NARCISSISTIC RAGE 785 Critically,empirical research on narcissistic personality traits slights with"disdain,rage,or defiant co ack"(p.659). utline key theor andiosity and vulnerability.For Wink (191) (1)Then.we ce on nan of pe sism dir stic."only grandiosity predi arce of narcissistic rage.As a whole,the studies sent the n only on of narciss e.”Subsequent distinct dim wvide key tests of clinical a ed the high reas vulnerabili What Is Narcissistic Rage? w圆 trom ulsion in the pursuit of all these e the poud be in all sm within If-invo 1006)This i o. 1975,Kh.1972R0.2005. liy disor actions such as depre sion.Moreover,thes and se despite these being key to clinical ent of the disorder.As ng a self-p piral B.Lewi agner, y th at extent existing understanding narcissistic aggression. Anger and Hostility Narcissism and Aggression nd Fre the first self-preo ccupation leads them to word rage itsel ntial reasons for th ink betw As M.Lewis (1992)puts it"a elaborates. Kohut (1972)as 'narcissistic rage. clinical observations the dysfunctionl,as it is dispr irected.Other the individua whom he his to be that ne's se Ker oiee who ard him.(.64 6 exhibited by narcissistic individuals (J. D. Miller & Campbell, 2008; Pincus & Lukowitsky, 2010; Wink, 1991). Critically, empirical research on narcissistic personality traits reveals that people differ on two relatively independent dimen￾sions of narcissistic features, corresponding to the conceptualiza￾tions of grandiosity and vulnerability. For example, Wink (1991) linked grandiosity and vulnerability factors extracted from numer￾ous self-report measures of narcissism to spouse reports of per￾sonality. Although elevation on both narcissism dimensions pre￾dicted being viewed as “arrogant,” “argumentative,” and “opportunistic,” only grandiosity predicted being viewed as a “show-off,” “egotistical,” and “assertive,” whereas only vulnera￾bility predicted being viewed as “complaining,” “bitter,” and “de￾fensive.” Subsequent research has replicated these distinct dimen￾sions in diverse populations and identified their distinct correlates. Specifically, grandiosity is linked to dominance, low emotional distress, and high self-esteem, whereas vulnerability is linked to introversion, high emotional distress, and low self-esteem, al￾though both share a core of entitled and dismissive tendencies (Glover, Miller, Lynam, Crego, & Widiger, 2012; Krizan & Johar, 2012; J. D. Miller et al., 2011; Rathvon & Holmstrom, 1996; Wink, 1991). It should be noted that the Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI; Raskin & Hall, 1981), the most commonly used measure of narcissism within personality and social psychology, captures nar￾cissistic grandiosity, not vulnerability (Krizan & Johar, 2012; J. D. Miller & Campbell, 2008; Rathvon & Holmstrom, 1996). This is important because the vast majority of theory and evidence in personality and social psychology is based on the use of this measure, and thus speaks only to grandiose aspects of narcissism. Furthermore, diagnostic criteria for narcissistic personality disor￾der do not currently include vulnerable symptoms of narcissism, despite these being key to clinical assessment of the disorder. As a result, there is a substantial concern that assessment of narcissism across both personality and clinical domains ignores important aspects of the construct (J. D. Miller, Gentile, Wilson, & Camp￾bell, 2013; Pincus & Lukowitsky, 2010; Ronningstam, 2005). As we elaborate later in the article, this imposes serious limitations on understanding narcissistic aggression. Narcissism and Aggression Sigmund Freud (1932) was the first to suggest that narcissists’ self-preoccupation leads them to aggress against others. The po￾tential reasons for the link between anger, aggression, and narcis￾sism were subsequently suggested by other psychoanalysts, whose clinical observations suggested that narcissistic self-absorption can fuel a vicious cycle of hostility, shame, and reactive aggression (Alexander, 1938; Jacobson, 1964; Saul, 1947). Defined by Heinz Kohut (1972) as “narcissistic rage,” these clinical observations describe a precarious condition in which frustrations of a narcis￾sistically perceived reality and a vulnerable sense of self result in dejection and shame that fuel anger, resentment, and vindictive￾ness. Moreover, they suggest narcissistic rage to be immature and dysfunctional, as it is disproportionate or misdirected. Other the￾orists have also suggested that narcissistic individuals exhibit patterns of rage, instigated by rejection that opens childhood wounds or events that contradict one’s sense of specialness (Kern￾berg, 1975; Millon, 1997). The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed.; American Psychiatric Association, 1994) itself states that narcissistic individuals react to interpersonal slights with “disdain, rage, or defiant counterattack” (p. 659). Following these views, we first outline key theoretical features of narcissistic rage, building on the pioneering work by Kohut (1972). Then, we review existing empirical evidence on narcissism and aggression with a focus on rage reactions. We argue that the almost exclusive focus on grandiose narcissism yielded little sup￾port for theoretical accounts of narcissistic rage. In response, we present four studies that looked to vulnerable narcissism as a key source of narcissistic rage. As a whole, the studies represent the first systematic examination of narcissistic rage within the context of both vulnerable and grandiose narcissism. Furthermore, they provide key tests of clinical accounts of narcissistic aggression so far not adequately addressed in nonclinical populations. What Is Narcissistic Rage? Although it can be traced back to Freud, narcissistic rage was first extensively described by the psychoanalyst Heinz Kohut (1972). According to him, “the need for revenge, for righting a wrong, for undoing a hurt by whatever means, and a deeply anchored, unrelent￾ing compulsion in the pursuit of all these aims . . . are the charac￾teristic features of narcissistic rage in all its forms” (p. 638). He succinctly summarized a key observation of many clinicians, namely, that narcissistic individuals whose self-involved percep￾tion of reality are questioned will respond with vitriol and retali￾ation in addition to shame and depression (Alexander, 1938; Kern￾berg, 1975; Kohut, 1972; Ronningstam, 2005). In fact, these observations view the lack of a cohesive sense of self as key both to externalizing reactions such as aggression and to internalizing reactions such as depression. Moreover, these other- and self￾destructive reactions are thought to become mutually reinforcing, producing a self-perpetuating “shame–rage” spiral (H. B. Lewis, 1987; Scheff, 1987; Tangney, Wagner, Fletcher, & Gramzow, 1992). As specified next, these analyses imply three key aspects of narcissistic rage. We first outline these features of the narcissistic rage hypothesis and then critically evaluate to what extent existing empirical evidence on narcissism bears on them. Anger and Hostility First and foremost, narcissistic rage is defined by pervasive, intense, and ill-directed anger. As the word rage itself implies, narcissists’ angry responses to even minor provocations should be disproportionate and unfocused. As M. Lewis (1992) puts it, “rage is anger out of control” (p. 153). Numerous psychoanalytic ac￾counts link threats to narcissistic self-views (i.e., “narcissistic injuries”) to intense anger and hostility (e.g., Alexander, 1938; Freud, 1921). As Kohut (1972) elaborates, the fanaticism of the need for revenge and the unending compulsion of having to square an account after an offense are therefore not the attributes of aggressivity that is integrated with the mature purposes . . . the shame-prone individual who is ready to experience setbacks as narcissistic injuries and respond to them with insatiable rage does not recognize his opponent as a center of independent initiative with whom he happens to be at cross purposes . . . the narcissistically injured... cannot rest until he has blotted out a vaguely experienced offender who dared to oppose him, to disagree with him, or to outshine him. (pp. 643– 644) This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly. NARCISSISTIC RAGE 785