., & Baumeister, R. F. (1998). Threatened egotism,
narcissism, self-esteem, and direct and displaced aggression: Does
self-love or self-hate lead to violence? Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology,75, 219–229. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-
3514.75.1.219
Bushman, B. J., & Thomaes, S. (2012). When the narcissistic ego
deflates, narcissistic aggression inflates. In W. K. Campbell & J.
D. Miller (Eds.), The handbook of narcissism and narcissistic
personality disorder: Theoretical approaches, empirical findings,
and treatment (pp. 319–329). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. https://doi.
org/10.1002/9781118093108.ch28
Buss, D. M., & Chiodo, L. M. (1991). Narcissistic acts in everyday
life. Journal of Personality,59, 179–215. https://doi.org/10.1111/
j.1467-6494.1991.tb00773.x
Campbell, W. K. (1999). Narcissism and romantic attraction. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology,77, 1254–1270. https://doi.
org/10.1037/0022-3514.77.6.1254
Campbell, W. K., Bush, C. P., Brunell, A. B., & Shelton, J. (2005).
Understanding the social costs of narcissism: The case of the trag-
edy of the commons. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
31, 1358–1368. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167205274855
Campbell, W. K., & Campbell, S. M. (2009). On the self-regulatory
dynamics created by the peculiar benefits and costs of narcissism:
A contextual reinforcement model and examination of leadership.
Self and Identity,8, 214–232. https://doi.org/10.1080/
15298860802505129
Campbell, W. K., Foster, C. A., & Finkel, E. J. (2002). Does self-
love lead to love for others? A story of narcissistic game playing.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,83, 340–354.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.83.2.340
Campbell, W. K., Goodie, A. S., & Foster, J. D. (2004). Narcissism,
confidence, and risk attitude. Journal of Behavioral Decision
Making,17, 297–311. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.475
Campbell, W. K., Reeder, G. D., Sedikides, C., & Elliot, A. J.
(2000). Narcissism and comparative self-enhancement strategies.
Journal of Research in Personality,3, 329–347. https://doi.org/
10.1006/jrpe.2000.2282
Campbell, W. K., Rudich, E. A., & Sedikides, C. (2002). Narcissism,
self-esteem, and the positivity of self-views: Two portraits of self-
love. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,28, 358–368.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167202286007
Carlson,E.N.,Vazire,S.,&Oltmanns,T.F.(2011).Youprob-
ably think this paper’s about you: Narcissists’perceptions of
their personality and reputation. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology,101,185–201. https://doi.org/10.1037/
a0023781
Carroll, L. (1987). A study of narcissism, affiliation, intimacy, and
power motives among students in business administration. Psy-
chological Reports,61, 355–358. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.
1987.61.2.355
Cheng, J. T., Tracy, J. L., & Henrich, J. (2010). Pride, personality,
and the evolutionary foundations of human social status. Evolu-
tion and Human Behavior,31, 334–347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
evolhumbehav.2010.02.004
Curran, P. J., Bauer, D. J., & Willoughby, M. T. (2006). Testing and
probing interactions in hierarchical linear growth models. In C. S.
Bergeman & S. M. Boker (Eds.), Methodological issues in aging
research (pp. 99–129). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
ZEIGLER-HILL ET AL.
|
325

Emmons, R. A. (1984). Factor analysis and construct validity of the
Narcissistic Personality Inventory. Journal of Personality Assess-
ment,48, 291–300. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa4803_11
Farwell, L., & Wohlwend-Lloyd, R. (1998). Narcissistic processes:
Optimistic expectations, favorable self-evaluations, and self-
enhancing attributions. Journal of Personality,66,65–83. https://
doi.org/10.1111/1467-6494.00003
Foster, J. D., Misra, T. A., & Reidy, D. E. (2009). Narcissists are
approach-oriented toward their money and their friends. Journal
of Research in Personality,43, 764–769. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jrp.2009.05.005
Foster, J. D., Shrira, I., & Campbell, W. K. (2006). Theoretical mod-
els of narcissism, sexuality, and relationship commitment. Journal
of Social and Personal Relationships,23, 367–386. https://doi.
org/10.1177/0265407506064204
Foster, J. D., & Trimm, R. F. (2008). On being eager and uninhib-
ited: Narcissism and approach-avoidance motivation. Personality
and Social Psychology Bulletin,34, 1004–1017. https://doi.org/10.
1177/0146167208316688
Gabriel, M. T., Critelli, J. W., & Ee, J. S. (1994). Narcissistic illu-
sions in self-evaluations of intelligence and attractiveness. Journal
of Personality,62, 143–155. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.
1994.tb00798.x
Geukes, K., Nestler, S., Hutteman, R., Dufner, M., K€
ufner, A. C.,
Egloff, B., ... Back, M. D. (2017). Puffed-up but shaky selves:
State self-esteem level and variability in narcissists. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology,112, 769–786. https://doi.org/
10.1037/pspp0000093
Gilbert, P., Price, J., & Allan, S. (1995). Social comparison, social
attractiveness and evolution: How might they be related? New
Ideas in Psychology,13, 149–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/0732-
118X(95)00002-X
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,
1–47. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12072
Huo, Y. J., Binning, K. R., & Molina, L. E. (2010). Testing an inte-
grative model of respect: Implications for social engagement and
well-being. Personality and Social Psychological Bulletin,36,
200–212. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167209356787
John, O. P., & Robins, R. W. (1994). Accuracy and bias in self-
perception: Individual differences in self-enhancement and
the role of narcissism. Journal of Personality and Social Psy-
chology,66, 206–219. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.66.
1.206
Jones, D. N., & Paulhus, D. L. (2010). Different provocations trigger
aggression in narcissists and psychopaths. Social Psychological
and Personality Science,1,12–18. https://doi.org/10.1177/
1948550609347591
Kernis, M. H., & Sun, C. R. (1994). Narcissism and reactions to
interpersonal feedback. Journal of Research in Personality,28,4–
13. https://doi.org/10.1006/jrpe.1994.1002
Krizan, Z., & Herlache, A. D. (2018). The narcissism spectrum
model: A synthetic view of narcissistic personality. Personality
and Social Psychology Review,22,3–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/
1088868316685018
K€
ufner, A. C., Nestler, S., & Back, M. D. (2013). The two pathways
to being an (un-)popular narcissist. Journal of Personality,81,
184–195. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2012.00795.x
Lange, J., Crusius, N. J., & Hagemeyer, B. (2016). The evil queen’s
dilemma: Linking narcissistic admiration and rivalry to benign
and malicious envy. European Journal of Personality,30, 168–
188. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2047
Leary, M. R., Bednarski, R., Hammon, D., & Duncan, T. (1997).
Blowhards, snobs, and narcissists: Interpersonal reactions to
excessive egoism. In R. M. Kowalski (Ed.), Behaving badly:
Aversive behaviors in interpersonal relationships (pp. 111–131).
New York, NY: Plenum Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-
4757-9354-3_6
Leary, M. R., Jongman-Sereno, K. P., & Diebels, K. J. (2014). The
pursuit of status: A self-presentational perspective on the quest for
social value. In J. T. Cheng, J. L. Tracy, & C. Anderson (Eds.),
The psychology of social status (pp. 159–178). New York, NY:
Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-0867-7_8
Leary, M. R., Tambor, E. S., Terdal, S. K., & Downs, D. L. (1995).
Self-esteem as an interpersonal monitor: The sociometer hypothe-
sis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,68, 518–530.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.68.3.518
Leckelt, M., K€
ufner, A. C. P., Nestler, S., & Back, M. D. (2015).
Behavioral processes underlying the decline of narcissists’popu-
larity over time. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
109, 856–871. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000057
Lee, I. C., Pratto, F., & Johnson, B. T. (2011). Intergroup consensus/
disagreement in support of group-based hierarchy: An examina-
tion of socio-structural and psycho-cultural factors. Psychological
Bulletin,137, 1029–1064. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025410
Lynam, D. R., Hoyle, R. H., & Newman, J. P. (2006). The perils of
partialling: Cautionary tales from aggression and psychopathy.
Assessment,13, 328–341. https://doi.org/10.1177/
1073191106290562
Mahadevan,
N., Gregg, A. P., & Sedikides, C. (2019). Is self-
regard a sociometer or a hierometer? Self-esteem tracks status and
inclusion, narcissism tracks status. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology,
https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000189
Mahadevan, N., Gregg, A. P., Sedikides, C., & De Waal-Andrews,
W. G. (2016). Winners, losers, insiders, and outsiders: Comparing
hierometer and sociometer theories of self-regard. Frontiers in
Psychology,7, 334. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00334
Miller, J. D., Lynam, D. R., McCain, J. L., Few, L. R., Crego, C.,
Widiger, T. A., & Campbell, W. K. (2016). Thinking structurally
about narcissism: An examination of the Five-Factor Narcissism
Inventory and its components. Journal of Personality Disorders,
30,1–18. https://doi.org/10.1521/pedi_2015_29_177
Miller, J. D., & Maples, J. (2011). Trait personality models of narcis-
sistic personality disorder, grandiose narcissism, and vulnerable
narcissism. In W. K. Campbell & J. D. Miller (Eds.), The hand-
book of narcissism and narcissistic personality disorder: Theoreti-
cal approaches, empirical findings, and treatments (pp. 71–88).
Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118093108.ch7
Morf, C. C., & Rhodewalt, F. (1993). Narcissism and self-evaluation
maintenance: Explorations in object relations. Personality and
Social Psychology Bulletin,19, 668–676. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0146167293196001
ZEIGLER-HILL ET AL.
326
|
1,–6.16 444 46

Morf, C. C., & Rhodewalt, F. (2001). Unraveling the paradoxes of
narcissism: A dynamic self-regulatory processing model. Psycho-
logical Inquiry,12, 177–196. https://doi.org/10.1207/
S15327965PLI1204_1
Neel, R., Kenrick, D. T., White, A. E., & Neuberg S. L. (2016). Indi-
vidual differences in fundamental social motives. Journal of Per-
sonality and Social Psychology,110, 887–907. https://doi.org/10.
1037/pspp0000068
Paulhus, D. L. (1998). Interpersonal and intrapsychic adaptiveness of
trait self-enhancement: A mixed blessing? Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology,74, 1197–1208. https://doi.org/10.1037/
0022-3514.74.5.1197
Raskin, R., & Novacek, J. (1991). Narcissism and the use of fantasy.
Journal of Clinical Psychology,47, 490–499. https://doi.org/10.
1002/1097-4679(199107)47:4<490::AID-JCLP2270470404>3.0.
CO;2-J
Raskin, R., & Terry, H. (1988). A principal-components analysis of
the Narcissistic Personality Inventory and further evidence of its
construct validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
54, 890–902. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.54.5.890
Richard, F. D., Bond, C. F., & Stokes-Zoota, J. J. (2003). One hun-
dred years of social psychology quantitatively described. Review
of General Psychology,7, 331–363. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-
2680.7.4.331
Rogoza, R., Wyszy
nska, P., Maćkiewicz, M., & Cieciuch, J. (2016).
Differentiation of the two narcissistic faces in their relations to
personality traits and basic values. Personality and Individual Dif-
ferences,95,85–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.02.038
Rogoza, R., _
Zemojtel-Piotrowska, M., Rogoza, M., Piotrowski, J., &
Wyszy
nska, P. (2016). Narcissistic admiration and rivalry in the
context of personality metatraits. Personality and Individual Dif-
ferences,102, 180–185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.07.003
Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Prince-
ton, NJ: Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.1126/sci-
ence.148.3671.804
Sch€
onbrodt, F. D., & Perugini, M. (2013). At what sample size do
correlations stabilize? Journal of Research in Personality,47,
609–612. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2013.05.009
Sedikides, C., Gregg, A. P., Cisek, S., & Hart, C. M. (2007). The I
that buys: Narcissists as consumers. Journal of Consumer Psy-
chology,17, 254–257. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1057-7408(07)
70035-9
Shrout, P. E., & Lane, S. P. (2012). Psychometrics. In M. R. Mehl &
T. S. Conner (Eds.), Handbook of research methods for studying
daily life (pp. 620–635). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Simmons, J. P., Nelson, L. D., & Simonsohn, U. (2012). A 21 word
solution. Retrieved from http://ssrn.com/abstract=2160588
Sleep, C. E., Lynam, D. R., Hyatt, C. S., & Miller, J. D. (2017). Per-
ils of partialing redux: The case of the Dark Triad. Journal of
Abnormal Psychology,126, 939–950. https://doi.org/10.1037/
abn0000278
Southard, A. C., Zeigler-Hill, V., Vrabel, J. K., & McCabe, G. A. (in
press). Narcissism and self-esteem. In A. D. Hermann, A. B. Bru-
nell, & J. D. Foster (Eds.), The handbook of trait narcissism: Key
advances, research methods, and controversies. New York, NY:
Springer.
Tamborski, M., Brown, R. P., & Chowning, K. (2012). Self-serv-
ing bias or simply serving the self? Evidence for a dimen-
sional approach to narcissism. Personality and Individual
Differences,52,942–946. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2012.
01.030
Twenge, J. M., & Campbell, W. K. (2003). “Isn’t it fun to get the
respect that we’re going to deserve?”Narcissism, social rejection,
and aggression. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,29,
261–272. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167202239051
Wright,A.G.C.,&Edershile,E.A.(2018).Issuesresolvedandunre-
solved in pathological narcissism. Current Opinion in Psychology,
21,74–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.10.001
Wurst, S. N., Gerlach, T. M., Dufner, M., Rauthmann, J. F.,
Grosz, M. P., K€
ufner, A. C. P., ... Back,M.D.(2017).Nar-
cissism and romantic relationships: The differential impact of
narcissistic admiration and rivalry. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology,112,280–306. https://doi.org/10.1037/
pspp0000113
Zeigler-Hill, V., & Hobbs, K. A. (2017). The darker aspects of moti-
vation: Pathological personality traits and the fundamental social
motives. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology,36,87–107.
https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.2017.36.2.87
Zeigler-Hill, V., McCabe, G. A., Vrabel, J. K., Raby, C. M., & Cro-
nin, S. (in press). The narcissistic pursuit of status. In A. D. Her-
mann, A. B. Brunell, & J. D. Foster (Eds.), The handbook of trait
narcissism: Key advances, research methods, and controversies.
New York, NY: Springer.
Zeigler-Hill, V., & Trombly, D. R. C. (2018). Narcissism and mate
value: Is beauty in the eye of the narcissistic beholder? Personal-
ity and Individual Differences,122, 115–119. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.paid.2017.10.021
Zitek, E. M., & Jordan, A. H. (2016). Narcissism predicts support for
hierarchy (at least when narcissists think they can rise to the top).
Social Psychological and Personality Science,7, 707–716. https://
doi.org/10.1177/1948550616649241
How to cite this article: Zeigler-Hill V, Vrabel JK,
McCabe GA, et al. Narcissism and the pursuit of status.
Journal of Personality. 2019;87:310 –https://doi.org/
10.1111/jopy.12392
ZEIGLER-HILL ET AL.
|
327
327.