Talk:Narcissistic personality disorder/Archive 3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Archive 2

The most recent comment was 6 weeks old and redundant, most was far older, and is now totally irrelevant, so I have archived the page.--Zeraeph 08:16, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] New discussions please

Zeraeph is currently under suspension for Wiki violations and verbally attacking others. As far as I am concerned all her contributions were completely poisonous. I think it is a good idea to keep the previous text archived so we can start afresh with the slate wiped clean. I am working on the Bully and Workplace Bully Wiki entries in particular. Narcissism and psychopathy is closely related to bullying so there is quite a lot of overlap.

I am not in Sam Vaknin's fan club but I feel that Zeraeph wound him up into a frenzy. Like him or loath him, Sam is one of the key authorities on narcissism. He still runs two support groups for victims of narcissism. --Penbat 11:55, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Narcissistic Rage, Supply and Injury

No mention of these. They all need their own Wikis. --Penbat 14:19, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Is anyone here going to update the news that the American .... of Psychiatry has recently concluded that NPD is no longer accepted as a valid assessment?

After 5 years of reading Sam Vaknin through internet and his oft' times endless ramblings making no sense whatsoever then exploiting a number of females that were taken under his "spell" that he relishes odiously - I wholly agree with the new diagnosis of NPD. He always gets rid of people who dare question him by changing his website or cutting them out. A way to avoid any questioning of his self anointed "expertize".

Someone, somewhere got carried away and led a whole nation to believe that what is not possible exists. Narcissism is one thing and sociopathy is another and both I always believed are unrelated.

Psychopaths, killers, etc. often are narcissists as well but none ever become that borne of narcissism and to have intertwined both terms for years I have always believed is a horrid distortion of psychiatric analysis. If not terminology.

Disorder refers to disarray, to throw into confusion, into sociopathy... and I know of no peoples more focused than narcissists of the worst kind. Many of which we see as highly successful entrepeneurs on a daily basis. These may suffer other ailments and get divorced often and produce disfunctional children but certainly left untreated don't end up sociopaths/psychos as NPD would infer.

I have always believed that it is - just as Vaknin himself has repeatedly said - "the Jewish course" since profound Narcissism is more often found among Russian, Ashkanasi and Sephardic Jews of pure blood. Way above and beyond what exists among gentiles of the world.

Have any of you ever tried living in Israel? It's either get louder and brazier than the next person or get verbally cut down to a wimpering pulp. Verbal agressiveness often dominates their way of life. Vaknin himself has said that his own narcissistic Jewishness is what led him to investigate it's cause. Or dysphoria? A word he applies so often it ends up failing to impress.

He suffers from delusions of grandeur. THAT is not narcissism. He plays on the emotions of vulnerable women on internet that he lures into "loving him". His drive for "further" attention is through his supposed profound "studies" on narcissism pretending he's some sort of expert when in fact it is only sloppily put together empirical research that he relies on. I will add, however, that empirical here reaches inward.

Vaknin needs to write about his full experience but in balance sans constant personal aggrandizement that he can't seem to control.

Little wonder why he believes he's an expert?

Thank you for your time. 75.22.213.84 03:50, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

I am really uncomfortable with the race specific aspects of your claims here, there are no valid grounds for them that I am aware of.
I also do not feel that there is any relevance in making personal attacks on Sam Vaknin as this article in no way refers to him or his work which does not meet the requirements of WP:RS, WP:V or WP:OR. --Zeraeph 05:53, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

As a Jew, I am overwhelmed that Wikipedia would allow something like this. It makes my heart ache and my mind reels in disbelief. Can it removed? Is this possible? Sarah —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.149.20.233 (talk • contribs)

I have requested that the uncivil remarks made by User:75.22.213.84 be permanently deleted [1].
In the event of this happening I hope nobody will object to the responses made by myself and User:172.149.20.233 (that will no longer have a context, or make sense) being deleted? --Zeraeph 11:25, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Say what?

"Zeraeph wound him up into a frenzy"

Don't you know that, like wife beaters, narcissists always pull this stunt to come out smelling like a rose? And it worked on YOU? Oh, what a groaner. Unbelievable. Just unbelievable. I'm oughta here. --User:ken2849

Sockpuppet alert ! --Penbat 13:24, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Small Text

[edit] Peer-reviewed, neutral content needed

This entry is generally lacking in scholarly rigour and reads as opinion. It would be improved by a healthy dose of substantiation and peer-reviewed referencing.(Unsigned comment)

Yes I agree but more importantly IMO loads of material is completely missing: true self, false self, projection, narcissistic rage, narcissistic supply, narcissistic injury etc are completely missing. They are ideas introduced by the pioneers mentioned on Narcissism_(psychology). I am gradually working towards a more rigourous write up but I am no expert. The only heavyweight expert around who was likely to contribute was Sam Vaknin but the powers that be have banned him.

Vaknin is not recognised by peers as an authority - he is widely regarded in the profession as a crank, and a dangerous spreader of misinformation. I support the "powers that be", just as I would support removal of Intelligent Design arguments in wiki articles on biology. It's comparable. - Unsigned by User:220.237.81.156 22:48, 10 October 2006
20.237.81.156 is almost certainly a sockpuppet and can be disregarded. --Penbat 13:17, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
Hey Penbat, regardless of whether it's a sockpuppet or not, comments like that should certainly not be disregarded because this is a talk page, not a !vote tally page, so please be a little more civil (saying "can be disregarded" is only more appropriate for a !vote tally page). In addition, 220.237.81.156, please also watch your civility. It's not constructive criticism to go around saying that so-and-so is a crank. It looks like both sides are getting a little hot. It might be tough, but staying cool when the editing gets hot is necessary, especially when both sides are tossing around things like this. --Deathphoenix ʕ 02:55, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Not all material can be peer reviewed scientifically as the pioneers such as Kohut had differing theories but they are important to understand. --Penbat 13:17, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Also nothing on Comorbidity of NPD. --Penbat 14:31, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Shocked by deletion of Vaknin, Sam Malignant Self Love - Narcissism Revisited by 220.237.81.156

You could at least had the decency to discuss this first. There are about 30 books listed - with a wide range of styles - some very academic and some designed for the lay non-technical reader. Sam Vaknin's book is one of the best selling on Narcissism. The reader is more than capable of using their own judgement about which books to refer to. IMO this sort of censorship is unreasonable and If it is not put back I will refuse to ever do any more work on narcissism Wikis. --Penbat 13:33, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Vaknin is not an authority - he is regarded in the profession as a crank with many wildly unsubstantiated claims. This page must retain professional rigour to maintain credibility. - Unsigned by User:220.237.81.156 22:49, 10 October 2006 (UTC) Please sign your posts from now on.
220.237.81.156 is almost certainly a sockpuppet and can be disregarded. --Penbat 13:15, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
Vaknin does not make things up out of nothing - they are not things he dreamed up. Sam worked under a psychitrist conducting research on personality disorders while he was in prison and had unfettered access to the doctor's library selections. Since he left Israel 10 years ago, he has acquired a considerable library of authorities on NPD and, as time went by, on many other relevant and related topics.
Vaknin's only "mistake" was in not foot-noting his original book. Instead, he merely listed his reference texts.
The truth is that Vaknin's book, MSL, is on the shelves at several Ivy League colleges because professors have requested it be there. If it is good enough for them, then it must be a lot better what your spouting off indicates. He has no "wildly unsubstantiated claims". Whenever something is merely his own material, he indicates that. All the rest, he learned from the authorities in the field. -I am Kiwi 06:39, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] What the professionals have to say

[edit] Narcissistic Supply in professional journals & books

Google Scholar Search - Scholarly books and journal articles referencing "Narcissistic Supply

found on that page - The earliest date for a doctor (a psychoanalyst) using "Narcissistic Supply" was 1938. The drive to amass wealth O Fenichel - Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 1938 - pep-web.org ... can be looked upon first as a derivative of that primitive form of regulation of self-regard in which the individual requires a 'narcissistic supply' from the ...

This bird would fly if anyone knows exactly what O Fenichel said about Narcissistic Supply - because it would have to be presented soley in terms of O Fenichel and referenced soley to O Fenichel, even from what little is there it seems to have been quite a different usage. Remember, this is a medical related article where policy on citations must be followed far more strictly than elsewhere and should, ideally, all be from formally published medical/academic sources (see WP:RS). --Zeraeph 00:37, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Also, these that quote and cite Vaknin

Self-Submitted free online content site. Article submitted by Vaknin and is original research. Does not accord with WP:SOURCE, WP:RS or WP:NOR.--Zeraeph 00:37, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
"Narcissism in High Fidelity" Dr. Kristina Nelson Book of movie-related literary criticism, written by a PHD in English. Does not accord with WP:SOURCE or WP:RS for a medical article. (book itself might be worth a mention on Narcissism? If there is anything new and interesting in it.)--Zeraeph 00:37, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Narzisstische Strukturen in Sunset Boulevard und Mulholland Drive N Velten, H Berressem, E Seminar - pp 6,16,17 uni-koeln.de ... of Narcissistic Supply (admiration, adoration, approval, awe) and fulfills important Ego functions“ (Vaknin). Eine narzisstische ... Narzisstische Strukturen

Narzisstische Strukturen -

Philosophy Student at Cologne University (http://www.uni-koeln.de/phil-fak/) movie related essay. Does not accord with WP:SOURCE or WP:RS, also it is in German (see WP:RS). --Zeraeph 00:37, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Unadulterated Arrogance: Autopsy of the Narcissistic Parental Alienator DM Summers, CC Summers - American Journal of Family Therapy, 2006 - Taylor & Francis
... excessive admiration, adulation, attention and affirmation—or, failing that, wishes to be feared and to be notorious (narcissistic supply) (Vaknin, 2003b). ...
Again, self submitted, not academic, not peer-reviewed, not exactly a "recognised publishing house" either, http://journalsonline.tandf.co.uk and no way to check the credentials of the authors one way or another. But "parental alienation" can sometimes be a dubious field, certainly isn't universally recognised by the academic or medical mainstream. Does not accord with WP:SOURCE or WP:RS. --Zeraeph 00:37, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

-I am Kiwi 07:31, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Narcissistic Rage in Professional Journals & Books

Google Scholar for Narcissistic Rage As far as I can reckon, Kohut coined this term in a book published in 1971. -I am Kiwi 07:40, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Great, can you write it up referenced to at least Kohut, and any other formally published, academic/medical sources that meet the standards of WP:SOURCE and WP:RS --Zeraeph 00:40, 14 October 2006 (UTC)?

[edit] Narcissistic Injury in Professional Journals & Books

2000 mentions in scholarly books & journals -I am Kiwi 07:40, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Great, can you write it up referenced soley to any formally published, academic/medical sources that meet the standards of WP:SOURCE and WP:RS? --Zeraeph 00:42, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Human Sources of Narcissistic Supply

Google Scholar - professional books and journals dealing with Sources of Narcissistic Personality It may have been Vaknin who coined the terms Primary and Secondary. Not all relevant journals and books are available online, but analysts recognized and described Primary and Secondary sources of supply, even if they didn't use the actual terms.

-I am Kiwi 07:58, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

A vague statement like that is nowhere near enough, it needs backing with formally published, recognised, academic/medical citations that meet WP:SOURCE and WP:RS. --Zeraeph 00:45, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Understanding Sam Vaknin's body of work

Sam Vaknin is a more than competent researcher, and he has written a book that may be rambling and repetitive, but that does not not mean that facts within suddenly become faulty. It doesn't work that way. The truth is that Vaknin has devoted a large portion of the last 10+ years studying NPD.

After he brought his as then unpublished book to the web, he immediately attracted thousands of correspondents, including mental health professionals, to include psychiatrists and psychologists. He did not realize he was going to get more letters from the human wreckage NPD spawns than from any other group. This led him to begin years of continuing deep and extensive study of shame, dependence, codependency, other personality disorders, etc.

He has done increasingly large amounts of study in of research findings in a wide range of subjects touching on all aspects of the personality disorders and the disruptions in human relational functioning.

The truth is, Vaknin does not have much of any "original research" in his books and articles. What he percieved from his correspondence, he did not write about directly but of what his research told him about what letters to him said. What Vaknin has in his book comes from the very fine minds of icons in the field. Vaknin's "problem", as I mentioned above, was his failure to footnote. If he weren't so lazy or if he thought it would gain him sufficient narcissistic supply, he might be tempted to tackle that arduous task. -I am Kiwi 08:18, 11 October 2006 (UTC)


I have to say I strongly disagree - the whole body of work I've seen is characterised by very sloppy research methods, and it is very worrying that he appears to deliberately mislead people about his qualifications. It is concerning that an individual who has successfully drowned internet sources with his writings, though with no substantial formal qualification or recognition in the profession (and the above list does not dispel this), with assertions that do not appear to be verified, can get a toehold in an encyclopedia.Topologyrob 06:10, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

What is your angle and interest in this then ? Do you have formal qualifications in Narcissism yourself. Have you personally read Sam Vaknins work and assessed it first hand. What you have just said does not tally with the fact that there are about 8 self help forums for victims of narcissism and Sam Vaknin's work features quite heavily in most of them. If Sam Vaknin's work didnt resonate with those victims, his work wouldn't get accepted in those forums. Also comments like yours dont appear on the Editorial and User reviews for Malignant Self Love for Amazon. If you have read Malignant Self Love and you dislike it so much why dont you do everyone else a favour and put up your own Amazon review to warn people. Anyway airbrushing out a book that sells well and a body of work is just plain censorship - the reader can make his own mind up. Also many other books on narcissism are just personal views by qualified psychologists without any citations at all - these sorts of books are self help books intended for the lay person. --Penbat 08:27, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

My angle is interest in seeing accurate scientific representation on Wikipedia - it is analagous to not wanting to see discussions of perpetual motion machines in physics entries on Wikipedia (however popular views may be amongst the general public), or 9-11 conspiracy theories in discussions of building demolition (currently attracting a very large popular following). That someone's work can resonate with people (not themselves diagnosed with NPD) does not constitute strong clinical evidence.

I have indeed read Malignant Self Love closely - that is why I am worried that it is so influential in the popular perception of NPD. I believe it is unverified and divergent from clinical evidence.

I am not a qualified psychologist, however, and this should be noted, though I am a stakeholder. I am personally connected with several individuals suffering NPD and have often come up against what I see as misinformation from Sam Vaknin on many occasions as his work is throroughly permeating cyberspace, though it is virtually invisible in the peer-reviewed literature. An encyclopedia should reflect the professional discourse, not the popular one (however, a sociological view of the topic could include discussions of Vaknin). As Vaknin does not publish in peer-reviewed journals, his work should not be priveleged in an encyclopedia - it has not passed the scholarly tests. And much of what he writes could be seen as very damaging, particularly his assertions that NPD is untreatable. These strong statements need to be verified by clinical evidence, not hearsay and personal opinion.Topologyrob 01:53, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Countering my stance somewhat is the extended quotations from Vaknin in a recent scholarly paper (Summers, D, Summers, C (2006) Unadulterated Arrogance: Autopsy of the Narcissistic Parental Alienator. American Journal of Family Therapy 34:5, 399-428), though Vaknin has not himself published on NPD in peer-reviewed journals, in stark contrast to other authorities cited on the Wikipedia entry - Topologyrob 02:59, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Scholarly? Please explain, because I couldn't even discover the actual credentials of the authors? Did I miss something? Not that it would make any real difference. --Zeraeph 01:00, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
All personal considerations aside, Sam Vaknin is some kind of Financial Analyst/Economist with no formal qualification in any field related to clinical psychology. He is self published. He does not come close to meeting the requirements of WP:SOURCE or WP:RS as applied to a medical article.
This is an Encyclopaedia, it is of paramount importance that articles in a medical field only have the most impeccable academic/medical sources. If you can find other, suitable, sources that make similar points, that is fine, please include them, and if there is enough information to make a separate article, please make that too, but only after you are ready to post some information to that article, empty stubs look very bad, are unnecessary and are usually (rightly IMHO) summarily deleted. --Zeraeph 01:00, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Way to Go on Narcissistic Supply, Rage, Injury & Charm

I strongly suggest having separate articles for N Supply, Rage and Injury. There is a lot that could be said about them especially Supply. They are referred to separately anyway from the Workplace Bullying article. Maybe set them all up as psychology stub articles and build on them over time. Also the psychological concept of "charm" needs an article as well, initially I also suggest setting up as a psychology stub. --Penbat 15:30, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Any volunteers to kick it off ? --Penbat 14:58, 12 October 2006 (UTC)


Hey Penbat. I did a lot of research last night and collected enough material to create the Narcissistic Supply, Injury and Rage stubs, also Reactive Narcissistic Personality Disorder, Celebrity Narcissism (waiting for Paris Hilton & friends) and Cultural Narcissism. Had you already added Acquired Situational Narcissism? I also recognized the need for a Narcissism Category. I will have to create a template. I am getting to where I need a mentor - there is so much to learn and I keep forgetting things that I thought I had already learned. I had to laugh when I managed to import a Wiki template page into a brand new article - I finally figured out how I managed to do that.
My lord, Penbat, you really know how to light a fire under our friend. Could you slack off on him before he spontaneously combusts?? You did read my note to you on your talk page? I have a response I am composing and I promise you I will have it posted soon. Let's debate finite precise and demarcated points of fact. Let's not have anything so open-ended that it invites only rehashes of old nebulous unfounded charges. Okay? Thanks for considering my suggestion. -I am Kiwi 04:16, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
Can I ask you not to create articles until you have all your "ducks in a row" and have a reasonable amount of verifiable text in a formal, neutral tone to post to them? (Just noticed Malignant Narcissism is a gem of an example of what I mean) After all there is no need to rush, there will still be plenty of cyberspace left when you are ready. Also, I did see some personal commentary on some of the deleted stubs, comments along the lines of: "I will add more to this later", that is really seriously frowned upon. I feel sure the person who put it there (sorry, I didn't check) did not realise that.--Zeraeph 01:07, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Book list is huge

Hi, I think the book list is huge. I don't think it's the norm for a Wikipedia article to have such a large "reading list". I think this list should be mercilessly chopped down to just a few entries, and only of the absolute most notable publications. Thoughts? --Deathphoenix ʕ 03:27, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Hello Phoenix. I will look it over this weekend and see what trimming might be advisable. There are so many other Narcissism topics that we might migrate certain ones to others where they might be appropriate.
What, by the way, is the total allowed with a large important topic like this where what is written in the books does not often have a lot of overlap, but instead deals with different points of view, different theories, different aspects, different degrees of manifestation of the disorder? If I knew what number of books was allowed, it would help us. I can look it up myself if you can tell me what Wiki guideline page it is on. -I am Kiwi 04:24, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
Hmmm... here's the problem: there is no hard and fast rule. It's just what looks proper. The nearest I can tell is Wikipedia:Citing sources. Believe me, there are many large and important topics on Wikipedia, and they get by without long reading lists. The only advice I can offer is that the reading list should be chopped down to only notable publications. What books are notable? Once again, we don't have a hard and fast rule. This and this are only guidelines. It's really what makes sense. Reading lists don't have to present different points of view. What's important is that the article itself presents a neutral point of view, and that it is properly referenced. Reading lists aren't really encyclopedic, in my opinion, so if there are any books in the reading list, they should be the most comprehensive books. I'd rather have one book that presents twelve points of view than twelve books that present a different point of view of each. A link to a (notable enough) web page that shows the same reading list is even better. It's hard to say, and I'm sorry I can't present a hard and fast rule. Mostly, we got with what makes sense, and in my opinion, a huge reading list just doesn't make sense. --Deathphoenix ʕ 04:48, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
Okay, that makes a great deal of sense and helps direct the task. Yes, I had thought that what I needed was an outside link to a long list of books!! I just have to find a website that is a more or less a permanent fixture. So, Aye Aye, Captain. Your wish is my command.
Actually, I too thought the list seemed to go on and on - and I had been thinking that when there are less books, one slows down and browses. But as it is, I must admit I don't really know what books are there. :o) I'll drop by your talk page when I've done the butcher job. And please, Penbat, I know it may be hard, but you will actually be the better judge on a lot of these books, so buck up and we will get through it together. -I am Kiwi 06:33, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Oh, Sam Vaknin! You silly, silly man! Why put on this ingratiating pretence? You're an adult aren't you? What are you doing Sam, I mean 'I am Kiwi. Awwww, there's a little smile! (sorry everyone else, but Sam Vatkin is a menace)

[edit] Having a Book Sale at the Library

Pennie, here is my take on the list. You go through it, decide what to keep. Let's try to keep it to no more than 15?? And subgroup them into "self-help" and "professional publications" I'll be checking in and we can sort through all these, then delete the entire topic here once the selections have been made. That way, people won't forever have to wade through all this. -I am Kiwi 09:05, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Books and Articles on NPD and Pathological Narcissism

  • Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders

I have a very dim point of view of the DSM-IV. It is little more than coding manual for the medical practice-insurance interface. It will be of more interest (for awhile) when the new edition comes out - next year, I think.

  • Alford, C. Fred. Narcissism: Socrates, the Frankfurt School and Psychoanalytic Theory

I might be wrong, but I don't think this ever became a best seller, nor, I suspect, would it be of much interest to the layman - which is, afterall, the audience Wikipedia is directed at.

  • Bach, Sheldon. Narcissistic States and the Therapeutic Process,

Nope.

  • Banja, John Medical Errors and Medical Narcissism, 2005

This one should be moved over to the Medical Narcissism area - whereever that may end up, for what I looked at the stub it is, I'm not certain whether others are beginning to use this term.

  • Brown. Nina W. Coping with Infuriating, Mean, Critical People: The Destructive Narcissistic Pattern, 2006

This sounds like a KEEPER! Should check out the the Amazon's reviews?

  • Carter, Les Enough About You, Let's Talk About Me: How to Recognize and Manage the Narcissists in Your Life, 2005

I've read about this book, too. Narcissism and NPD are big big buzz words

  • Ekleberry, Sharon, LCSW, CSAC. Dual Diagnosis: Addiction and Axis II Personality Disorders. The Counselor, March/April, 1996.

Not needed - I have already put up a link to her website where this series of articles resides - you can also download all the articles in a zip file

  • Fairbairn, W. R. D. An Object Relations Theory of the Personality, New York, Basic Books, 1954 ISBN 0-465-05163-4

Nope

  • Freud, S Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality (1905), Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud, Vol. 7, London, Hogarth Press, 1964. ISBN 0-465-09708-1

NO NO NO

  • Gabbard, Glen O (Ed); Beck, Judith S (Ed); Holmes, Jeremy (Ed). Oxford Textbook of Psychotherapy. (pp. 279-289). ix, 534 pp., 2005.

NOPE

  • Gelder, Michael, Gath, Dennis, Mayou, Richard, Cowen, Philip (eds.), Oxford Textbook of Psychiatry, third edition, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1996, (reprinted 2000).

NOPE

  • Goldman, Howard H., Review of General Psychiatry, fourth edition, Prentice-Hall International, London, 1995.

NOPE NOPE NOPE

  • Golomb, Elan. Trapped in the Mirror : Adult Children of Narcissists in Their Struggle for Self, Quill, 1995. ISBN 0-688-14071-8

Undoubtedly a classic.

  • Greenberg, Jay R. and Mitchell, Stephen A. Object Relations in Psychoanalytic Theory, Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press, 1983. ISBN 0-674-62975-2 ehhh. I don't think so
  • Grunberger, Bela. Narcissism: Psychoanalytic Essays, New York, International Universities Press, 1979. ISBN 0-8236-3491-4

I can't be certain, but the title makes me want to yawn.

  • Guntrip, Harry. Personality Structure and Human Interaction, New York, International Universities Press, 1961. ISBN 0-8236-4120-1

Bit dated

  • Horowitz, M.J. (1975). "Sliding Meanings: A defense against threat in narcissistic personalities". International Journal of Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy 4, 167. --- This is a journal article.
  • Hotchkiss, Sandy Why is it Always about You?: The Seven Deadly Sins of Narcissism, 2005 - I've heard this mentioned a lot considering that it was only published last year
  • Jacobson, Edith. The Self and the Object World, New York, International Universities Press, 1964. ISBN 0-8236-6060-5

Nope

  • Kernberg, O. Borderline Conditions and Pathological Narcissism, New York, Jason Aronson, 1975. ISBN 0-87668-177-1

This was GOOD. A definite KEEP!

  • Klein, Melanie The Writings of Melanie Klein, Ed. Roger Money-Kyrle, 4 vols., New York, Free Press, 1964-75.

four volumes? every word she ever wrote?

  • Kohut, Heinz. The Analysis of the Self: A Systematic Approach to Treatment of Narcissistic Personality Disorders, International Universities Press, 1971. ISBN 0-82368-002-9

Anything by Kohut is blessed.

This should be moved over to the Narcissism topic

THIS is good.

  • Maccoby, Michael. The Productive Narcissist.

Now, This might be good..

  • Masterson, James. A Therapist's Guide to the Personality Disorders: The Masterson Approach. ISBN: 0029202922 - a professionally-oriented text
  • Masterson, James. Search for the Real Self : Unmasking the Personality Disorders of our Age. a keeper

a Keeper

  • Mollon, Phil. The Fragile Self: The Structure of Narcissistic Disturbance and Its Therapy, Jason Aronson Publishers, 1995. ISBN 1-56821-234-8 -- sounds good, given the publisher
  • Morrison, Andrew. Essential Papers on Narcissism, New York University Press, 1986. ISBN 0-8147-5395-7 Essential to who?
  • Morrison, Andrew. Shame: The Underside of Narcissism, The Analytic Press, 1997. ISBN 0-88163-280-5 good, for shame is such an important component in the development of NPD - KEEP
  • Payson, Eleanor The Wizard of Oz and Other Narcissists: Coping with the One-Way Relationship in Work, Love, and Family, 2002 ???? I don't know the feedback on this one
  • Ronningstam, Elsa F. (ed.). Disorders of Narcissism: Diagnostic, Clinical, and Empirical Implications, American Psychiatric Press, 1998. ISBN 0-7657-0259-2 - pretty dry clinical stuff
  • Ronningstam, Elsa F. Identifying and Understanding the Narcissistic Personality, 2005. - this is good
  • Rothstein, Arnold. The Narcissistic Pursuit of Reflection, 2nd revised ed., New York, International Universities Press, 1984.

Sounds intriguing

  • Schwartz, Robert C. Ph.D., DAPA and Smith, Shannon D. , Ph.D., DAPA, "Psychotherapeutic Assessment and Treatment of Narcissistic Personality Disorder" (American Psychotherapy Association, Article #3004 Annals July/August 2002) - journal article
  • Stern, Daniel. The Interpersonal World of the Infant: A View from Psychoanalysis and Developmental Psychology, New York, Basic Books, 1985. ISBN 0-465-09589-5 Stern can be good, but this one sounds pretty deep going
  • Zweig, Paul. The Heresy of Self-Love: A Study of Subversive Individualism, New York, Basic Books, 1968. ISBN 0-691-01371-3

This sounds very intriguing, especially given the year it was written

List is far too good to break up so I have moved it to it's own List of further reading on narcissism and narcissistic personality disorder an approach that has worked well on other articles swamped by their reading lists. Link added to "see also" --Zeraeph 09:51, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] References section is NOT locked

References section is not locked but uses inline citations in accord with WP:CITE.--Zeraeph 20:59, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Confusing wording

They are very likely to be disdainful and disparaging towards in response to the notion of psychotherapy.

There appears to be a word missing here. Please clarify. Thanks. Ireneshusband 05:53, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Which word do you think is missing? --Zeraeph 12:18, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A possible campaign of vandalism

This was posted to several mailing lists last night [2].

The assertions in the post are entirely incorrect and deliberately inflammatory. As a matter of fact, to the best of my knowledge, all reference to, or text from, this individual's writing has been removed from the articles in question where he had posted it, because of it's unverifiability and inaccuracy.

I have have contacted this individual several times asking him which portions of text he feels infringe his copyright so that they may be deleted, and received no reply. --Zeraeph 19:54, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] You must have "wound him up into a frenzy" again

Ken2849 22:40, 3 January 2007 (UTC)ken2849

[edit] Expanding this article

I would be the first person to admit that this article needs considerable expansion, but only with great care, with citation, from verifiable WP:V and reliable sources WP:RS. So please do not alter this article substantially until you have verifiable and cited information to offer. Thank You. --Zeraeph 02:37, 6 January 2007 (UTC)


[edit] seems to be considerable confusion re:subject of article

the correct term has been inserted where the behaviors described by the DSM-IV and the most professional texts belong to NPD, not to this clinically vague term "narcissism". and the phrase "to the extent" is scarcely encyclopedic, never mind clinically meaningful. now if some of these books being used as authoritative sources here are about narcissism, not NPD, then they shouldn't be used in this article but in the Narcissism (psychology) article. if it is felt necessary to give context, all that is needed is to reference the Narcissism (psychology) article. if the word narcissism is to be used in this article, it must be qualified as a pathologically extreme form of narcissism - for clarity as opposed to confusion. 172.191.141.133 03:14, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

beg pardon. mean most instances of the use must be qualified. there are several places where it was obvious it was correct use 172.191.141.133 03:17, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
I think, if you read it, you will find that the whole article make the, correct and accurate, point that narcissistic personality disorder is a DSM IV diagnosis (all DSM Disorders have articles) of a pathologically extreme form of Narcissism, with an explanation of how that works. Simply because that is exactly what it is.
We can hardly re-invent it as something else for variety.
Please do not keep making the article inaccurate by inappropriate word substitutions. Some of your substitutions were valid, but the "clinical experience" subsection discusses Narcissism as a context for NPD and to substitute NPD for Narcissism, is like wantonly substituting the word "aeroplane" for the word "flight" in every context, and makes incorrect nonsense of the whole section. Because the section that uses the word "narcissism" is describing the attributes of narcissism as a context for NPD, and not NPD. Many of those statement become incorrect when applied specifically to NPD rather than narcissism.
Articles about disorders reference to other conditions all the time, for instance the borderline personality disorder article makes constant reference to bipolar, you could not change all those references to the words "borderline personality disorder" just to "avoid confusing the reader". Or even more equivalent, the dissociative identity disorder article makes considerable reference to dissociation, if you were to substitute the term "dissociative identity disorder" for every instance of the term "dissociation" (the exact equivalent of what you are trying to do here), you would make nonsense of the article.
The way to mention the term narcissistic personality disorder more often is to add more verifiable information from reputable sources about narcissistic personality disorder to the article. --Zeraeph 05:07, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
Looking over the section carefully I realise that, although blindly substituting the term "narcissistic personality disorder", as you did, would render the section totally incorrect, there is a need of qualification to distinguish the use of the term "narcissism" in this context from healthy narcissism. So I have done so. This should resolve the issue.--Zeraeph 05:43, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
My goodness. The ignorance displayed this evening is remarkable. Can't someone with some education take some control of this topic and reduce the total incompetence? 172.131.28.38 06:19, 6 January 2007 (UTC)