COMMENTARIES In Defense of Narcissistic Personality Traits

Miller and Campbell (pp. 180–191, this issue) provide an informative discussion of the importance of considering narcissistic personality trait research when attempting to understand narcissistic personality disorder. Their arguments might seem so straightforward and compelling that they are hardly worth presenting. However, it does seem that this considerable body of literature is at times neglected, if not ignored. Although authors of some review papers and chapters on narcissistic personality disorder do represent well the narcissistic personality trait research (e.g., Pincus & Lukowitsky, in press; Ronningstam, 2005), others have focused less on this research (e.g., Levy, Reynoso, Wasserman, & Clarkin, 2007; Millon et al., 1996; Millon, Grossman, Millon, Meagher, & Ramnath, 2004). The lack of recognition of this literature can have dire complications. Narcissistic personality disorder has been proposed for deletion from the American Psychiatric Association’s (APA) diagnostic manual, whereas the avoidant and obsessive– compulsive personality disorders would be retained (Skodol, 2009; Skodol & Bender, 2009). One must presume that this proposal is based largely on the relative amount of empirical support (Regier, Narrow, Kuhl, & Kupfer, 2009), but this is difficult to understand if the review of the literature concerning narcissistic personality disorder included the many empirical studies that have been conducted on trait narcissism. What would be the reason for ignoring research on narcissism when constructing a systematic and comprehensive review of the scientific research on narcissistic personality disorder? It couldn’t be that the constructs are not comparable. Narcissistic personality traits are typically assessed using the Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI). As indicated by Cain, Pincus, and Ansell (2008), “since 1985, the NPI was used as the main or only measure of narcissistic traits in approximately 77% of social/ personality research on narcissism” (pp. 642– 643). The NPI will provide a reasonably valid assessment of narcissistic personality disorder because, like most other personality disorder measures, the authors of the NPI constructed the instrument explicitly on the basis of the diagnostic criterion set for narcissistic personality disorder (Raskin & Hall, 1979, 1981). The NPI even has scales to assess such narcissistic personality disorder symptoms as exploitativeness, entitlement, superiority, exhibitionism, and vanity. Not surprisingly, the NPI correlates as highly (if not higher) with measures of narcissistic personality disorder as any two measures of narcissistic personality disorder correlate with one another (e.g., Miller et al., 2009; Samuel & Widiger, 2008). Cain et al. are critical of the construct of narcissism as assessed by the NPI but they are equally critical of the APA criterion set for precisely the same reasons. In sum, it is apparent that the NPI is providing an assessment of narcissism that is very close to narcissistic personality disorder as defined within the current APA diagnostic manual. A computer search via PsychInfo for peerreviewed articles that have used the NPI yields at least 165 publications, the vast majority of which are empirical. This is a considerable body of research that would help buttress the scientific foundation for narcissistic personality disorder. To see further discussion of the Target Conceptual Article, Commentaries, and Author Response, as well as to contribute to the ongoing dialogue on this topic, please visit our Online Forum at http://pdtrtonline.apa.org.