While the objective level of intelligence is not associated with narcissism, relations to self-assessed intelligence (SAI) have been repeatedly reported. Existing research suggests that different facets of narcissism may have different associations with SAI. In the current daily diary study (N = 176; N = 3975 total observations), we employed dynamic structural equation modeling to examine the relationships between facets of trait and state narcissism (i.e., agentic, antagonistic, and neurotic) and the level, variability, and instability of SAI assessed over 28 consecutive days. Both trait and state narcissism were consistently related to SAI: agentic narcissism showed a positive relationship, whereas antagonistic and neurotic narcissism showed negative relationships with SAI. Trait agentic and state antagonistic narcissism predicted greater variability of SAI scores throughout the study, while neither trait nor state narcissism predicted the instability of SAI. Finally, we found that experiencing increased agentic narcissism on one day, predicted perceiving oneself as more intelligent on the next day, but feeling smarter did not predict feeling narcissistic over time. Moreover, we demonstrated that differentiating between narcissism facets yielded more theoretically accurate results compared to distinguishing between grandiose and vulnerable narcissism.
AbeleA. E.WojciszkeB. (2014). Communal and agentic content in social cognition: A dual perspective model. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 50(1), 195–255. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-800284-1.00004-7
2.
AckermanR. A.DonnellanM. B.WrightA. G. C. (2019). Current conceptualizations of narcissism. Current Opinion in Psychiatry, 32(1), 32–37. https://doi.org/10.1097/YCO/0000000000000463
AugustineA. A.LarsenR. J. (2012). Is a trait really the mean of states? Similarities and differences between traditional and aggregate assessments of personality. Journal of Individual Differences, 33(3), 131–137. https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-0001/a000083
5.
AustinE. J.DearyI. J.WhitemanM. C.FowkesF. G. R.PedersenN.RabittP.BentN.McInnesL. (2002). Relationships between ability and personality: Does intelligence contribute positively to personal and social adjustment?Personality and Individual Differences, 32(8), 1391–1411. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(01)00129-5
6.
BackM. D. (2018). The narcissistic admiration and rivalry concept. In HermannA. D.BrunnelA. B.FosterJ. D. (Eds.), Handbook of trait narcissism. Key advances, research methods, and controversies (pp. 57–67). Berlin, Germany: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92171-6_6
7.
BackM. D.KüfnerA. C.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(6), 1013–1037. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034431
8.
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(1), 132–145. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016338
9.
BairdB. M.LeK.LucasR. E. (2006). On the nature of intraindividual personality variability: Reliability, validity, and associations with well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(3), 512–527. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.90.3.512
10.
Blasco-BelledA.RogozaR.AlsinetC. (2022). Vulnerable narcissism is related to the fear of being laughed at and to the joy of laughing at others. Personality and Individual Differences, 190(4), 111536. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2022.111536
11.
BovairdJ.EmbretsonS. (2008). Modern measurement in the social sciences. In The Sage handbook of social research methods (pp. 268–289). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446212165
12.
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(4), 638–656. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2007.09.006
13.
Chamorro-PremuzicT.FurnhamA. (2005). Personality and intellectual competence. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
CondonD. M.RevelleW. (2014). The international cognitive ability resource: Development and initial validation of a public-domain measure. Intelligence, 43(1), 52–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2014.01.004
16.
CostantiniG.PeruginiM. (2018). A framework for testing causality in personality research. European Journal of Personality, 32(4), 254–268. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2150
17.
CroweM. L.LynamD. R.CampbellW. K.MillerJ. D. (2019). Exploring the structure of narcissism: Towards an integrated solution. Journal of Personality, 87(6), 1151–1169. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12464
18.
CurranP. J.BauerD. J. (2011). The disaggregation of within-person and between-person effects in longitudinal models of change. Annual Review of Psychology, 62(1), 583–619. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.100356
Di PierroR.AmelioS.MaccaM.MadedduF.Di SarnoM. (2022). What if I feel rejected? Borderline personality, pathological narcissism, and social rejection in daily life. Journal of Personality Disorders, 36(5), 559–582. https://doi.org/10.1521/pedi.2022.36.5.559
22.
Di PierroR.FantiE.GallucciM.MadedduF.PretiE. (2023). Narcissus going public: Pathological narcissism and reactions to public vs. private exposure in ego-relevant events. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 45(1), 136–149. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-022-09998-0
23.
Di SarnoM.CostantiniG.RichetinJ.PretiE.PeruginiM. (2023). Why are you (un)conscientious? The dynamic interplay of goals, states, and traits in everyday life. Journal of Personality, 91(4), 977–991. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12701
24.
Di SarnoM.ZimmermannJ.MadedduF.CasiniE.Di PierroR. (2020). Shame behind the corner? A daily diary investigation of pathological narcissism. Journal of Research in Personality, 85(1), 103924. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2020.103924
25.
DufnerM.DenissenJ. J. A.van ZalkM.MatthesB.MeeusW. H. J.van AkenM. A. G.SedikidesC. (2012). Positive intelligence illusions: on the relation between intellectual self-enhancement and psychological adjustment. Journal of Personality, 80(3), 537–571. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2011.00742.x
26.
DworakE. M.RevelleW.DoeblerP.CondonD. M. (2021). Using the International Cognitive Ability Resource as an open source tool to explore individual differences in cognitive ability. Personality and Individual Differences, 169(1), 109906. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.109906
27.
EdershileE. A.WoodsW. C.SharpeB. M.CroweM. L.MillerJ. D.WrightA. G. (2019). A day in the life of Narcissus: Measuring narcissistic grandiosity and vulnerability in daily life. Psychological Assessment, 31(7), 913–924. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000717
28.
EdershileE. A.WrightA. G. (2021). Fluctuations in grandiose and vulnerable narcissistic states: A momentary perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 120(5), 1386–1414. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000370
29.
FleesonW. (2001). Toward a structure- and process-integrated view of personality: Traits as density distributions of states. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80(6), 1011–1027. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.80.6.1011
30.
FleesonW.MalanosA. B.AchilleN. M. (2002). An intraindividual process approach to the relationship between extraversion and positive affect: Is acting extraverted as “good” as being extraverted?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(6), 1409–1422. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.83.6.1409
31.
FreundP. A.KastenN. (2012). How smart do you think you are? A meta-analysis on the validity of self-estimates of cognitive ability. Psychological Bulletin, 138(2), 296–321. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026556
32.
GabrielM. T.CritelliJ. W.EeJ. S. (1994). Narcissistic illusions in self-evaluations of intelligence and attractiveness. Journal of Personality, 62(1), 143–155. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1994.tb00798.x
33.
GeukesK.NestlerS.HuttemanR.DufnerM.KüfnerA. C. P.EgloffB.DenissenJ. J. A.BackM. D. (2017). Puffed-up but shaky selves: State self-esteem level and variability in narcissists. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 112(5), 769–786. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000093
34.
GiacominM.JordanC. H. (2018). State narcissism. In HermannA. D.BrunnellA. B.FosterJ. D. (Eds.), Handbook of trait narcissism: Key advances, research methods, and controversies (pp. 105–111). Berlin, Germany: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92171-6_11
35.
GignacG. E. (2015). Raven’s is not a pure measure of general intelligence: Implications for g factor theory and the brief measurement of g. Intelligence, 52(1), 71–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2015.07.006
36.
GignacG. E.ZajenkowskiM. (2021). The frustrated narcissist: Intelligence may reduce the chances of developing narcissistic rivalry. Intelligence, 87(1), 101556. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2021.101556
37.
GoldB.KuhnJ. T. (2017). A longitudinal study on the stability of self-estimated intelligence and its relationship to personality traits. Personality and Individual Differences, 106(1), 292–297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.10.052
38.
GottfredsonL. S. (1997). Mainstream science on intelligence: An editorial with 52 signatories, history and bibliography. Intelligence, 24(1), 13–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0160-2896(97)90011-8
39.
GrapsasE.BrummelmanE.BackM. D.DenissenJ. J. A. (2020). The “why” and “how” of narcissism.” A process model of narcissistic status pursuit. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 15(1), 150–172. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691619873350
40.
GrijalvaE.ZhangL. (2016). Narcissism and self-insight: A review and meta-analysis of narcissists’ self-enhancement tendencies. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 42(1), 3–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167215611636
41.
HowardM. C.CogswellJ. (2018). The “other” relationships of self-assessed intelligence: A meta-analysis. Journal of Research in Personality, 77(2), 31–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2018.09.006
42.
JaukE.NeubauerA. C.MairuntereggerT.PempS.SieberK. P.RauthmannJ. F. (2016). How alluring are dark personalities? The dark triad and attractiveness in speed dating. European Journal of Personality, 30(2), 125–138. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2040
43.
JaukE.UlbrichL.JorschickP.HöflerM.KaufmanS. B.KanskeP. (2022). The nonlinear association between grandiose and vulnerable narcissism: An individual data meta-analysis. Journal of Personality, 90(5), 703–726. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12692
44.
JaukE.WeigleE.LehmannK.BenedekM.NeubauerA. C. (2017). The relationship between grandiose and vulnerable (hypersensitive) narcissism. Frontiers in Psychology, 8(1), 1600. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01600
45.
JorgensenT. D.PornprasertmanitS.SchoemannA. M.RosseelY. (2021). semTools: Useful tools for structural equation modeling. R package version 0.5-5. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=semTools
46.
KandlerC.RauthmannJ. F. (2021). Conceptualizing and studying characteristics, units, and fits of persons and environments: A coherent synthesis. European Journal of Personality, 35(3), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/08902070211048728
47.
KrizanZ. (2018). The narcissism spectrum model: A spectrum perspective on narcissistic personality. In HermannA. D.BrunnelA. B.FosterJ. D. (Eds.), Handbook of trait narcissism. Key advances, research methods, and controversies (pp. 15–25). Berlin, Germany: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92171-6_2
48.
KrizanZ.HerlacheA. D. (2018). The narcissism spectrum model: A synthetic view of narcissistic personality. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 22(1), 3–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868316685018
49.
LeniarskaM.ZajenkowskiM.RogozaR.FatfoutaR. (2023). Do communal narcissists care about intelligence? Associations with high self-assessed and low objective intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 207(6), 112153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2023.112153
50.
LorahJ. (2018). Effect size measures for multilevel models: Definition, interpretation, and TIMSS example. Large-cale Assessments in Education, 6(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40536-018-0061-2
51.
MartinezM. E. (2013). Future bright: A transforming vision of human intelligence. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
52.
McNeishD. (2021). Specifying location-scale models for heterogeneous variances as multilevel SEMs. Organizational Research Methods, 24, 630–653. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428120913083
53.
McNeishD.HamakerE. L. (2020). A primer on two-level dynamic structural equation models for intensive longitudinal data in Mplus. Psychological Methods, 25(5), 610–635. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000250
54.
MielkeI.HumbergS.LeckeltM.GeukesK.BackM. D. (2021). Do narcissists self-enhance? Disentangling the associations between narcissism and positive versus enhanced self-views across aspects of narcissism, content domains, and comparison criteria. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 12(5), 580–592. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550620930543
55.
MillerJ. D.BackM. D.LynamD. R.WrightA. G. C. (2021). Narcissism today: What we know and what we need to learn. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 30(6), 519–525. https://doi.org/10.1177/09637214211044109
56.
MillerJ. D.CampbellW. K. (2008). Comparing clinical and social-personality conceptualizations of narcissism. Journal of Personality, 76(3), 449–476. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2008.00492.x
57.
MillerJ. D.CampbellW. K. (2010). The case for using research on trait narcissism as a building block for understanding narcissistic personality disorder. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 1(3), 180–191. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018229
MillerJ. D.LynamD. R.McCainJ. L.FewL. R.CregoC.WidigerT. A.CampbellW. K. (2016). Thinking structurally about narcissism: An examination of the Five-Factor Narcissism Inventory and its components. Journal of Personality Disorders, 30(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1521/pedi_2015_29_177
60.
MillerJ. D.LynamD. R.VizeC.CroweM.SleepC.Maples-KellerJ.FewL. R.CampbellW. K. (2017b). Vulnerable narcissism is (mostly) a disorder of neuroticism. Journal of Personality. 86(2), 186–199.https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12303
61.
MooreJ. W.MiddletonD.HaggardP.FletcherP. C. (2012). Exploring implicit and explicit aspects of sense of agency. Consciousness and Cognition, 21(4), 1748–1753. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2012.10.005
62.
MuthénL. K.MuthénB. O. (2017). Mplus User’s Guide. (Eighth Edition). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
63.
NestlerS. (2022). An extension of the mixed-effects growth model that considers between-person differences in the within-subject variance and the autocorrelation. Statistics in Medicine, 41(3), 471–482. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.9280
64.
NezlekJ. B. (2017). A practical guide to understanding reliability in studies of within-person variability. Journal of Research in Personality, 69(1), 149–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2016.06.020
65.
Packer WestM.MillerJ. D.WeissB.SpencerC. C.CroweM. L.CampbellW. K.LynamD. R. (2021). Development and validation of the super-short form of the five-factor narcissism inventory (FFNI-SSF). Personality and Individual Differences, 177(4), 110825. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2021.110825
66.
PaulhusD. L. (1998). Interpersonal and intrapsychic adaptiveness of trait self-enhancement: A mixed blessing?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(5), 1197–1208. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.74.5.1197
67.
PaulhusD. L.LysyD. C.YikM. S. (1998). Self-report measures of intelligence: Are they useful as proxy IQ tests?Journal of Personality, 66(4), 525–554. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6494.00023
68.
RavenJ. (2000). The Raven's progressive matrices: Change and stability over culture and time. Cognitive Psychology, 41(1), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.1006/cogp.1999.0735
69.
R Core Team. (2021). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/
70.
RogozaR.CieciuchJ.StrusW. (2022a). Narcissistic isolation and enmity concept: Disentangling the blue and dark face of vulnerable narcissism. Journal of Research in Personality, 96(3), 104167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2021.104167
71.
RogozaR.CieciuchJ.StrusW.BaranT. (2019). Seeking a common framework for research on narcissism: An attempt to integrate the different faces of narcissism within the Circumplex of Personality Metatraits. European Journal of Personality, 33(4), 436–455. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2206
72.
RogozaR.CieciuchJ.StrusW.KłosowskiM. (2021). Investigating the structure of the polish five factor narcissism inventory: Support for the three-factor model of narcissism. Psychological Assessment, 33(3), 267–272. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000901
73.
RogozaR.CroweM. L.JamisonL.CieciuchJ.StrusW. (2022b). Support for the three-factor model of narcissism and its personality underpinnings through the lens of the network psychometrics. Psychological Assessment, 34(9), 880–890. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0001149
74.
RogozaR.Żemojtel-PiotrowskaM.KwiatkowskaM. M.KwiatkowskaK. (2018). The bright, the dark, and the blue face of narcissism: The spectrum of narcissism in its relations to the metatraits of personality, self-esteem, and nomological network of shyness, loneliness and empathy. Frontiers in Psychology, 9(1), 343. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00343
75.
RonningstamE. (2016). Pathological narcissism and narcissistic personality disorder: Recent research and clinical implications. Current Behavioral Neuroscience Reports, 3(1), 34–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40473-016-0060-y
76.
RosseelY. (2012). lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1–36. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i02
77.
SchmidtF. L.HunterJ. (2004). General mental ability in the world of work: Occupational attainment and job performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(1), 162–173. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.86.1.162
78.
SchultzbergM.MuthénB. (2017). Number of subjects and time points needed for multilevel tim-series analysis: A simulation study of dynamic structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling, 25(1), 495–515. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2017.1392862
79.
ShermanE. D.MillerJ. D.FewL. R.CampbellW. K.WidigerT. A.CregoC.LynamD. R. (2015). Development of a short form of the five-factor narcissism inventory: The FFNI-SF. Psychological Assessment, 27(3), 1110–1116. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000100
SilmG.PedasteM.TähtK. (2020). The relationship between performance and test-taking effort when measured with self-report or time-based instruments: A meta-analytic review. Educational Research Review, 31(2), 100335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2020.100335
82.
SleepC. E.LynamD. R.HyattC. S.MillerJ. D. (2017). Perils of partialing redux: The case of the Dark Triad. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 126(7), 939–950. https://doi.org/10.1037/abn0000278
83.
SternbergR. J.ConwayB. E.KetronJ. L.BernsteinM. (1981). People's conceptions of intelligence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41(1), 37–55. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.41.1.37
84.
SwamiV. (2012). An examination of the temporal stability of self-assessed intelligence. Individual Differences Research, 10(4), 176–181.
85.
SyzmanowiczA.FurnhamA. (2011). Gender differences in self-estimates of general, mathematical, spatial and verbal intelligence: Four meta-analyses. Learning and Individual Differences, 21(5), 493–504. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2011.07.001
86.
The International Cognitive Ability Resource Team. (2014). The International Cognitive Ability Resource. The International Cognitive Ability Resource Team. https://icar-project.com/
87.
WangL. P.MaxwellS. E. (2015). On disaggregating between-person and within-person effects with longitudinal data using multilevel models. Psychological Methods, 20(1), 63–83. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000030
88.
WardM. K.MeadeA. W. (2023). Dealing with careless responding in survey data: Prevention, identification, and recommended best practices. Annual Review of Psychology, 74(1), 577–596. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-040422-045007
89.
WetzelE.LeckeltM.GerlachT. M.BackM. D. (2016). Distinguishing subgroups of narcissists with latent class analysis. European Journal of Personality, 30(4), 374–389. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2062
WrightA. G. C.EdershileE. (2018). Issues resolved and unresolved in pathological narcissism. Current Opinion in Psychology, 21(1), 74–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.10.001
92.
YoungS. R.KeithT. Z. (2020). An examination of the convergent validity of the ICAR16 and WAIS-IV. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 38(8), 1052–1059. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282920943455
93.
ZagorskyJ. L. (2007). Do you have to be smart to be rich? The impact of IQ on wealth, income and financial distress. Intelligence, 35(5), 489–501. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2007.02.003
94.
ZajenkowskiM.CzarnaA. Z. (2015). What makes narcissists unhappy? Subjectively assessed intelligence moderates the relationship between narcissism and psychological well-being. Personality and Individual Differences, 77(3), 50–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.12.045
95.
ZajenkowskiM.CzarnaA. Z.SzymaniakK.DufnerM. (2020a). What do highly narcissistic people think and feel about (their) intelligence?Journal of Personality, 88(4), 703–718. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12520
96.
ZajenkowskiM.DufnerM. (2020). Why do narcissists care so much about intelligence?Current Directions in Psychological Science, 29(3), 261–266. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0963721420917152
97.
ZajenkowskiM.GignacG. E. (2021). Telling people they are intelligent correlates with the feeling of narcissistic uniqueness: The influence of IQ feedback on temporary state narcissism. Intelligence, 89(1), 101595. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2021.101595
98.
ZajenkowskiM.LeniarskaM.JonasonP. K. (2020b). Look how smart I am!. Only narcissistic admiration is associated with inflated reports of intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 165, 110158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.110158
99.
ZajenkowskiM.SedikidesC.GignacG. E.GórniakJ.MaciantowiczO. (2022). Induced narcissism increases self-assessed intelligence: Implications for academic goal-pursuit, expected academic achievement, and psychological well-being. Journal of Research in Personality, 101(6), 104311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2022.104311
