| Title |
Narcissistic Personality Disorder: An Integrative Review of Recent Empirical Data and Current Definitions
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Psychiatry Reports, March 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11920-014-0445-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Stefan Roepke, Aline Vater |
| Abstract |
Although concepts of pathological narcissism are as old as psychology and psychiatry itself, only a small number of clinical studies are based on the criteria for narcissistic personality disorder (NPD), as defined in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manuals of Mental Disorders (DSM). As a result, NPD appears to be one of the most controversially discussed nosological entities in psychiatry. Whereas the majority of empirical studies used self or other ratings of NPD criteria to address issues of reliability and validity of the diagnostic category (i.e., internal consistency, factor structure, discriminant validity), only recent research has applied experimental designs to investigate specific features of NPD (e.g., self-esteem, empathy, shame). The aim of this review is to summarize available empirical data on NPD and relate these findings to current definitions of NPD (according to the DSM-5, [1]). In order to do so, this review follows the five steps to establishing diagnostic validity proposed by Robins and Guze [2], i.e., (1) clinical description, (2) laboratory studies, (3) delimitation from other disorders, (4) family studies, and (5) follow up studies. Finally, this review suggests pathways for future research that may assist further nosological evaluation of NPD and contribute to the overall goal, the improvement of treatment for patients. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 90 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | 1% |
| Sweden | 1 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Spain | 1 | 1% |
| Serbia | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 85 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 16 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 10% |
| Other | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 21 | 23% |
| Unknown | 18 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 39 | 43% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 19% |
| Unspecified | 3 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 3% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 6 | 7% |
| Unknown | 21 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 76. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 November 2018.
All research outputs
#472,669
of 22,751,628 outputs
Outputs from Current Psychiatry Reports
#57
of 1,190 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,662
of 221,673 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Psychiatry Reports
#2
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,751,628 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,190 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 221,673 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.