The Effect of Narcissism in Female Leaders. To what Extent does Narcissism Influence the Success of Transactional and Transformational Leadership of Women?

Bachelor Thesis , 2023 , 73 Pages

Psychology - Industrial and organizational psychology

This bachelor thesis attempts to answer the research question of to what extent narcissism influences the success of transactional and transformational leadership of women. This question is relevant because although there is a lot of literature on gender differences in narcissism, gender differences in leadership styles, and the relationship between narcissism and leadership styles, there is no practical information on gender differences of narcissistic leaders in terms of leadership style. In this respect, direct literature comparisons and mergers are used in the answer.

In doing so, it can be concluded that the influence of narcissism on leadership styles is influenced by gender and that women possess specific characteristics that enable them to meet societal expectations. They can be perceived as a traditionally feminine woman and a manager, such as having better emotional regulation and the ability to take perspective. In addition, women are better than men at leadership skills such as individual attention and conditional rewards. It also suggests that gender differences in leadership styles may be less pronounced in experimental settings or when gender-neutral selection criteria are used. Further empirical research is needed to explore these conjectures and their potential implications.

Table of Contents

1 Introduction
1.1 Background and motivation
1.2 Methodology and Structure

2 Narcissism
2.1 Definition and of Narcissism and Narcissistic Personality Disorder
2.2 Manifestations and Measurement of Narcissism
2.3 Two subtypes: Grandiose and Vulnerable Narcissism
2.3.1 Female Narcissism in Correlation to Women
2.4 Narcissism and Gender
2.4.1 Narcissism and its Development among women

3 Leadership Styles
3.1 Authoritarian Leadership Style
3.2 Transactional Leadership Style
3.3 Transformational Leadership Style
3.4 Attributes of Successful Leadership

4 Narcissism in Leadership Positions
4.1 General symptoms of narcissistic leaders
4.2 Positive influence of narcissism on leadership positions
4.3 Negative Influence of Narcissism on Leadership Positions
4.4 Empirical Comparison of Narcissistic Leaders with a Successful Leadership Style

5 Female Leadership
5.1 Female Leadership
5.2 The most common Leadership Styles of Women
5.3 The Girl Boss Ideal

6 Narcissistic Women in Leadership

7 Case Study: Elisabeth Holmes

8 Conclusion
8.1 Limitations and further Research

9 References

10 Appendix A

11 Appendix B

List of Tables

Table 1 Employed women in management positions and the EU by year in percentages

Table 2 Multifactorial Leadership Questionnaire Facet of Transformational Leadership

List of Abbreviations

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Abstract

This bachelor thesis attempts to answer the research question of to what extent narcissism influences the success of transactional and transformational leadership of women. This question is relevant because although there is a lot of literature on gender differences in narcissism, gender differences in leadership styles, and the relationship between narcissism and leadership styles, there is no practical information on gender differences of narcissistic leaders in terms of leadership style.

In this respect, direct literature comparisons and mergers are used in the answer.

In doing so, it can be concluded that the influence of narcissism on leadership styles is influenced by gender and that women possess specific characteristics that enable them to meet societal expectations. They can be perceived as a traditionally feminine woman and a manager, such as having better emotional regulation and the ability to take perspective. In addition, women are better than men at leadership skills such as individual attention and conditional rewards. It also suggests that gender differences in leadership styles may be less pronounced in experimental settings or when gender­neutral selection criteria are used. Further empirical research is needed to explore these conjectures and their potential implications.

1 Introduction

1.1 Background and motivation

While the term "narcissism" has a rather vague meaning in everyday usage, in psychological research, it refers to a differentiated and clearly defined personality characteristic whose most extreme manifestation is also called narcissistic personality disorder (Asendorpf & Neyer, 2018, p.117). Therefore, the characteristic of the narcissistic character is the unstable self-esteem, overestimation of self, a lack of empathy, and emotional coldness. The construct of narcissism is also used outside the academic discourse. It is used, for example, in the press to explain the immoral or grossly selfish behavior of prominent people or executives, such as the fraud of Elizabeth Holmes (Csef, 2020, p. 507).

Holmes had gained notoriety as a successful entrepreneur and founder of the biotechnology company Theranos, whose product passed a test that could perform various medical checks with a small amount of blood. After some time, however, it turned out that the technology behind the invention was a fraud, the test ineffective, and the company Theranos was thus worthless (Williams, 2022, p.23). Although her company never developed a working product, Holmes had raised over ten billion dollars in investment over the years with her large-scale fraud.

A fraud of this magnitude raises the question of the psychological factors that can lead to such serious antisocial behavior, with narcissism as a personality trait being a promising explanation. In addition, the individual case of Holmes suggests that there could be a positive correlation between narcissistic behavior and management positions and that people with narcissistic personalities could be more present working at management levels than in the average population.

Therefore, this bachelor thesis is dedicated to investigating which factors of narcissism influence the behavior and perception of a female leader. The gender-specific focus was chosen, since women are still underrepresented in research both in a business and psychological area, and therefore, there is a lack of research on narcissistic female leaders in business.

In this respect, the research question this Bachelor Thesis is attempting to answer: To what extent does narcissism influence the success of transactional and transformational leadership of women?

So, the research question also aims to investigate and combine the findings of the present secondary research used as well as to understand whether narcissism influences the success of transactional and transformational leadership of women and whether the effects are rather positive or negative.

By adding the dimension of comparing different leadership styles, it is possible to reach a more nuanced and meaningful result.

Until now, the research literature has no findings on this exact question, as can be seen in the known meta-analyses and existing textbooks. However, to establish a scientifically valid hypothesis that can be investigated in future research, gender differences in narcissism and narcissistic leaders need to be addressed, since they have a crucial influence on the examined personality and leadership traits.

1.2 Methodology and Structure

While the first chapter serves as an introduction, the focus of chapter two lies on understanding the key terms regarding narcissism and different leadership styles. First, a general definition of narcissism and its delimitation from narcissistic personality disorder is formulated. Then, different leadership styles are defined and explained more in-depth to understand their possible success concerning narcissism in a later section of the thesis.

The main focus of chapter two, therefore, lies on the findings, which state that narcissism is a normally distributed personality trait in the average population. In addition to the symptoms and similarities to other personality constructs, various survey instruments and frequently mentioned subtypes that are repeatedly used and accepted in research are also distinguished in this chapter. Finally, gender-specific findings of narcissism related research are examined.

Chapter 3 defines the essential terms leadership, leader, and leadership style to provide a theoretical framework for further discussion. In particular, three leadership styles are examined more thoroughly: authoritarian, transactional, and transformational leadership. Subsequently, based on empirical findings, a collection of requirements is created that a manager must meet in order to be able to adopt a successful leadership style with a focus on transformational leadership. The methodological approach for this chapter focuses on review papers because these combine particular findings of empirical research and provide them in a synthesized way.

Afterwards, Chapter 4 addresses how narcissism affects people in leadership positions, its most common characteristics in this area, and the advantages and disadvantages of narcissistic behavior for executives. In the last section of the chapter, the question will be answered to what extent an ideal-typical leader must combine in himself or herself the characteristics, explained in chapter 3.4., to fit or not fit the narcissistic personality definition. Again, the focus here lies on the transformational leadership style.

Chapter 5 subsequently illustrates the topic of female leadership, whereby first an overview of women in management positions is given, then, which quotas of women exist in management positions, which systematic obstacles women face if they want to reach those positions, and other statistical findings, which aim to provide the basis for the subsequent discussion. The geographical focus lies on Germany since it is a flourishing industrialized country, which culture-wise is very similar to Austria with a ten times broader sample size. This chapter also answers the question of which leadership styles can be observed particularly frequently among women and which empirical findings exist on specific leadership styles and women in research. Finally, the so-called "girl boss" ideal, a current trend on social media that illuminates narcissistic tendencies among women in management positions praised in western societies, will be described in more detail.

To conclude, in Chapter 6, all the previously named parts are brought together to find an answer to the research question of how narcissism probably influences the success of women in leadership positions using transactional and transformational leadership style. At this point, it is possible to discover whether a narcissistic disposition should have a positive or rather negative effect in this respect by considering all previously collected scientific findings.

To round off the empirically based discussion with a practical and meaningful example from the modern business world, the fraud case of Elizabeth Holmes in chapter 7 is the subject of a detailed analysis.

Lastly, the conclusion is presented in chapter 8, which summarizes the essential findings of the investigation and synthesizes them in a final assessment.

2 Narcissism

2.1 Definition and of Narcissism and Narcissistic Personality Disorder

The first important distinction concerns the difference between the personality trait narcissism, on the one hand, and narcissistic personality disorder, on the other hand (Asendorpf & Neyer, 2018, p. 118). While everyone has a more or less pronounced narcissistic disposition, which is approximately normally distributed in the general population, an extreme expression is pathologized and classified as narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) (Skodol, Bender, & Morey, 2014, p. 1). Consequently, the question cannot be whether a particular individual is narcissistic or is not, but only how strong the narcissistic disposition is and whether it is extreme enough to be significant for the personality disorder diagnosis. The construct of narcissism is thus classified as belonging to differential psychology. In contrast, the construct of narcissistic personality disorder is classified as belonging to clinical psychology (Pincus & Lukowitsky, 2010, p. 231). Therefore, it means that a narcissistic personality should not be pathologized per se but only has a disease significance as a disorder.

2.2 Manifestations and Measurement of Narcissism

Narcissism is named after the Greek myth of Narcissus because of whose youthful beauty the nymph Echo falls in love with him, but he rejects her and subsequently she kills herself. As a divine punishment, Narcissus falls in love with his own reflection and, from then on, can only admire himself in the reflecting surface of a lake. (Schlagmann, 2008, p. 444). As a clinical picture, narcissism was first described in psychoanalysis by Sigmund Freud, who postulated that narcissistically predisposed people direct their own libido particularly strongly towards themselves and thereby associate above-average competencies and characteristics with their own person (Freud, 1914, p. 2 ). For this reason, those affected are mainly motivated to protect this exaggerated and unrealistic self-image against external criticism and to ward off threats to their self-esteem. This also explains the lack of empathy, the readiness for aggressive outbursts, and the pronounced inability to accept criticism. Current research has moved away from Freud's assumptions but has retained the clinical picture, which will be explained in more detail below.

As a personality trait, narcissism is now considered to belong to the so-called dark triad, which also includes machiavellianism and psychopathy (Asendorpf & Neyer, 2018, p. 226). Depending on the study, the three personality traits correlate slightly to moderately (r = 0.20 to r = 0.60) and overlap in all three characteristics emotional coldness, lack of empathy, and low agreeableness (Paulhus, 2014, p. 424). Far from these overlaps, however, each of the personality traits is set apart by specific symptoms and behaviors: While machiavellianism manifests itself primarily in a manipulative nature, a cynical worldview, low moral standards, and a tendency to lie (Dahling, Whitaker, & Levy, 2009, p. 220), psychopathy is characterized by a lack of impulse regulation, a propensity for violence, and a lack of altruism (Lynam & Gudonis, 2005, pp. 391). With these two traits, the same applies as stated above to narcissism: It is not a matter of whether or not a particular individual is Machiavellian or psychopathic, but only to what extent, with average or low levels of significance not necessarily having negative consequences. Thus, none of the three personality traits is dichotomous.

On the other hand, narcissism manifests itself in an inflated but unstable self-image, a sense of one's own magnificence, and both dominant and arrogant as well as charming behavior. As a result, more narcissistic individuals are often initially viewed positively, as kind, conscientious, and entertaining by those around them, because they initially succeed in convincing others of themselves and creating the impression in them that they are indeed as great as they think themselves to be (Paulhus, 1998, p. 1197). After some time, however, this assessment turns, and narcissistic persons are often judged as more unfriendly, hostile, and arrogant. Due to their unstable self-image, narcissistically predisposed individuals are often more susceptible to external praise and criticism, which is often directed back to them by their social environment, especially in the later stages of an acquaintance. While positive feedback in experimental performance tasks triggered particularly positive feelings in comparison to subjects with averagely pronounced narcissism scores, negative feedback led to above­average anger and frustration (Bushman & Baumeister, 1998, p. 219). It is important to mention, that this feedback was completely independent of the actual performance. This reaction pattern shows the excessive sensitivity of narcissistically predisposed individuals to praise and criticism from outside, which, as already explained, is rooted in unstable self­esteem. Anger and frustration can be understood as reactions to violating this self-esteem.

Campbell et al. (2000) examined the individual strategies narcissistically predisposed individuals use to maintain their self-worth. The study's question is whether narcissists also demonstrate a stronger tendency toward self-enhancement than non-narcissistically inclined subjects in comparison when using self-defense strategies that do not involve advantageous comparison with other individuals (W. K. Campbell et al., 2000, p. 330). Here, the self­esteem defense strategies of narcissists and non-narcissists were measured in response to feedback on feigned performance tasks. Two general types of strategies were identified: Comparative strategies involve comparing oneself favorably with another person, such as by assigning blame to a partner in a task. Noncomparative strategies correspondingly do not imply a comparison with other people and may involve, for example, downplaying the importance of the task (W. K. Campbell et al., 2000, p. 331).

The study was based on two perspectives: the narcissistic self-enhancement perspective and the strategic flexibility perspective (W. K. Campbell et al., 2000, p. 341). According to the narcissistic self-enhancement perspective, narcissists enhance their self­worth to a greater extent than others using both comparative and noncomparative strategies. Thus, the corresponding hypothesis predicts that narcissists seek to enhance their self-worth using both strategies. In contrast, the strategic flexibility perspective focuses on interpersonal orientation. Compared to narcissists, non-narcissists are more interpersonally oriented, show less feelings of superiority, and are more approachable, empathic, and oriented toward harmonious coexistence in communities (Asendorpf & Neyer, 2018, p. 226). Because of this same interpersonal orientation, non-narcissists may be less likely to use self-improvement strategies detrimental to other partners in cooperative tasks, such as belittling them (W. K. Campbell et al., 2000, p. 331). However, non-narcissists might show a tendency to use such self-enhancement strategies that do not belittle any partner, which would thus be a non­comparative strategies of self-esteem defense. A condition here is, of course, that the opportunity to exercise this strategy must be present. In this case, expressing a self-esteem defense mechanism could be equal between narcissists and others. In sum, the strategic flexibility perspective predicts that non-narcissists will engage in self-enhancement, but in a manner consistent with their stronger interpersonal orientation (W. K. Campbell et al., 2000, p. 341). In contrast, the prediction for narcissists is that they will seek to increase their own self-worth regardless of whether or not they need to devalue others to do so.

As a result, both hypotheses were supported in the Campbell et al. study: Narcissists enhanced their self-worth regardless of strategy, whereas non-narcissists did so only with strategies that did not involve devaluing others (W. K. Campbell et al., 2000, p. 342). Remarkably, non-narcissists even exhibited behavior in some cases to also increase another person's self-worth, which was not the case for narcissists. Thus, it appeared that self-esteem maintenance is a general human endeavor and that the distinctive feature of narcissism is that it occurs at the expense of other people, which has particular implications for the question of whether the narcissistically inclined personality has a fit with successful leadership styles. This question will be answered in chapter 4.4.

Two measurement instruments have become widely used in research to measure narcissism: the Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI) (Raskin & Terry, 1988) and the Narcissistic Admiration and Rivalry Questionnaire (NARQ). (Back et al., 2013).

The NPI focuses on the previously explained unstable self-image and the associated susceptibility to external self-esteem threats. Six correlating sub-facets extracted by factor analysis are examined: leadership personality, physical vanity, claim / dominance, arrogance / sense of superiority, ambition / will to lead, and independence / influence. (Schütz, Marcus, & Sellin, 2004, p. 203). In this context, however, it should be mentioned that different research groups arrive at varying numbers of factors depending on the calibration sample and factor- analytical approach, with the number ranging from two to seven (Ackerman et al., 2011, p. 67). In turn, the fact that the factor solution depends on the sample and that there is no consensus on the number of factors indicates, on the one hand, that factor analysis is not perfectly standardized and allows degrees of freedom on the part of the researchers and, on the other hand, that the results of the NPI vary with different sample properties.

The NARQ, however, postulates two correlated but independent underlying factors for narcissism: narcissistic admiration on the one hand and narcissistic rivalry on the other. According to the authors, narcissistically inclined people are motivated to enhance their self­image and convince those around them of this self-image. In case of failure, i.e., receiving negative feedback about one's performance, narcissistic people tend to attribute the failure to their environment and blame others for their own failures (Back et al., 2013, p. 1017 ff.). With this focus on protecting an unrealistically inflated and fragile self-image, the narcissism conception of NARQ is in the tradition of Freud, who, as stated above, declared the defense against external self-esteem threats to be the core finding of the narcissistic personality structure (Freud, 1914, p. 2). In contrast to Freud's methods, however, the NARQ represents an empirically based instrument that is not based on psychoanalytic theorizing.

These two factors can also explain why narcissistic people initially make a positive impression on new acquaintances, but then the judgment turns into the opposite (Paulhus, 1998, p. 1197), since narcissists are initially motivated to convince others of themselves, which works well given that their acquaintance's opinion about them is still not very intense. Over time, the opportunities for negative feedback increase, and the narcissist's rivalry becomes stronger and more frequent, which is why the judgment of the environment turns negative.

This dynamic can also be observed in long-term partnerships. While narcissism values represent one of the few personality traits that can predict attractiveness, the partner's dissatisfaction increases over time (Wurst et al., 2017, p. 280). Thus, the effort to gain the partner's admiration declines over the years, and the tendency to rivalry and devaluation for the purpose of self-esteem maintenance becomes more pronounced. Obviously, the same pattern also exists in the work context (cf. chapters 4.2. and 4.3.).

As mentioned, only the most extreme manifestation of this widespread and varying personality trait can be described as narcissistic personality disorder (Skodol et al., 2014, p. 1 ). As such, it has found its way into the two most widely used classification systems of mental disorders, which will be described below.

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) lists nine criteria, at least five of which must be present for a diagnosis of narcissistic personality disorder (NPD): A grandiose sense of one's own importance; exaggerated fantasies of success, beauty, or intelligence; a belief that one is especially unique and can only be understood by people and institutions of similar status; a need for extensive admiration; an inflated sense of entitlement; overreaching and taking advantage of others in interpersonal interactions; a lack of empathy; envy or a belief that those around them are jealous of them; and finally, arrogant behaviors or expressions (American Psychiatric Association & American Psychiatric Association, 2013). As with all DSM-5 syndromes, other necessary criteria are that the symptoms must be present over several months, that a similar clinical picture cannot better explain them, and that either the psychosocial level of functioning is impaired or there is a decisive level of distress that substantially limits the quality of life of the affected person.

As with all personality disorders, the narcissistic one develops during adolescence, manifests itself in a situation-unspecific manner on various occasions, and is very stable across the lifespan, undergoing few changes (Skodol et al., 2014, p. 1). The manifestation of symptoms must also be severe enough to show a substantial deviation from social norms, resulting in significant difficulties in forming social relationships and significantly limiting the affected person's ability to carry out everyday life (Caligor, Levy, & Yeomans, 2015, p. 417).

The second significant classification manual is the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, 11th Edition (ICD-11) of the WHO, which, however, no longer lists narcissistic personality disorder as a separate disorder but only speaks of "personality disorders" in general terms (Mulder, 2021, p. 2). In the previous version of the ICD-10, the disorder was still listed as a specific personality disorder, and the symptoms overlapped considerably with those of the DSM-5 (Ottosson et al., 1998, p. 246).

The origin of a narcissistic personality and the corresponding personality disorder lies in genetic and hereditary influences on the one hand and socialization influences on the other. Twin studies have shown that a substantial proportion of the variance in the trait in question can be explained by genetic variance, and heritability is estimated at 80% (Torgersen et al., 2000, p. 416 ff.). In addition, environmental factors such as a too caring or extremely critical parenting style, excessive levels of attention, trauma, irregular or unanticipated parental care, and social learning of psychological manipulation on the part of parents also appear to influence the development of narcissistic personality disorder (Gabbard, 2014, p. 481). As with all clinical pictures, these statements about the causative factors of narcissism refer only to correlates that could be found in the study of entire populations. This does not contradict the possibility that specific incisive events may have been the determining factor for a narcissistic predisposition in individual cases.

2.3 Two subtypes: Grandiose and Vulnerable Narcissism

Although neither classification system distinguishes between subtypes, and there is no consensus in research about which subtypes exist and which distinctions are adequate to empirical findings, a difference is often made between grandiose and vulnerable narcissism (Caligor et al., 2015, p. 416 ff.). This distinction is relevant to the present research question because the grandiose subtype is more frequently encountered in leadership positions and, therefore, much more prominent in research (W. K. Campbell, Hoffman, Campbell, & Marchisio, 2011, p. 270). Both subtypes, the grandiose and the vulnerable correspond to the tendencies already determined at the outset that characterize narcissism, namely, on the one hand, the effort to convince others of one's worth and, on the other hand, the need to ward off external threats to one's own self-worth and thereby maintain one's own fragile self-image (Asendorpf & Neyer, 2018, p. 229). In this respect, it is still the same personality trait, only that the two components are emphasized to different degrees.

The two subtypes can first be distinguished in terms of the conditions of their emergence. Campbell et al. report that the grandiose form is partly favored by excessive parental evaluation, while the vulnerable subtype arises from inadequate parental care, particularly emotional coldness (W. K. Campbell et al., 2011, p. 270; Otway & Vignoles, 2006, p. 108).

The two forms of narcissism also exhibit different nomological networks (Miller et al., 2011, pp. 1022). Thus, grandiose narcissism is associated with antisocial personality and psychopathy, whereas the vulnerable form correlates with a borderline personality disorder. Other differences emerge in impulsivity: Whereas grandiose narcissism is associated primarily with sensation seeking and an approach orientation, the vulnerable form is associated with a wide range of impulse control problems.

Further differences are also evident in attachment behavior. The study by Miller et al. shows that only the vulnerable form of narcissism is associated with a pathological attachment style, manifested by statistically significant correlations with both avoidance and fear of attachment (Miller et al., 2011, p. 1032). The combination of high avoidance and attachment indicates an anxious attachment style in which individuals maintain negative views of themselves and others. Anxious attachment styles have been associated with several problematic correlates, including borderline personality disorder, aggression, substance abuse, and other risky behaviors.

In contrast, the grandiose form of narcissism showed no significant associations with attachment anxiety and avoidance and was essentially not associated with attachment styles (Miller et al., 2011, p. 1033). These correlational patterns suggest that grandiose narcissism is not associated with attachment disorders.

In addition, individuals with different narcissism subtypes have different views of relationships with others and differ in their personality traits relevant to interpersonal interactions, such as extraversion and agreeableness, as noted above (Miller et al., 2011, p. 1034). Individuals with higher expressions of both forms of narcissism were more prone to anger and aggression when confronted with various interpersonal situations. There is a statistically significant finding that grandiose narcissism has a stronger correlation with the likelihood of using verbal and physical aggression to resolve problematic interpersonal situations. (Miller et al., 2011, p. 1034)This increased willingness to engage in overtly aggressive behavior, found primarily in individuals with higher grandiose narcissism, could be explained due to their more pronounced interpersonal dominance and assertiveness compared to individuals with higher vulnerable narcissism.

The personality differences between the two subtypes also yield relevant consequences for psychopathological correlates. For example, individuals with high vulnerable narcissism expression report various psychological problems indicative of significant distress, such as depression, anxiety, hostility, paranoia, and heightened emotional sensitivity to interpersonal conflict (Miller et al., 2011, p. 1035). Similarly, vulnerable narcissists report low positive affect and marked negative affect. In contrast, individuals with high grandiose narcissism expression appear far less vulnerable to these psychological stresses, as evidenced by the fact that grandiose narcissism does not show significant correlations with indicators of psychological distress or negative affect.

Regarding other pathological personality traits, the grandiose narcissism factor showed greater discriminant validity than the vulnerable narcissism sub-facet. It mainly showed significant positive correlations with antisocial and histrionic personality disorder (Miller et al., 2011, p. 1035).

In contrast, vulnerable narcissism showed a less specific correlation pattern, significantly positively correlated with 8 of the 10 personality disorders (Miller et al., 2011, p. 1035). Vulnerable narcissism, as discussed above, correlates strongly with neuroticism or negative emotionality, which is a core component of many personality disorders and is associated with diverse mental disorder patterns, explaining the nonspecific and broadly distributed correlation pattern.

As expected, vulnerable narcissism strongly correlates with borderline personality disorder (Miller et al., 2011, p. 1035). In another study, given that the nomological networks of vulnerable narcissism and borderline personality disorder overlap so strongly, Miller et al. even go so far as to question whether they are distinct constructs (Miller et al., 2010, pp. 1543). In reality, however, both subtypes often occur as a mixed form and are therefore not clearly distinguishable from each other in all cases, which is why it is also difficult for research that wants to investigate the influence of individual subtypes on specific outcome variables to distinguish these subtypes from each other conceptually and to identify their different correlates clearly.

2.3.1 Female Narcissism in Correlation to Women

Another distinction between narcissistic subtypes, particularly common in the German-speaking world, concerns male and female narcissism (Wardetzki, 2019, p. 70). Accordingly, the characteristics of male narcissism are characterized by an emphasis on grandiosity and a striving for power that is acted out through intimidation and dominance in relationships. Men with narcissistic traits tend to compensate for their weaknesses by exaggerating themselves and struggling for recognition and autonomy as part of this goal (Wardetzki, 2021, p. 56). In relationships, they pursue a strategy of avoidance and tend to devalue and hurt their partner to emphasize their superiority. They look for a partner who mirrors their ideal image of themselves and can identify with this ideal image. They show open aggressiveness or withdraw and end the relationship to ward off offenses. In relationships, they often dominate and seek the admiration of their partner in order to strengthen their self-esteem.

Female narcissism, on the other hand, is characterized by a deep-seated inferiority that is compensated for by conformity and submission (Wardetzki, 2019, p. 70). Accordingly, women with narcissistic traits tend to tend toward self-sacrifice and often rely on recognition from their partners to maintain their self-esteem. In relationships, according to this distinction, they often seek support and orientation from their partner and in many cases mother him. They identify with their partner's ideal image of themselves and may persist in a victim position to protect themselves from slights. Defense against offenses often takes the form of passive aggressiveness like denial and self-deprecation to avoid conflict and maintain a harmonious relationship. It is important to note that Wardetzki uses female narcissism synonymously with vulnerable narcissism (Wardetzki, 2021, p. 22). In this respect, the clinical picture so designated does not necessarily occur exclusively among women but is typically associated more with the female sex (Wardetzki, 2021, p. 58).

This detailed discussion of the subtypes is relevant to the question of the present study in that the grandiose subtype, due to its predisposition, pushes much more strongly into leadership than the vulnerable one. Therefore Campbell et al. also refer to it as "the classic narcissist in the workplace" (W. K. Campbell et al., 2011, p. 270). Thus, in various reviews and empirical studies on the effects of narcissism on organizational leadership, the investigation is limited exclusively to the grandiose subtype, leaving vulnerable and also female narcissism entirely out of the picture (Braun, 2017, p. 17 f.; W. K. Campbell et al, 2011, p. 270; Choi, 2021, p. 16; Fatfouta, 2019, p. 3; O'Reilly & Chatman, 2020, p. 9.; Roberts, Woodman, & Sedikides, 2018, p. 2 f.; Schattke & Marion-Jetten, 2022, p. 290; Shepherd, 2016). In this sense, also in the further course of the work, when narcissism is mentioned, and it is not explicitly further qualified, the grandiose subtype is meant.

2.4 Narcissism and Gender

After this general overview of the history of narcissism, its definition in terms of content and diagnostics, the distinction between personality traits and clinical picture, and its causes, the following subchapter presents the most crucial gender effects or differences between men and women.

It is striking that men are significantly overrepresented, with approximately 75% of all diagnosed narcissistic personality disorders (Wardetzki, 2019, p. 69). However, this could also be due to the fact that a diagnosis distorted by gender stereotypes tends to attribute a histrionic personality disorder to narcissistically predisposed women. In contrast, men have often been attributed to a narcissistic personality disorder.

There are several findings in research on gender differences in the expression of narcissism in general, as well as on the different subtypes. In a meta-analysis of gender differences and narcissism, it was found that men were, on average, more narcissistic than women (Grijalva et al., 2015, p. 261). The effect size was moderate (d = 0.26), and 355 studies were included, with a total sample size of 470,846 subjects. The same meta-study, when examining different U.S. college cohorts, found that these sex differences were stable over time and were also found in different age groups. Investigating sex differences in the three sub facets of narcissistic personality assessed by the NPI measurement instrument presented above (Raskin & Terry, 1988) showed that it was primarily the facets of aspiration/dominance (d = 0.29) and ambition/leadership (d = 0.20) that accounted for the global differences.

Differences in the narcissism subtype of grandiose narcissism presented above were much more minor (d = 0.04). Vulnerable narcissism, which is characterized by low self­esteem, high levels of neuroticism, and high levels of introversion, also showed minimal gender effects (d = 0.04) (Grijalva et al., 2015, p. 261).

This gender effect is also reflected in the lifetime prevalence of narcissistic personality disorder, which is 7.7 % for men and 4.8 % for women, according to the National

Epidemiological Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions (Grant et al., 2008, p. 18). In addition, the core characteristics of narcissism, such as physical expression of anger, striving for power, and an authoritarian leadership style, are more consistent with the male stereotype, at least in Western society (Corry, Merritt, Mrug, & Pamp, 2008, p. 593).

To explain how these gender effects occur, Grijalva et al. (2015) refer to the biosocial approach of social role theory (Wood & Eagly, 2012). According to this approach, men and women are predisposed to a certain division of labor through specific biological and evolutionary differences. This division of labor, in turn, causes men and women to take on different social roles, meaning that certain behaviors are expected of them, and deviations from these behaviors are socially sanctioned. Still, it also means that they express a certain self-image which fits to this division of labor. These expectations reinforce social roles, mediated partly by biological mechanisms such as situational hormone releases. Wood and Eagly's (2012) approach is thus a synthesis of evolutionary biology nature approaches that seek to explain sex differences through biological traits (Buss & Schmitt, 2011, p. 768) and of social constructivist nurture approaches, which attribute these differences only to socialization influences (West & Zimmerman, 1987, p. 125). That this approach is appropriate is already evident from the causes of narcissism presented above, which include partly genetic and partly socialization influences.

The influence of social roles is mediated by the so-called correspondence bias, which infers natural and time-stable characteristics from a specific general behavior that can be explained solely by situational circumstances (Gilbert & Malone, 1995, p. 21). Thus, if men and women are observed to engage in gender-specific behaviors corresponding to the division of labor to which they have a biologically determined tendency, inferences are drawn from this behavior to supposedly essential masculine and feminine traits, respectively.

[...]

• Publication Year: 2023
• Pages: 73
• Catalog Number: V1358349
• ISBN (PDF): 9783346874979
• ISBN (Book): 9783346874986
• Language: German
• Tags: effect, narcissism, female, leaders, extent, influence, success, transactional, transformational, leadership, women