Collective narcissism

Who defined it?

The construct and its scale were defined in a 2009 paper by Golec de Zavala, Cichocka, Eidelson and Jayawickreme, "Collective narcissism and its social consequences", in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology [1]. Across five studies, collective narcissism, but not individual narcissism, predicted intergroup aggressiveness. The link was mediated by perceived threat from other groups and perceived insult to one's own group [1].

All five samples were students: in the United States (n = 263), London (n = 92), Poland (n = 148 and n = 262) and Mexico (n = 202) [1]. The findings describe these student samples and do not extend by themselves to other populations.

How is it measured?

It is measured with the Collective Narcissism Scale. In the 2009 paper the scale was shortened from 23 to 9 items, answered from 1 (strongly disagree) to 6 (strongly agree) [1]. The scale is registered in the PsycTESTS database [2]. It is a self-report measure: it records what people say they believe.

Later work also used a 5-item version with the same 1–6 answers; in studies of the Brexit vote its reliability was α = 0.87 and 0.88 [3]. That figure comes from one paper.

What does the research find?

A 2020 review by the authors of the construct describes it as "a belief that one's own group (the in-group) is exceptional but not sufficiently recognized by others" [4]. The review links it to prejudice, retaliatory intergroup aggression and pleasure at others' suffering, and to hypersensitivity to provocation; the link weakens with experiences that strengthen emotional resilience, such as positive identification with a community [4]. A 2019 review by the same group describes people high in collective narcissism as hypervigilant to threats to the group's position, prone to conspiracy thinking, and hostile; interventions that support regulation of negative emotions weaken the link with hostility [5]. Both are reviews by the construct's authors, add no new sample of their own, and summarise mostly correlational studies.

In the United Kingdom, collective narcissism was linked indirectly, through perceived threat from immigrants, to voting to leave the EU and supporting the referendum result (N = 280 and 226, online) [3]. The authors note that the data are correlational and cross-sectional and do not allow firm causal conclusions; the samples were not representative, and most participants had voted to remain.

Collective narcissism predicted belief in conspiracies by other groups, but not by one's own group [6]. This finding comes from one study of 269 people online in the United States.

In a nationally representative sample of adults in Poland (n = 1,007), collective narcissism mediated the link between low personal control and defending the group's image, lower loyalty to the group and less positive attitudes to other groups; secure identification mediated the link between high control and loyalty and positive attitudes to others [7]. This is one country at one point in time, and it does not prove causation.

In samples from Poland (570, 569 and 393) and the United States (778), collective narcissism was associated with negative emotionality, and in-group satisfaction with positive emotionality [8]. The author notes that all these studies are correlational.

What is not collective narcissism?

Pride in one's group and satisfaction with it are not the same thing. The research treats in-group satisfaction and secure identification as separate from collective narcissism, with different associations: positive rather than negative emotionality, and loyalty and positive attitudes to other groups rather than defensiveness [7][8]. The 2020 review by the construct's authors also contrasts it with in-group satisfaction [4]. These are correlational findings.

Collective narcissism is measured as a belief about a group, separately from individual narcissism, and it is not a diagnosis. The 2009 studies found that it predicted intergroup aggressiveness where individual narcissism did not [1], in student samples.

How do researchers tell it apart from ordinary belonging?

Researchers measure collective narcissism and in-group satisfaction side by side. Collective narcissism is tied to the belief that the group is exceptional but not recognised enough [4]; in-group satisfaction is not, and the two show different associations with emotions and with attitudes to other groups [7][8]. This separates groups of respondents in correlational data; it does not sort any single person into one or the other.