While I like to keep the main focus of my Beautiful Minds blog on actual beautiful minds, I do like to occasionally talk about not-so-beautiful minds. In my opinion, covering the full spectrum of human thought and behavior can enrich exceptional thinking that contributes positively to society.

Today’s focus is on a particular type of not-so-beautiful mind: the narcissistic mind. Much has been said about narcissists on Psychology Today blogs, and there has been a lot of important empirical work on the subject. But a very recent set of studies published in Personality and Social Psychology (the leading journal for social psychologists) by Mitja de Buck and colleagues really caught my attention because I found the results quite disturbing. (Before I go any further, I must thank my dear friend and colleague Louisa Egan for bringing the study to my attention.)

Narcissism involves unusually high levels of self-esteem, grandiosity, self-focus, and self-importance. Emmons (1984) distinguishes four aspects of narcissism: leadership/authority (those who enjoy being leaders and being seen as an authority), self-absorption/self-admiration (those who admire their physical appearance and personality), superiority/arrogance (those who overestimate their abilities), and exploitativeness/entitlement (those who enjoy manipulating and exploiting others and expect favors from others). Note that these four aspects are only moderately correlated with each other and there is a lot of variation among narcissists in terms of how they express their narcissism.

Narcissists do not get along well with others, and this becomes more apparent in the long run. Narcissists do not tend to succeed in long-term relationships, and they suffer from all sorts of interpersonal and personal problems. Paulhus (1998) found that after the seventh session of a student work group that lasted approximately two and a half hours, narcissists were rated by other members of the group as less agreeable, less accommodating, less warm, more hostile, and more arrogant.

But here’s the interesting (or ironic) point. In the same study, Paulhus found that after the first meeting, narcissists were rated as more agreeable, conscientious, open, competent, entertaining, and adaptable by other group members. What a contrast to what group members thought of the same narcissistic individuals on day seven!

What is going on here? What makes narcissists so attractive, at least initially, that explains their popularity? What signals do they give off? What aspects of narcissists are most strongly associated with their popularity?

In a series of four very clever studies, Mitja de Buck and colleagues sought to determine why narcissists are popular at “no-knowledge.” They suggest that narcissists are more popular at first sight because of the signals they produce, which people on first acquaintance can use to “analyze” and form an impression of that person without any other information about them.

They investigated four signals that they hypothesized, based on previous research (Berscheid & Reis, 1998), to be related to narcissists’ popularity at first sight and why people often describe narcissists as having a “charismatic air”: attractiveness, competence, personal warmth, and humor. In the words of the researcher himself:

“We hypothesize that narcissism predicts all four relevant domains—attractiveness, from their flashy, elegant clothing; personal warmth, from their charming glances at strangers; competence, from their self-confident demeanor; and humor, from their clever verbal expressions. As a result, they should enjoy greater initial popularity than nonnarcissists (p. 134).”

Their first study involved 73 first-year psychology students who had never met each other before. At the beginning of an introduction session, each student was randomly assigned a seat number. Then, one by one, the students took turns going to a designated spot on the floor and introducing themselves, after which the other new student rated how much they liked the person and how much they wanted to get to know him or her. Each introduction was videotaped, and four groups of independent observers rated various physical cues, nonverbal physical cues, nonverbal facial cues, and verbal cues of the speaker that the researchers hypothesized were related to attraction. After all students had given their introductions and the session was over, students were given a number of questionnaires to complete at home, including a self-report questionnaire on narcissism.

What did they find? As expected, narcissists were more likable at first sight. As expected, narcissists also exhibited more elegant and attractive appearances, more attractive facial expressions, more confident body movements, and more playful verbal expressions.

But what they reported next really shocked me. Not all aspects of narcissism were equally predictive of popularity. In fact, the leadership/authority aspect was completely unrelated to first impressions. The researchers found that the aspect that most strongly predicted popularity was the exploitative/entitlement aspect. Additionally, while all aspects of narcissism were significantly correlated with all of the cues that observers rated, the exploitative/entitlement aspect was more consistent and stronger with the cues than any of the other aspects!

In three more studies, the researchers found striking consistency in this pattern of results. Narcissists who had a sense of entitlement and a tendency to exploit others were more popular at first glance among uninvolved observers who had only watched a video of the introduction and thus had been exposed to the full information about the target’s behaviors but did not have to actually introduce themselves (Study 2), observers who had only physical and nonverbal information about the speaker (No Voice condition, Study 3), and observers who had only physical information (Body Only condition, Study 4).

It is also interesting that in all of these conditions, all the available cues were all that was necessary to produce the pattern. For example, in the Body Only condition (Study 4), flashy and elegant clothing was all that was needed to show an association between the exploitative/entitled facet of narcissism and popularity. In other words, when the only cue was fancy clothing, fancy clothing predicted popularity, and those who wore this style of clothing tended to score higher on the exploitative/entitled facet of narcissism.

Paradoxes of Narcissism

I find these results puzzling, but more on that in a second. As the researchers note, these findings help resolve some of the paradoxes in this area (see Emmons, 1984). One paradox concerns the adaptive value of narcissism. How can the most maladaptive aspect (exploitation/entitlement) of an already maladaptive personality trait (narcissism) also be the most effective trait for liking others?

The researchers speculate that

“the positive social feedback that narcissists elicit in others at first glance may play an important role in maintaining their problematic interpersonal behavior and dysfunctional interpersonal coping mechanisms in the long run.”

So the positive feedback that narcissists receive upon first acquaintance confirms their superiority and reinforces their search for similar situations that allow them to elicit similar responses. I think Buck and colleagues are right when they say that “liking others is like a drug for narcissists.” The problem for narcissists is that their addiction to admiration makes them more vulnerable to addiction.

“It prevents them from forming relationships or from committing to the social contexts in which they are embedded for a longer period of time… The positive interpersonal feedback that narcissists evoke when they are not acquaintances is an important part of the vicious interpersonal cycle that narcissists experience.”

But what about the narcissist who is not very interested in maintaining deep, meaningful relationships? Well, since most narcissists are not interested in the long term (they tend to be more impulsive anyway), their desire to exploit others and their sense of entitlement are adaptive for them in the short term, even if it harms others. In fact, Back and colleagues show that narcissists who score high on the exploitative/entitlement subscale are more popular when they are not acquaintances. As the researchers note, looking at the different aspects of narcissism as well as the different circumstances in which these aspects can emerge (short-term versus long-term) can be combined to more fully understand the social consequences of narcissism.

Another paradox, which Emmons (1984) called the paradox of narcissism, is the tendency of narcissists to devalue others at the same time that they need others to admire them. As Murph and Rodwalt (2001) put it, narcissists

“crave and seek self-affirmation, and destroy the relationships on which they depend.”

Buck and colleagues note that narcissists can “resolve” the paradox by relying solely on positive feedback from those they have no knowledge of and should not value.

“Because others truly like narcissists at first sight, they contribute to the maintenance of the narcissist’s most ambivalent mindset.”

In light of this, I believe that blogging is a great, if not the best, arena for narcissists. Narcissistic bloggers can receive a steady stream of admiration from complete strangers in the form of comments after each post. The blogger does not have to appreciate the commenter or form a relationship with the commenter. In fact, the commenter helps feed the narcissistic blogger’s addiction to instant admiration. Overly critical comments can easily be deleted.

Another paradox lies in the developmental trajectory of narcissism, particularly the role of parental responses. Which type of parent contributes to a narcissistic child, a parent who overvalues ​​the child (as some researchers have speculated) or a parent who undervalues ​​the child (as others have speculated)? As Buck and colleagues have noted, a combination of overvaluation and undervaluation can contribute to narcissism. The overvaluation/undervaluation combination was proposed by Freud and has received some recent empirical support (Otway & Vignoles, 2006). According to Back et al.,

“The presence of both excessive but indiscriminate parental praise, as well as persistent implicit parental messages of coldness and rejection, rather than warmth and acceptance, ‘may help explain the paradoxical combination of grandiosity and vulnerability that characterizes adult narcissists’ (Otway & Vignoles, 2006, p. 113).”

A fourth paradox noted by Back and colleagues that is also related to the others is the narcissist’s lack of insight. Back and colleagues suggest that it is these short-term positive feedbacks that contribute to the narcissist’s lack of self-criticism because he or she does not see the need for it.

“Because of their persistent selfishness, they do not receive long-term emotional support, and they are unable to develop intimate relationships. As a result, their self remains vulnerable, making instant admiration even more necessary, etc. In seeking self-insight into narcissists and in treating it, the focus should be on both the narcissists’ interpersonal mechanisms and the social reactions that narcissists actually receive.”

My Recommendation

I return to the fact that I find the results of Buck and his colleague’s study very puzzling. Why do some people continue to fall for narcissists? What can we all do to protect ourselves from being deceived? These are not simple questions, and the JPSP study makes things even more complicated. Here’s why.

We tend to be attracted to people who have the four qualities (flashy and elegant dress, charming facial expression, confident body movements, and funny verbal expression) that narcissists tend to have (initially). To complicate matters, the JPSP study suggests that if someone has all four of these traits on first encounter, they are likely a narcissist. And not just any kind of narcissist, but the worst kind of narcissist—the kind who enjoys exploiting others while feeling entitled to do so.

So what are we supposed to do, do we intentionally choose those who exhibit traits that are the opposite of what is generally considered attractive?

Yes, that is exactly what I am suggesting!

My message to all those who are tired of being scammed by narcissists, assholes, chauvinists, etc. is to change the scenario entirely. Girls, the next time you go to a club, approach every guy you see who looks shy and awkward and stands in the corner of the dance floor and drinks his drink way too fast. Give a chance to the guy who approaches you and doesn’t seem smooth at all but seems genuinely interested in you. Give a chance to those who don’t initially exhibit all four of the highly attractive traits and see if after talking to them for a while and giving them a chance to open up a bit, they naturally begin to exhibit the traits you are looking for in a potential partner/girlfriend. If they are not really attractive after getting to know them, you may want to look elsewhere, but give them a chance. (Okay, I admit that what I’m advocating here sounds like a collective revenge on the genius scheme. Well, why not? It’s my blog and I can talk if I want!)

I’m being sarcastic here, but a lot of people are being so hard on themselves because they fall for the jerk over and over again (yes, I’m talking to you, Jane Kim: don’t be so hard on yourself, you’re a great person!). The JPSP study suggests that there’s a clear rationale for why you fall for these types of people—they tend to have attractive qualities. They also tend to be jerkish. Sure, people want to end up with someone who has truly attractive qualities, but it might be more reasonable to evaluate the person in multiple contexts first before getting too involved.

This is the most sensible advice I can think of at this point. I’m totally open to suggestions. The appeal of the bad boy, the appeal of the narcissist, the appeal of the jerk, etc. are all recurring themes across humanity, and I’m glad to see some real empirical research finally shedding light on these issues.