Narcissism through the ages: What happens when narcissists grow older?

Three types of adult narcissism, as assessed with Wink’s (1991) observational rating method, were studied over a period of 25 years, with participants from the Intergenerational Studies of the Institute of Human Development, UC Berkeley. Narcissism was assessed on three occasions, from age 34 to age 59. Hypersensitive narcissism was found to decrease, Autonomous narcissism increased, and Willfulness narcissism did not change with age. At age 34, both Willfulness and Autonomous narcissism were related to agentic personality characteristics, but only Autonomous narcissism was related to the communal personality characteristic of empathy. Change in narcissism between age 34 and age 59 was shown to predict change in personality at age 71. The agentic personality characteristics that had been associated with Willfulness narcissism at age 34 were no longer characteristic of those individuals at age 71. In addition, in contrast to Autonomous narcissism, at age 34 Willfulness and Hypersensitivity were associated with emotional maladjustment, and predicted continuing maladjustment and less favorable life outcomes in later life.     

Does participation in research lead to changes in attitudes among clinicians? Report on a survey of those involved in a French practice research network

Background/Objective: With increasing awareness of some of the limitations of randomised controlled trials as the ‘gold standard’ of psychotherapy evaluation, researchers at the start of the twenty‐first century have focused on a number of new priorities: developing studies in natural conditions; investigating the psychotherapeutic process to better understand the conditions, causes and mechanisms of change; and reducing the gap between clinicians and researchers. Can these three interrelated objectives be combined? Method: A French psychotherapy practice‐based research network (PRN) is used as a field of research for these issues. A survey was used to investigate the conditions that encouraged the clinicians to participate in the PRN study within the context of clinicians’ general opposition to research. Results: Several elements emerged as the key to clinicians’ positive involvement in research: the methodology implemented (intensive case studies during one year); the choice of measures; the constant attention to the practicalities and the potential contribution of studies to clinical practice; the organisation of work in peer groups; the training methods; the use of new information technologies and the sense of participation in a project that would support the profession. Implications: These elements are briefly discussed in relation to the question of how best to encourage clinicians to engage with research.