The influence of narcissistic vulnerability and grandiosity on momentary hostility leading up to and following interpersonal rejection.

Author(s):  
Elizabeth N. Aslinger ◽  
Sean P. Lane ◽  
Donald R. Lynam ◽  
Timothy J. Trull

2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer Wang ◽  
Janxin Leu ◽  
Yuichi Shoda


2007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Garris ◽  
Hiroshi Oikawa ◽  
Ohbuchi Ken-ichi ◽  
Monica Harris




2012 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 523-538 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tomas Ståhl ◽  
Colette van Laar ◽  
Naomi Ellemers ◽  
Belle Derks

Prejudice expectations and other interpersonal rejection concerns have been found to direct attention towards social evaluative information. In some studies, rejection concerns have been found to direct attention towards social acceptance cues, whereas other studies have found an attention bias towards social rejection cues. In the present article we argue that these attention biases constitute promotion- (vs. prevention-) oriented strategies to deal with concerns about how one is evaluated. In support of this notion, a first study demonstrated that prejudice expectations direct attention towards male faces signaling happiness (vs. contempt) among women with a chronic promotion focus, but not among women with a chronic prevention focus. A second study demonstrated that the effect generalizes to subliminally presented acceptance-related (vs. nonsocial, sexist) words, and when a promotion (vs. prevention) focus had been experimentally induced. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.





2021 ◽  
Vol 35 (5) ◽  
pp. 691-707
Author(s):  
Scott Sasso ◽  
Nicole M. Cain ◽  
Kevin B. Meehan ◽  
Ruifan Zeng ◽  
Philip S. Wong

Previous research has shown that narcissism is associated with interpersonal difficulties and maladaptive affective responses to social rejection. In the current studies, the authors examined two phenotypes of pathological narcissism, narcissistic grandiosity and narcissistic vulnerability, and their impact on individuals' affective responses in two distinctive social rejection paradigms. Participants from Study 1 (N = 239), recruited from a multicultural university and Amazon's Mechanical Turk, completed Cyberball, a computerized social rejection paradigm. Participants from Study 2 (N = 238) were recruited from a multicultural university and participated in an in vivo group rejection paradigm in a laboratory. Results indicated that following the rejection in both studies, narcissistic vulnerability positively predicted explicit negative affect and state anger. In addition, the positive relationship between narcissistic vulnerability and explicit negative affect was moderated by greater implicit negative affect in Study 2. The implications and limitations of these findings are discussed.



2015 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 707-721 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanna Rajchert

The relationship between exclusion or rejection and aggression is already well documented, but there is still a debate about the mechanisms that underlie this effect. In two studies we focused on the propensity to react aggressively (readiness for aggression) on the bases of emotional, cognitive or self-enhancement (personality-immanent) processes. In both studies we first measured readiness for aggression and then ego-depleted participants. Next, in Study 1 we excluded participants (n = 96) using an online ball throwing game and measured displaced aggressive behavior - intensity and duration of an unpleasant noise administrated to a stranger. In Study 2 participants (n = 140) were rejected by a peer on the basis of an interview that they gave and then could retaliate by reducing peer's chance for getting a job. The results show that exclusion effect on displaced aggression was moderated by cognitive readiness for aggression, while rejection effect on retaliatory aggression was shaped by emotional and personality-immanent readiness for aggression as well as ego-depletion. The results were discussed in light of the strength model of self-control by Baumeister, Vohs, and Tice (2007).



2017 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
pp. 649-663 ◽  
Author(s):  
Caitlin A Williams ◽  
James D Doorley ◽  
Christianne Esposito-Smythers


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document