Among well-acquainted people, those high on agentic narcissism are less popular than those low on agentic narcissism. That popularity-difference figures prominently in the narcissism literature. But why are agentic narcissists less popular? We propose a novel answer―the tit-for-tat hypothesis. It states that agentic narcissists like other people less than non-narcissists do and that others reciprocate by liking agentic narcissists less in return. We also examine whether the tit-for-tat hypothesis generalizes to communal narcissism. A large round-robin study (N = 474) assessed agentic and communal narcissism (Wave 1) and included two round-robin waves (Waves 2-3). The round-robin waves assessed participants’ liking for all round-robin group members (2,488 informant-reports). The tit-for-tat hypothesis applied to agentic narcissists. It also applied to communal narcissists, albeit in a different way. Compared with non-narcissists, communal narcissists liked other people more and―in return―those others liked communal narcissists more. Our results elaborate on and qualify the thriving literature on narcissists’ popularity.
AckermanR. A.WittE. A.DonnellanM. B.TrzesniewskiK. H.RobinsR. W.KashyD. A. (2011). What does the Narcissistic Personality Inventory really measure?Assessment, 18, 67-87.
2.
AkaikeH. (1973). Information theory and an extension of the maximum likelihood principle. In PetrovB. N.CsakiF. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2nd International Symposium on Information Theory (pp. 267-281). Budapest, Hungary: Akadémiai Kiadó.
3.
BackM. D.KüfnerA. C. P.DufnerM.GerlachT. M.RauthmannJ. F.DenissenJ. J. A. (2013). Narcissistic admiration and rivalry: Disentangling the bright and dark sides of narcissism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 105, 1013-1037.
4.
BackM. D.SchmukleS. C.EgloffB. (2010). Why are narcissists so charming at first sight? Decoding the narcissism-popularity link at zero acquaintance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98, 132-145.
5.
BackM. D.SchmukleS. C.EgloffB. (2011). A closer look at first sight: Social relations lens model analysis of personality and interpersonal attraction at zero acquaintance. European Journal of Personality, 25, 225-238.
6.
BaumeisterR. F. (1993). Understanding the inner nature of low self-esteem: Uncertain, fragile, protective, and conflicted. In BaumeisterR. F. (Ed.), Self-esteem: The puzzle of low self-regard (pp. 201-218). New York, NY: Plenum Press.
7.
BaumeisterR. F.VohsK. D. (2001). Narcissism as addiction to esteem. Psychological Inquiry, 12, 206-210.
8.
BizumicB.DuckittJ. (2008). “My group is not worthy of me”: Narcissism and ethnocentrism. Political Psychology, 29, 437-453.
9.
BurnhamK. P.AndersonD. R.HuyvaertK. P. (2011). AIC model selection and multimodel inference in behavioral ecology: Some background, observations, and comparisons. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 65, 23-35.
10.
BushmanB. J.BaumeisterR. 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.
11.
CainN. M.PincusA. L.AnsellE. B. (2008). Narcissism at the crossroads: Phenotypic description of pathological narcissism across clinical theory, social/personality psychology, and psychiatric diagnosis. Clinical Psychology Review, 28, 638-656.
12.
CampbellW. K. (1999). Narcissism and romantic attraction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 1254-1270.
13.
CampbellW. K.CampbellS. M. (2009). On the self-regulatory dynamics created by the particular benefits and costs of narcissism: A contextual reinforcement model and examination of leadership. Self and Identity, 8, 214-232.
14.
CampbellW. K.FosterC. A.FinkelE. 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.
15.
CampbellW. K.FosterJ. D. (2007). The narcissistic self: Background, an extended agency model, and ongoing controversies. In SedikidesC.SpencerS. J. (Eds.), The self (pp. 115-138). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
16.
CarlsonE. N.VazireS.OltmannsT. F. (2011). You probably think this paper’s about you: Narcissists’ perceptions of their personality and reputation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101, 185-201
17.
ChartrandT. L.LakinJ. L. (2013). The antecedents and consequences of human behavioral mimicry. Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 285-308.
18.
CzarnaA. Z.DufnerM.CliftonA. D. (2014). The effects of vulnerable and grandiose narcissism on liking-based and disliking-based centrality in social networks. Journal of Research in Personality, 50, 42-45.
19.
CzarnaA. Z.LeifeldP.ŚmiejaM.DufnerM.SaloveyP. (2016). Do narcissism and emotional intelligence win us friends? Modeling dynamics of peer popularity using inferential network analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 42, 1588-1599.
20.
DufnerM.GebauerJ. E.SedikidesC.DenissenJ. J. A. (2018). Self-enhancement and psychological adjustment: A meta-analytic review. Personality and Social Psychology Review. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/1088868318756467
21.
DufnerM.LeisingD.GebauerJ. E. (2016). Which basic rules underlie social judgments? Agency follows a zero-sum principle and communion follows a non-zero-sum principle. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 42, 677-687.
22.
EndersC. K. (2010). Applied missing data analysis. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
23.
EndersC. K.TofighiD. (2007). Centering predictor variables in cross-sectional multilevel models: A new look at an old issue. Psychological Methods, 12, 121-138.
24.
FiedlerK.SchottM.MeiserT. (2011). What mediation analysis can (not) do. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 1231-1236.
25.
FunderD. C.SneedC. D. (1993). Behavioral manifestations of personality: An ecological approach to judgmental accuracy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 479-490.
26.
GebauerJ. E.NehrlichA. D.StahlbergD.SedikidesC.HackenschmidtA.SchickD.. . . ManderJ. (2018). Mind-body practices and the self: Yoga and meditation do not quiet the ego but instead boost self-enhancement. Psychological Science, 29, 1299-1308.
27.
GebauerJ. E.SedikidesC. (2018a). Agency and communion in grandiose narcissism. In AbeleA. E.WojciszkeB. (Eds.), Agency and communion in social psychology (pp. 90-102). London, England: Routledge.
28.
GebauerJ. E.SedikidesC. (2018b). Communal narcissism: Theoretical and empirical support. In HermannA. D.BrunellA.FosterJ. (Eds.), The Handbook of trait narcissism: Key advances, research methods, and controversies (pp. 69-78). New York, NY: Springer.
29.
GebauerJ. E.SedikidesC.SchradeA. (2017). Christian self-enhancement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113, 786-809.
30.
GebauerJ. E.SedikidesC.VerplankenB.MaioG. R. (2012). Communal narcissism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103, 854-878.
31.
GouldnerA. W. (1960). The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement. American Sociological Review, 25, 161-178.
32.
GrijalvaE.ZhangL. (2016). Narcissism and self-insight: A review and meta-analysis of narcissists’ self-enhancement tendencies. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 42, 3-24.
33.
HayesA. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
34.
HepperE. G.HartC. M.SedikidesC. (2014). Moving narcissus: Can narcissists be empathic?Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 40, 1079-1091.
35.
HillP. L.RobertsB. W. (2012). Narcissism, well-being, and observer-rated personality across the lifespan. Social Psychological & Personality Science, 3, 216-223.
36.
ImhoffR.KochA. (2017). How orthogonal are the Big Two of social perception? On the curvilinear relation between agency and communion. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 12, 122-137.
37.
JeffreysH. (1961). Theory of probability (3rd ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
38.
JordanC. H.GiacominM.KoppL. (2014). Let go of your (inflated) ego: Caring more about others reduces narcissistic tendencies. Social & Personality Psychology Compass, 8, 511-523.
39.
KennyD. A. (1994). Interpersonal perception: A social relations analysis. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
40.
KishtonJ. M.WidamanK. F. (1994). Unidimensional versus domain representative parceling of questionnaire items: Am empirical example. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 54, 754-765.
41.
KlarY.GiladiE. E. (1997). No one in my group can be below the group’s average: A robust positivity bias in favor of anonymous peers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 885-901.
42.
KrizanZ.HerlacheA. D. (2018). The Narcissism Spectrum Model: A synthetic view of narcissistic personality. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 22, 3-21.
43.
KüfnerA. C. P.NestlerS.BackM. D. (2013). The two pathways to being an (un-)popular narcissist. Journal of Personality, 81(2), 184–195. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6494.2012.00795.x
44.
KwiatkowskaM. M.JułkowskiT.RogozaR.Żemojtel-PiotrowskaM.FatfoutaR. (2019). Narcissism and trust: Differential impact of agentic, antagonistic, and communal narcissism. Personality and Individual Differences, 137, 139-143.
45.
LamkinJ.CliftonA.CampbellW. K.MillerJ. D. (2014). An examination of the perceptions of social network characteristics associated with grandiose and vulnerable narcissism. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 5, 137-145.
46.
LeckeltM.KüfnerA. C. P.NestlerS.BackM. D. (2015). Behavioral processes underlying the decline of narcissists’ popularity over time. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109, 856-871.
47.
LeisingD.ErbsJ.FritzU. (2010). The letter of recommendation effect in informant ratings of personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98, 668-682.
48.
LiN. P.BaileyJ. M.KenrickD. T.LinsenmeierJ. A. W. (2002). The necessities and luxuries of mate preferences: Testing the tradeoffs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 947-955.
49.
LittleT. D.CunninghamW. A.ShaharG.WidamanK. F. (2002). To parcel or not to parcel: Exploring the question, weighing the merits. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 151-173.
50.
McArdleJ. J. (2009). Latent variable modeling of differences and changes with longitudinal data. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 577-605.
51.
MorfC. C.RhodewaltF. (2001). Unraveling the paradoxes of narcissism: A dynamic self-regulatory processing model. Psychological Inquiry, 12, 177-196.
52.
MuthénL. K.MuthénB. O. (2012). Mplus user’s guide (7th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Author.
53.
NehrlichA. D.GebauerJ. E.SedikidesC.SchoelC. (in press). Agentic narcissism, communal narcissism, and prosociality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. doi:10.1037/pspp0000190
54.
NezlekJ. B. (2007). A multilevel framework for understanding relationships among traits, states, situations and behaviours. European Journal of Personality, 21, 789-810.
55.
Ovid. (1986). Metamorphoses (A. D. Melville, Trans.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. (Original work published 8 AD)
56.
PalmerC. A.RamseyM. A.MoreyJ. N.GentzlerA. L. (2016). How do people share their positive events? Individual differences in capitalizing, bragging, and mass-sharing. Journal of Individual Differences, 37, 250-259.
57.
ParkinsonB.SimonsG. (2009). Affecting others: Social appraisal and emotion contagion in everyday decision making. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 35, 1071-1084.
58.
PaulhusD. L. (1998). Interpersonal and intrapsychic adaptiveness of trait self-enhancement: A mixed blessing?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1197-1208.
59.
PaulhusD. L. (2001). Normal narcissism: Two minimalist accounts. Psychological Inquiry, 12, 228-230.
60.
PaulhusD. L.JohnO. P. (1998). Egoistic and moralistic biases in self-perception: The interplay of self-deceptive styles with basic traits and motives. Journal of Personality, 66, 1025-1060.
61.
PreacherK. J.ZhangZ.ZyphurM. J. (2011). Alternative methods for assessing mediation in multilevel data: The advantages of multilevel SEM. Structural Equation Modeling, 18, 161-182.
62.
RaskinR. N.HallC. S. (1979). A narcissistic personality inventory. Psychological Reports, 45, 590.
63.
RaskinR. N.NovacekJ.HoganR. (1991). Narcissism, self-esteem, and defensive self-enhancement. Journal of Personality, 59, 19-38.
64.
RaskinR. N.TerryH. (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.
65.
RentzschK.GrossJ. J. (2015). Who turns green with envy? Conceptual and empirical perspectives on dispositional envy. European Journal of Personality, 29, 530-547.
66.
RentzschK.Schröder-AbéM.SchützA. (2015). Envy mediates the relation between low academic self-esteem and hostile tendencies. Journal of Research in Personality, 58, 143-153.
67.
RentzschK.SchützA.Schröder-AbéM. (2011). Being labeled nerd: Factors that influence the social acceptance of high-achieving students. Journal of Experimental Education, 79, 143-168.
68.
RikettaM.ZieglerR. (2007). Self-ambivalence and reactions to success versus failure. European Journal of Social Psychology, 37, 547-560.
69.
SchönbrodtF. D.BackM. D.SchmukleS. C. (2012). TripleR: An R package for social relations analyses based on round-robin designs. Behavior Research Methods, 44, 455-470.
70.
SchönbrodtF. D.PeruginiM. (2013). At what sample size do correlations stabilize?Journal of Research in Personality, 47, 609-612.
71.
SchützA.MarcusB.SellinI. (2004). Die Messung von Narzissmus als Persönlichkeitskonstrukt: Psychometrische Eigenschaften einer Lang- und einer Kurzform des Deutschen NPI (Narcissistic Personality Inventory) [Measuring narcissism as a personality construct: Psychometric properties of a long and a short version of the German Narcissistic Personality Inventory]. Diagnostica, 50, 202-218.
72.
SearsD. O. (1983). The person-positivity bias. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 233-250.
73.
ShroutP. E.BolgerN. (2002). Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations. Psychological Methods, 7, 422-445.
74.
TrapnellP. D.PaulhusD. L. (2012). Agentic and communal values: Their scope and measurement. Journal of Personality Assessment, 94, 39-52.
75.
Van DammeC.DeschrijverE.Van GeertE.HoorensV. (2017). When praising yourself insults others: Self-superiority claims provoke aggression. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 43, 1008-1019.
76.
van OschY.ZeelenbergM.BreugelmansS. M.BrandtM. J. (2018). Show or hide pride? Selective inhibition of pride expressions as a function of relevance of achievement domain. Emotion. Advance online publication. doi:10.1037/emo0000437
77.
WallaceH. M. (2011). Narcissistic self-enhancement. In CampbellW. K.MillerJ. D. (Eds.), The handbook of narcissism and narcissistic personality disorder: Theoretical approaches, empirical findings, and treatments (pp. 309-318). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
78.
WallaceH. M.BaumeisterR. F. (2002). The performance of narcissists rises and falls with perceived opportunity for glory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 819-834.
79.
WallaceH. M.GrotzingerA.HowardT. J.ParkhillN. (2015). When people evaluate others, the level of others’ narcissism matters less to evaluators who are narcissistic. Social Psychological & Personality Science, 6, 805-813.
80.
WarnerR. M.KennyD. A.StotoM. (1979). A new round robin analysis of variance for social interaction data. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1742-1757.
81.
WhiteH. (1980). A heteroskedasticity-consistent covariance matrix estimator and a direct test for heteroskedasticity. Econometrica, 48, 817-838.
82.
WigginsJ. S.TrapnellP.PhillipsN. (1988). Psychometric and geometric characteristics of the Revised Interpersonal Adjective Scales (IAS–R). Multivariate Behavioral Research, 23, 517-530.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
