Albrecht C. P. Küfner

The Emotional Timeline of September 11, 2001

September 11 was a traumatic event, with thousands of deaths and enormous individual and collective consequences. In the aftermath of September 11, people experienced a marked increase in psychological distress (Cohn, Mehl, & Pennebaker, 2004; Schlenger et al., 2002), which triggered a number of value-laden cognitions and emotions (e.g., willingness to sacrifice civil liberties, out-group derogation, moral outrage) and ultimately led to consequential political and societal outcomes (Skitka, Bauman, & Mullen, 2004). However, the immediate emotional reactions on the day of the attacks have not been studied previously. How did the dynamic course of sadness, anxiety, or anger develop? What kind of specific events induced these negative emotions? In the study reported here, we investigated the timeline of naturally unfolding negative emotions in response to the September 11 terrorist attacks.

“Automatic or the People?” Anger on September 11, 2001, and Lessons Learned for the Analysis of Large Digital Data Sets

In a recent study, we used Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC; Pennebaker, Francis, & Booth, 2001) to conduct an automatic analysis of emotional words included in 422,502 messages sent to text pagers during September 11, 2001 (Back, Küfner, & Egloff, 2010). Our results showed that people (a) did not react primarily with sadness, (b) experienced a number of event-related outbursts of anxiety, and (c) steadily became angrier. Because the data contained many technical codes, we computed for each of 216 time blocks the percentage of sadness-, anxiety-, and anger-related words in the messages, by dividing the number of such words by the total number of words in the messages that were included in the LIWC dictionary. As Pury (2011) intelligibly shows, this control routine was clearly insufficient. In particular, we did not anticipate that emotionally irrelevant, automatically generated messages (i.e., messages that described a “critical” server problem) would be incorrectly classified by LIWC as anger related and at the same time show a nonrandom time course (i.e., a dramatic increase over time). Although this unexpected confound did not affect our findings for sadness or anxiety, it did distort our findings for anger. As did our original analysis, Pury’s analysis with the automatically generated messages removed showed a strong increase in anger after the first attack. However, this rise in anger did not continue throughout the day; thus, Pury found a substantially lower overall correlation between anger-related words and time than we found in our original analysis. What can be learned from this scientific exchange? In a nutshell, automated text analysis of large digital data sets can lead to unforeseen confounds. Therefore, careful control mechanisms need to be implemented for both the preparation and the analysis of data. In an analysis of the September 11 pager data, it is necessary to (a) eliminate automatically generated messages, retaining meaningful social messages, and (b) correctly determine the level of emotion in these social messages. In an extensive reanalysis of the time course of anger as reflected in the pager data, we tried to tackle these issues systematically (for details, see the Supplemental Material available online). As it turned out, there seemed to be no automatic way to unequivocally distinguish between automatic and social messages or to identify anger-related messages (both problems also apply to the procedures outlined by Pury, 2011).Therefore, in addition to automatic algorithms, we used human judgment to generate a final data set that contained only social messages (two student assistants and the three authors classified 201,347 messages as automatic or social) and to determine the level of anger expressed in each of the 37,606 social messages identified (three independent student assistants rated anger on a scale from 0, no anger, to 2, strong anger). Figure 1 depicts the timelines of (a) the mean percentage of automatically counted LIWC anger words and (b) the mean anger rating for the 37,606 social messages. The two analytic strategies revealed distinct, albeit positively correlated, timelines, r = .50, p < .001. The level of anger was greater after the attacks than before the attacks both in the LIWC analysis, t(214) = 3.14, p < .01, and in the anger-rating analysis, t(214) = 2.07, p < .05. As Pury’s (2011) analyses suggest, however, the timeline of anger was not as straightforward as indicated in our original analyses. Within the first 3 hr analyzed (up through 1 hr after the attacks), the LIWC analysis and the anger-rating analysis showed an increase in anger, r = .69, p < .001, and r = .42, p < .05, respectively, but the level of anger decreased to the baseline level by about 5 hr after the attacks (1:45 p.m.) and then increased again throughout the rest of the day (LIWC analysis: r = .23, p < .01; anger-rating analysis: r = .22, p < .05). The overall correlation between time and anger was nonsignificant, r = .01, in the LIWC analysis and

Narcissism and the Use of Personal Pronouns Revisited

[Correction Notice: An Erratum for this article was reported in Vol 109(3) of Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (see record 2015-37773-002). The authors erroneously reported the overall correlation, first stated in the abstract, between Narcissism and total first-person-singular use as .02 (.017) instead of .01 (.010). The misreporting of the overall correlation between Narcissism and total use of first-person singular does not change the results or interpretation in any way (i.e., the near-zero association between Narcissism and I-talk). The online version of this article has been corrected.] Among both laypersons and researchers, extensive use of first-person singular pronouns (i.e., I-talk) is considered a face-valid linguistic marker of narcissism. However, the assumed relation between narcissism and I-talk has yet to be subjected to a strong empirical test. Accordingly, we conducted a large-scale (N = 4,811), multisite (5 labs), multimeasure (5 narcissism measures) and dual-language (English and German) investigation to quantify how strongly narcissism is related to using more first-person singular pronouns across different theoretically relevant communication contexts (identity-related, personal, impersonal, private, public, and stream-of-consciousness tasks). Overall (r = .02, 95% CI [-.02, .04]) and within the sampled contexts, narcissism was unrelated to use of first-person singular pronouns (total, subjective, objective, and possessive). This consistent near-zero effect has important implications for making inferences about narcissism from pronoun use and prompts questions about why I-talk tends to be strongly perceived as an indicator of narcissism in the absence of an underlying actual association between the 2 variables. (PsycINFO Database Record

Puffed-up but shaky selves: State self-esteem level and variability in narcissists.

Different theoretical conceptualizations characterize grandiose narcissists by high, yet fragile self-esteem. Empirical evidence, however, has been inconsistent, particularly regarding the relationship between narcissism and self-esteem fragility (i.e., self-esteem variability). Here, we aim at unraveling this inconsistency by disentangling the effects of two theoretically distinct facets of narcissism (i.e., admiration and rivalry) on the two aspects of state self-esteem (i.e., level and variability). We report on data from a laboratory-based and two field-based studies (total N = 596) in realistic social contexts, capturing momentary, daily, and weekly fluctuations of state self-esteem. To estimate unbiased effects of narcissism on the level and variability of self-esteem within one model, we applied mixed-effects location scale models. Results of the three studies and their meta-analytical integration indicated that narcissism is positively linked to self-esteem level and variability. When distinguishing between admiration and rivalry, however, an important dissociation was identified: Admiration was related to high (and rather stable) levels of state self-esteem, whereas rivalry was related to (rather low and) fragile self-esteem. Analyses on underlying processes suggest that effects of rivalry on self-esteem variability are based on stronger decreases in self-esteem from one assessment to the next, particularly after a perceived lack of social inclusion. The revealed differentiated effects of admiration and rivalry explain why the analysis of narcissism as a unitary concept has led to the inconsistent past findings and provide deeper insights into the intrapersonal dynamics of grandiose narcissism governing state self-esteem.

Narcissism and Romantic Relationships: The Differential Impact of Narcissistic Admiration and Rivalry.

Narcissism is known to be related to romantic success in short-term contexts (dating, early stage relationships) but also to problems in long-term committed relationships. We propose that these diverging romantic outcomes of narcissism can be explained by differential associations with agentic versus antagonistic dimensions of grandiose narcissism: Narcissistic Admiration and Rivalry. Both dimensions serve the central narcissistic goal of gaining and maintaining a grandiose self-view, but do so by different processes: Admiration is characterized by the tendency to promote the positivity of one’s self-view by seeking social admiration (assertive self-enhancement). Rivalry is characterized by the tendency to protect oneself from a negative self-view by derogating others (antagonistic self-protection). Across 7 studies (total N = 3,560) using diverse measures and methodological approaches (self-, peer, and partner reports, as well as interpersonal perception measures in video-based studies, face-to-face laboratory encounters, and online surveys), we show that the short-term romantic appeal associated with narcissism is primarily attributable to the dimension of Admiration, whereas the long-term romantic problems associated with narcissism are primarily attributable to the dimension of Rivalry. These results highlight the utility of a 2-dimensional reconceptualization of grandiose narcissism for explaining its heterogeneous romantic outcomes. The findings further underscore the idea that different facets of personality traits might impact different aspects of romantic relationship quality, depending on the stage of the relationship. Such a more nuanced view increases the predictive validity of personality traits in social relationship research.

Expanding the Nomological Net of the Pathological Narcissism Inventory German Validation and Extension in a Clinical Inpatient Sample

The Pathological Narcissism Inventory (PNI) is a multidimensional measure for assessing grandiose and vulnerable features in narcissistic pathology. The aim of the present research was to construct and validate a German translation of the PNI and to provide further information on the PNI’s nomological net. Findings from a first study confirm the psychometric soundness of the PNI and replicate its seven-factor first-order structure. A second-order structure was also supported but with several equivalent models. A second study investigating associations with a broad range of measures (DSM Axis I and II constructs, emotions, personality traits, interpersonal and dysfunctional behaviors, and well-being) supported the concurrent validity of the PNI. Discriminant validity with the Narcissistic Personality Inventory was also shown. Finally, in a third study an extension in a clinical inpatient sample provided further evidence that the PNI is a useful tool to assess the more pathological end of narcissism.

Validation of the Narcissistic Admiration and Rivalry Questionnaire Short Scale (NARQ-S) in convenience and representative samples

Due to increased empirical interest in narcissism across the social sciences, there is a need for inventories that can be administered quickly while also reliably measuring both the agentic and antagonistic aspects of grandiose narcissism. In this study, we sought to validate the factor structure, provide representative descriptive data and reliability estimates, assess the reliability across the trait spectrum, and examine the nomological network of the short version of the Narcissistic Admiration and Rivalry Questionnaire (NARQ-S; Back et al., 2013). We used data from a large convenience sample (total N = 11,937) as well as data from a large representative sample (total N = 4,433) that included responses to other narcissism measures as well as related constructs, including the other Dark Triad traits, Big Five personality traits, and self-esteem. Confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory were used to validate the factor structure and estimate the reliability across the latent trait spectrum, respectively. Results suggest that the NARQ-S shows a robust factor structure and is a reliable and valid short measure of the agentic and antagonistic aspects of grandiose narcissism. We also discuss future directions and applications of the NARQ-S as a short and comprehensive measure of grandiose narcissism.

Who Attains Status? Similarities and Differences Across Social Contexts

Informal groups form hierarchies and allocate social status in order to coordinate action and make collective decisions. Although researchers have identified characteristics of people who tend to get status, the extent to which these characteristics are context-dependent is unclear. In two studies, participants from the United States (N = 157) and Germany (N = 95) engaged in affiliative or competitive group interactions. We investigated whether the nature of the group’s task moderated the relationship between status attainment and personality. As in previous research, we found that extraversion predicted status in both competitive and affiliative contexts. In contrast, agreeableness was only associated with status in affiliative contexts. These findings underscore the importance of examining the relationship between personality and social status in context.

Early Impressions of Grandiose Narcissists: A Dual-Pathway Perspective

Getting-to-know situations are complex social contexts both for narcissists (who love to present themselves but are not inherently interested in others) and their social partners (who are fascinated but also turned off by narcissists). In this chapter, we give an empirical and conceptual overview on the early impressions grandiose narcissists make. We first summarize the existing empirical findings on the association between narcissism and personality impressions as well as liking at zero- and short-term acquaintance. This research indicates that narcissists tend to impress others despite the fact that others are able to accurately detect their narcissistic characteristics. We then present a dual-pathway framework that organizes these findings and specifies the moderating conditions of more or less positive first impressions of narcissists. The agentic pathway includes the tendency to behave dominant and expressive, which leads to being seen as assertive, which is evaluated positively and, thus, fosters popularity. The antagonistic pathway includes arrogant and combative behavior, which leads to being seen as aggressive, which is evaluated negatively and, thus, fosters unpopularity. Depending on which of the two pathways is triggered more in a given situation, at a given acquaintance level, and by a given facet of narcissism, a more or less positive/negative association between narcissism and popularity can result. Initial empirical investigations of unfolding laboratory group interactions underline the validity and utility of the dual-pathway perspective. We close with a number of suggestions for future research that applies the dual-pathway perspective across samples, contexts, and designs.