Development of Narcissism Across the Life Span: A Meta-Analysis

Orth, U., Krauss, S., & Back, M. D. (2024). Development of narcissism across the life span: A meta-analytic review of longitudinal studies. Psychological Bulletin, 150(6), 643–665. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000436

Rationale

Researchers have long been interested in the development of narcissism across the lifespan.

However, the field has not reached a consensus on this topic, partly due to the limited number of longitudinal studies explicitly focusing on these questions and the lack of distinction between different dimensions of narcissism (Orth et al., 2024).

Cross-sectional studies have suggested that older adults show lower levels of narcissism compared to younger adults and adolescents (Barlett & Barlett, 2015; Foster et al., 2003; Kawamoto et al., 2020; Weidmann et al., 2023; Wilson & Sibley, 2011).

However, these studies cannot distinguish between developmental effects and cohort differences (Baltes et al., 1979).

This meta-analysis aimed to synthesize the available longitudinal data to gain more robust insights into the life span trajectory of narcissism and the stability of individual differences in narcissism.

Method

The authors conducted a meta-analysis of longitudinal studies on narcissism, adhering to the Journal Article Reporting Standards and Meta-Analysis Reporting Standards (Appelbaum et al., 2018).

They searched the APA PsycInfo database using two search strategies, requested unpublished studies via electronic mailing lists of scientific societies, and examined reference sections of narrative reviews.

Studies were included if they met criteria such as being available in English or German, using a longitudinal design with at least two assessments separated by 6 months or more, and providing sufficient information to compute effect sizes.

Search strategy and terms:

The authors searched the APA PsycInfo database using the term “narcissis*” in subject headings, text words, and the field “tests and measures.”

They employed two search strategies to likely yield longitudinal studies: restricting the search by the limitation option “Longitudinal Study” and including search terms related to longitudinal research.

Inclusion criteria:

Studies were included if they met the following criteria:

(a) available in English or German; (b) empirical-quantitative; (c) longitudinal design with at least two assessments separated by 6 months or more; (d) narcissism assessed by self-report, informant report, or observer report; (e) identical measure of narcissism across assessments; (f) not an intervention study; (g) effect size information consistent across the report; and (h) sufficient information to compute effect sizes.

Statistical measures:

The authors used the standardized mean change d per year (dyear) as an effect size measure for mean-level change and disattenuated test-retest correlations for rank-order stability.

They accounted for the multilevel structure of the data and used random-effects models and mixed-effects metaregression models for the analyses.

Results

Mean-level change in narcissism:

• The weighted mean effect sizes for mean-level change in nonclinical samples were close to zero, ranging from -0.008 (neurotic) to -0.004 (agentic).
• The rate of change did not vary significantly as a function of age.
• Gender and birth cohort did not moderate the effect sizes, but the clinical status of the sample was a significant moderator for all narcissism factors.
• From age 8 to 77 years, agentic narcissism decreased by d = -0.28, antagonistic narcissism by d = -0.41, and neurotic narcissism by d = -0.55.

Rank-order stability of narcissism:

• The weighted mean effect sizes for rank-order stability were large, ranging from .60 to .73 across the three narcissism factors, based on an average time lag of 11.42 years.
• Rank-order stability did not vary as a function of age but declined as a function of time lag, asymptotically approaching values of .62 (agentic), .52 (antagonistic), and .33 (neurotic) across long time lags.
• Gender, birth cohort, and clinical status did not systematically moderate rank-order stability.

Insight

This meta-analysis provides robust evidence that narcissism tends to decline across the lifespan, with small to medium-sized changes from childhood to old age.

The findings are consistent with theoretical perspectives on narcissism development, such as the social investment model (Roberts et al., 2008) and socioemotional selectivity theory (Carstensen et al., 1999).

The study also demonstrates that individual differences in narcissism are highly stable over time, supporting the trait character of agentic, antagonistic, and neurotic narcissism.

The results extend previous research by distinguishing between the three narcissism factors, using longitudinal data, and covering a broad age range.

Future research could investigate the mechanisms responsible for the normative decline in narcissism and examine individual differences in developmental trajectories.

Strengths

The study had several methodological strengths, including:

• Distinguishing between the three factors of agentic, antagonistic, and neurotic narcissism
• Using longitudinal data to examine both mean-level change and rank-order stability
• Including samples across the life span, from childhood to old age
• Testing moderators to assess the generalizability of the findings
• Employing a meta-analytic approach to increase the robustness of the conclusions

Limitations

The meta-analytic data set had some geographical and demographic restrictions:

• Nearly all samples were from Western cultural contexts, limiting the generalizability of the findings to non-Western cultures.
• Most samples were predominantly White/European, making it difficult to test for differences between ethnic groups.
• The number of data points from old age was relatively low, suggesting that findings for this age group should be interpreted with caution.

Implications

The results of this meta-analysis have important implications for understanding the development of narcissism across the lifespan.

The findings suggest that clinically elevated levels of narcissism should become less likely with age, which is relevant for clinical psychology practice.

However, the study also highlights the need for more research with non-Western and ethnically diverse samples to assess the generalizability of the findings.

The high rank-order stability of narcissism emphasizes the importance of identifying factors that shape individual differences in narcissism early in life.

References

Primary reference

Orth, U., Krauss, S., & Back, M. D. (2024). Development of narcissism across the life span: A meta-analytic review of longitudinal studies.Psychological Bulletin, 150(6), 643–665. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000436

Other references

Appelbaum, M., Cooper, H., Kline, R. B., Mayo-Wilson, E., Nezu, A. M., & Rao, S. M. (2018). Journal article reporting standards for quantitative research in psychology: The APA publications and communications board task force report. American Psychologist, 73(1), 3–25. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000191

Baltes, P. B., Cornelius, S. W., & Nesselroade, J. R. (1979). Cohort effects in developmental psychology. In J. R. Nesselroade & P. B. Baltes (Eds.), Longitudinal research in the study of behavior and development (pp. 61–87). Academic Press.

Carstensen, L. L., Isaacowitz, D. M., & Charles, S. T. (1999). Taking time seriously: A theory of socioemotional selectivity. American Psychologist, 54(3), 165–181. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.54.3.165

Roberts, B. W., Wood, D., & Caspi, A. (2008). The development of personality traits in adulthood. In O. P. John, R. W. Robins, & L. A. Pervin (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (pp. 375–398). Guilford Press.

Keep Learning

Here are some Socratic questions for a college class to discuss this paper:

1. How do the life span trajectories of agentic, antagonistic, and neurotic narcissism compare to those of related personality constructs, such as the Big Five traits and self-esteem?
2. What potential mechanisms could account for the normative decline in narcissism across the life span? How could future research test these competing explanations?
3. Given the high rank-order stability of narcissism, what factors might shape individual differences in narcissism early in life? How could researchers investigate these influences?
4. How might cultural factors influence the development of narcissism across the life span? What research designs could be used to examine cross-cultural differences in narcissism trajectories?
5. What are the potential implications of the findings for clinical psychology practice and intervention strategies targeting narcissistic traits?
6. How could researchers address the limitations of this meta-analysis, such as the lack of non-Western and ethnically diverse samples, in future studies on narcissism development?