A new study published in Personality and Individual Differences suggests that the behavioral outcomes of adolescent narcissism are not uniform, but instead depend on the type of narcissism and an individual’s exposure to chronic stress. The research indicates that under conditions of low biological stress, one form of narcissism may be associated with positive social behaviors without a corresponding rise in aggression.
Researchers have long conceptualized narcissism as a personality trait characterized by an outsized sense of self-importance. Modern psychology, however, distinguishes between two primary forms. Grandiose narcissism is marked by boldness, extraversion, and an open belief in one’s own superiority. In contrast, vulnerable narcissism is characterized by defensiveness, introversion, and a fragile self-esteem that is highly sensitive to criticism. While both types share a sense of entitlement, their expression in social situations can differ significantly.
Previous studies on narcissism in adolescents have yielded mixed results, sometimes linking the trait to aggression and bullying, and other times to leadership and prosocial acts like helping others. A team of researchers led by Qiming Yu and Silin Huang at Beijing Normal University in China proposed that these apparent contradictions could be resolved by examining the two types of narcissism separately.
They also wanted to investigate how an objective measure of chronic stress might influence the relationship between these personality traits and adolescent social behavior. To do this, they turned to a concept known as allostatic load.
Allostatic load can be thought of as the cumulative “wear and tear” on the body that results from prolonged or repeated activation of stress responses. It is not simply a feeling of being stressed but a physiological state that can be measured through a panel of biological markers. By quantifying allostatic load, the scientists could assess the objective, biological toll of chronic stress on each adolescent, providing a unique window into how persistent environmental pressures might shape personality expression.
The research team recruited 451 adolescents between the ages of 12 and 17, along with their primary caregivers, from a public school in Hebei Province, China. The study involved a comprehensive data collection process. Adolescents completed questionnaires to measure their levels of both grandiose and vulnerable narcissism, as well as their own aggressive behaviors. Their primary caregivers completed separate surveys, reporting on the adolescents’ prosocial behaviors, such as their tendency to be helpful and considerate.
In addition to the surveys, the researchers gathered a range of physiological data from the adolescents to calculate their allostatic load. This involved measuring cardiovascular indicators like blood pressure and heart rate, a metabolic indicator in the form of body mass index, and levels of four key stress-related hormones from overnight urine samples. By combining these eight biomarkers into a single composite score, the team created an objective index of each participant’s cumulative physiological stress.
The initial analysis revealed distinct patterns for the two types of narcissism. Both grandiose and vulnerable narcissism were associated with higher levels of self-reported aggression. However, only grandiose narcissism was linked to higher levels of prosocial behavior as reported by caregivers. Vulnerable narcissism showed no significant connection to these positive social acts.
The more complex findings emerged when the researchers introduced allostatic load into their analysis. They found that chronic stress changed the relationship between grandiose narcissism and aggression. For adolescents with high allostatic load, meaning greater physiological wear and tear, higher levels of grandiose narcissism were strongly associated with more aggression. For adolescents with low allostatic load, this connection disappeared; grandiose narcissism was not linked to aggressive behavior in this low-stress group.
The influence of allostatic load on vulnerable narcissism was also notable, but it related to prosocial behavior instead of aggression. Among adolescents with low allostatic load, higher levels of vulnerable narcissism were associated with less prosocial behavior. As physiological stress levels increased, this negative relationship weakened.
For teens experiencing high allostatic load, there was even a slight tendency for vulnerable narcissism to be associated with more prosocial behavior, though this trend was not statistically robust across the entire high-stress group. This suggests that under chronic stress, adolescents with vulnerable narcissism may shift their social strategy, perhaps engaging in helpful behaviors to gain social approval.
The study’s authors acknowledge certain limitations. Because the data were collected at a single point in time, the study cannot establish a cause-and-effect relationship between narcissism, stress, and behavior over the long term. Future studies that follow adolescents over several years could help clarify these developmental pathways.
Additionally, the study did not account for early adverse experiences like childhood trauma, which could independently influence personality, stress physiology, and social functioning. Future investigations could incorporate these factors for a more complete understanding.
The study, “Is narcissism always bad? Allostatic load moderates the different relationships between grandiose and vulnerable narcissism and adolescents’ interpersonal adaptation,” was authored by Qiming Yu, Yi Ren, Chenyi Zuo, Shaojie Qiu, Feng Zhang, Sipu Guo, and Silin Huang.
