annotated bibliography
imamess
OverparentingandYoungAdultNarcissism_PsychologicalControla.pdf
The University of Southern Mississippi The University of Southern Mississippi
The Aquila Digital Community The Aquila Digital Community
Dissertations
Summer 8-2019
Overparenting and Young Adult Narcissism: Psychological Control Overparenting and Young Adult Narcissism: Psychological Control
and Interpersonal Dependency as Mediators and Interpersonal Dependency as Mediators
Nathan Alexander Winner University of Southern Mississippi
Follow this and additional works at: https://aquila.usm.edu/dissertations
Part of the Child Psychology Commons, Clinical Psychology Commons, Developmental Psychology
Commons, Family, Life Course, and Society Commons, Other Psychology Commons, Other Social and
Behavioral Sciences Commons, and the Personality and Social Contexts Commons
Recommended Citation Recommended Citation Winner, Nathan Alexander, "Overparenting and Young Adult Narcissism: Psychological Control and Interpersonal Dependency as Mediators" (2019). Dissertations. 1483. https://aquila.usm.edu/dissertations/1483
This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by The Aquila Digital Community. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations by an authorized administrator of The Aquila Digital Community. For more information, please contact [email protected].
OVERPARENTING AND YOUNG ADULT NARCISSISM:
PSYCHOLOGICAL CONTROL AND INTERPERSONAL
DEPENDENCY AS MEDIATORS
by
Nathan Alexander Winner
A Dissertation
Submitted to the Graduate School,
the College of Education and Psychology,
and the Department of Psychology
at The University of Southern Mississippi
in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
August 2019
OVERPARENTING AND YOUNG ADULT NARCISSISM:
PSYCHOLOGICAL CONTROL AND INTERPERSONAL
DEPENDENCY AS MEDIATORS
by Nathan Alexander Winner
August 2019
Approved by:
________________________________________________
Dr. Bonnie C. Nicholson, Committee Chair
Associate Professor, Psychology
________________________________________________
Dr. Eric R. Dahlen, Committee Member
Associate Professor, Psychology
________________________________________________
Dr. Ashley B. Batastini, Committee Member
Assistant Professor, Psychology
________________________________________________
Dr. Richard S. Mohn, Committee Member
Associate Professor, Educational Research and Administration
________________________________________________
Dr. D. Joe Olmi
Chair, Department of Psychology
________________________________________________
Dr. Karen S. Coats
Dean of the Graduate School
COPYRIGHT BY
Nathan Alexander Winner
2019
Published by the Graduate School
ii
ABSTRACT
OVERPARENTING AND YOUNG ADULT NARCISSISM: PSYCHOLOGICAL
CONTROL AND INTERPERSONAL DEPENDENCY AS MEDIATORS
by Nathan Alexander Winner
August 2019
Overparenting, or “helicopter parenting,” is a unique style of parenting
characterized by parents’ well-intentioned but age-inappropriate over-involvement and
intrusiveness in their children’s lives. Recent research has linked overparenting to the
development of narcissistic traits in young adults, although the mechanisms of this
relationship remain unclear. Two plausible mechanisms include the parenting behavior of
psychological control and the increased interpersonal dependency of the child.
Psychological control is a construct that overlaps with overparenting and has been linked
to both dependent and narcissistic traits. Similarly, interpersonal dependency is a key
predictor of narcissistic traits. Therefore, the present study sought to examine
psychological control and interpersonal dependency as sequential mediators in the
relationship between overparenting and young adult narcissistic traits. It was
hypothesized that greater levels of overparenting would be mediated by both greater
levels of parental psychological control and greater levels of interpersonal dependency
among young adult children in predicting narcissistic traits. Additionally, it was predicted
that these mediating relationships would be more pronounced when examining vulnerable
narcissistic traits compared to grandiose narcissistic traits. Results supported these
hypotheses. These findings highlight the mechanisms by which overparenting predicts
narcissistic traits, as well as shed light on the multifaceted nature of narcissism.
iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This project could not have been accomplished without the support and
encouragement of my major professor, Dr. Nicholson, as well as the members of my
committee, including Dr. Dahlen, Dr. Batastini, and Dr. Mohn. Finally, I wish to thank all
of my peers and colleagues for their support, and especially those on the Positive
Parenting Research Team, who have encouraged me throughout this process.
iv
DEDICATION
This dissertation is dedicated to my parents, for their unwavering love,
encouragement, and support.
v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................................ ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................................................................................. iii
DEDICATION ................................................................................................................... iv
LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................ vii
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS ........................................................................................... viii
CHAPTER I - INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................... 1
CHAPTER II - METHODOLOGY .................................................................................. 22
Measures ....................................................................................................................... 23
Demographic Questionnaire ..................................................................................... 23
Helicopter Parenting Instrument (HPI) ..................................................................... 24
Pathological Narcissism Inventory (PNI) ................................................................. 24
Psychological Control Scale- Youth Self-Report (PCS-YSR) ................................. 26
Interpersonal Dependency Inventory (IDI) ............................................................... 27
CHAPTER III - RESULTS ............................................................................................... 29
CHAPTER IV – DISCUSSION........................................................................................ 37
Limitations .................................................................................................................... 39
Areas for Future Research ............................................................................................ 40
Conclusion .................................................................................................................... 41
APPENDIX A – IRB Approval Letter .............................................................................. 43
vi
APPENDIX B – Electronic Informed Consent ................................................................. 44
REFERENCES ................................................................................................................. 46
vii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Means, Standard Deviations, and Bivariate Correlations for Study Measures .... 29
viii
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
Figure 1. Differences in Effect of Overparenting on Narcissistic Phenotypes. ................ 30
Figure 2. Mediation of Parental Psychological Control between Overparenting and
Narcissistic Phenotypes. ................................................................................................... 32
Figure 3. Mediation of Young Adult Interpersonal Dependency between Overparenting
and Narcissistic Traits. ...................................................................................................... 33
Figure 4. Mediation of Young Adult Interpersonal Dependency between Overparenting
and Narcissistic Phenotypes. ............................................................................................. 34
Figure 5. Parallel Mediation of Parental Psychological Control and Young Adult
Interpersonal Dependency between Overparenting and Narcissistic Traits. .................... 35
Figure 6. Parallel Mediation of Parental Psychological Control and Young Adult
Interpersonal Dependency between Overparenting and Narcissistic Phenotypes. ........... 36
1
CHAPTER I - INTRODUCTION
Narcissism, broadly defined as an interpersonal pattern characterized by a sense
of entitlement, an unhealthy need for admiration, and a general lack of empathy (Miller &
Campbell, 2008; Pincus, 2013), has undergone conceptual scrutiny in recent years (Cain,
Pincus, & Ansell, 2008), including researchers arguing for the existence of different
narcissistic phenotypes (Miller et al., 2011; Pincus, 2013). More specifically, grandiose
narcissism is regarded as narcissism manifesting as more overt, domineering, and
arrogant behavior in interactions with others (Miller et al., 2011; Ronningstam, 2009),
while vulnerable narcissism appears to characterize individuals who exhibit more shame,
defensiveness, oversensitivity, and low self-esteem (Dickinson & Pincus, 2003; Miller et
al., 2011). Additionally, a number of etiological theories on the development of
narcissism have been posited over the last several decades, and these theories suggest
different pathways in regards to the development of predominantly grandiose (Capron,
2004; Imbesi, 1999) and vulnerable (Horton, Bleau, & Drwecki, 2006; Rothstein, 1979)
narcissistic traits.
Overparenting, or “helicopter parenting,” is a construct which has garnered a
great deal of recent media attention (e.g., Kantrowitz & Tyre, 2006), and is regarded as
parenting which is over-involved (i.e., “hovering”), albeit well-intentioned, in the lives of
young adult children (Padilla-Walker & Nelson, 2012; Schiffrin et al., 2014). Recent
research has also noted a number of problematic outcomes related to overparenting
(Bradley-Geist & Olson-Buchanan, 2014; LeMoyne & Buchanan, 2011; Schiffrin et al.,
2014), including the development of narcissistic traits (Segrin, Woszidlo, Givertz, Bauer,
& Murphy, 2012; Segrin, Woszildo, Givertz, & Montgomery, 2013). There are a number
2
of plausible mechanisms by which overparenting may predict narcissistic traits, including
the mediating roles of psychological control and interpersonal dependency. Psychological
control, a category of parenting behaviors related to overparenting (Padilla-Walker &
Nelson, 2012), is indicative of parenting which is over-involved, intrusive, and fostering
of dependence (Barber, 1996). Relatedly, interpersonal dependency among young adult
children, which has recently been linked to both overparenting (Odenweller, Booth-
Butterfield, & Weber, 2014) and narcissism (Sonnenberg, 2013), is a pattern of
interpersonal behavior characterized by overreliance on others (Bornstein, 2012), which
is a trait related to an external locus of self, typical of narcissism (Pincus, 2013).
Therefore, the purpose of the present study was to examine the mediating roles of
psychological control and interpersonal dependency in the relationship between
overparenting and narcissistic traits. It was hypothesized that greater levels of both
parental psychological control and young adult child interpersonal dependency would
mediate the relationship between overparenting and pathological narcissism among
young adults. Additionally, given the mechanism by which overparenting was
hypothesized to predict narcissism (i.e., over-involvement rather than permissiveness;
Horton, Bleau, & Drwecki, 2006), it was also hypothesized that these mediating
relationships would be more pronounced among vulnerable (rather than grandiose)
narcissism. This study helps clarify the manner in which overparenting may lead to
narcissistic traits in young adults (Segrin, Woszildo et al., 2013), as well as cast light on
the societal implications of this emerging style of parenting.
3
Narcissism
While the clinical definition of narcissism has been subject to a great deal of
scrutiny and evolution (Cain, Pincus, & Ansell, 2008), researchers broadly characterize
narcissism as consisting of a pattern of entitlement, a strong desire for admiration from
others, and a dearth of empathy resulting in a generally dysfunctional interpersonal
pattern (Cain, Pincus, & Ansell, 2008; Miller et al., 2011; Miller & Campbell, 2008;
Pincus, 2013; American Psychiatric Association, 2013). Similarly, while the Diagnostic
and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders has undergone a number of changes over the
decades (Cain et al., 2008), Narcissistic Personality Disorder is currently defined as “a
pattern of grandiosity, need for admiration, and lack of empathy,” with an estimated
prevalence rate ranging 0% to 6.2% in non-clinical populations (American Psychiatric
Association, 2013, p. 645). However, given that everyone possesses some degree of
narcissistic traits (Cain et al., 2008; Raskin & Hall, 1979), research examining narcissism
typically conceptualizes this personality pattern as occurring along a continuum, where it
is unnecessary to meet formal criteria for a personality disorder.
Recently, research has begun to explore different subtypes of narcissism (i.e.,
grandiose narcissism and vulnerable narcissism; Miller et al., 2011; Pincus, 2013).
Grandiose narcissism is characterized by a greater degree of interpersonal domination
and aggression (Miller et al., 2011), with these individuals often perceived as more brash,
arrogant, and overt in their domineering patterns with others (Ronningstam, 2009).
Grandiose narcissistic individuals have even been regarded as “oblivious” (Gabbard,
1989), given their propensity for denying their own weaknesses and shortcomings, in
order to sustain their exaggerated, yet fragile sense of self (Gabbard, 1989; Kernberg,
4
1974; Kernberg, 1998). This conceptualization is consistent with research demonstrating
grandiose narcissistic individuals as less likely to report distress related to their relational
patterns, despite acknowledging interpersonal difficulties related to their domineering
behavior (Dickinson & Pincus, 2003). Furthermore, some researchers have noted that
aspects of this type of narcissism may be perceived as adaptive given the positive
association between grandiose narcissism, trait self-esteem (Horton et al., 2006) and
subjective well-being (Sedikides, Rudich, Gregg, Kumashiro, & Rusbult, 2004). Of
course, these seemingly adaptive traits serve to belie an underlying instability in the self-
image of grandiose narcissistic individuals (Ronningstam, 2009).
Conversely, vulnerable narcissism manifests in a socially avoidant manner
(Dickinson & Pincus, 2003), with these individuals better characterized as “shame-ridden
and hypersensitive” (Ronningstam, 2009; p. 113). These individuals often exhibit an
exaggerated defensiveness, which serves to obfuscate a low self-esteem and feelings of
insecurity (Miller et al., 2011). Whereas grandiose narcissistic individuals are able to
compensate for their insecurity through their own overt and domineering behavior,
vulnerable narcissistic individuals are more dependent on the explicit validation of others
(Dickinson & Pincus, 2003). Given this distinction, vulnerable narcissists have been
shown to be more likely than grandiose narcissists to acknowledge distress related to
their interpersonal difficulties (Dickinson & Pincus, 2003). This chronic pattern of
distress in interpersonal relationships leads to a larger pattern of hypersensitivity, and
even anxious-avoidant tendencies (Miller et al., 2011; Dickinson & Pincus, 2003).
Furthermore, while grandiose and vulnerable narcissism differ in their expressions of
self-esteem, both of these constructs can be characterized by self-esteem that is unstable
5
and oversensitive, and dependent on external sources of validation (Pincus 2013;
Ronningstam, 2009).
The presence of narcissistic traits varies along a continuum (Raskin & Hall,
1979), and some narcissistic characteristics may even be viewed as adaptive in certain
circumstances (e.g., when paired with trait self-esteem; Horton et al., 2006). This has
created some inconsistencies in the conceptualization of this construct, which is further
compounded by variability in the method of assessment used by researchers (e.g., Miller
et al., 2011; Pincus, 2013; Raskin & Hall, 1979). However, generally speaking,
narcissistic traits are considered pathological. In fact, Pincus (2013) has distinguished
pathological narcissism from more normative narcissistic traits by an emphasis on
“intense needs for validation and admiration” which are “extreme and coupled with
impaired regulatory capacities,” and “that energize the person to seek out self-
enhancement experiences” (Pincus, 2013, p. 95). This understanding of pathological
narcissism has been associated with a range of negative outcomes (Cain et al., 2008),
including alcohol and substance abuse (Ronningstam, 1996; Vaglum, 1999), delinquency
among adolescents (Barry, Grafeman, Adler, & Pickard, 2007; Barry & Wallace, 2010),
and maladaptive relational styles among adolescents and young adults (Campbell, Foster,
& Finkel, 2002; Dickinson & Pincus, 2003; Grafeman, Barry, Marcus, & Leachman,
2015; Lamkin, Clifton, Campbell, & Miller, 2014). Pathological narcissism has also been
linked to antisocial traits and behaviors in adults more broadly (Book, Visser, & Volk,
2015; Paulhus & Williams, 2002), including sexual coercion and violence specifically
(Baumeister, Catanese, & Wallace, 2002; Bushman, Bonacci, van Dijk, & Baumeister,
2003). Psychiatric patients exhibiting pathological narcissism have even demonstrated
6
unpredictable suicidal behavior, including suicidal behavior without the presence of
depressive symptoms (Links, Gould, & Ratnayake, 2003; Ronningstam & Maltsberger,
1998). The overlap between narcissistic traits and other problematic personality patterns,
including antisocial, histrionic, and borderline traits, has also been well-documented
(American Psychiatric Association, 2013).
A number of studies have also examined outcomes associated with narcissism
among young adults specifically. In assessing college students, Campbell, Foster, and
Finkel (2002) found individuals endorsing greater narcissistic traits to be more likely to
view romantic relationships as a “game,” and display less commitment. Finzi-Dottan and
Cohen (2011) demonstrated that narcissism among young adults is predictive of greater
conflict among siblings, with this conflict most profound when combined with
disfavorable treatment from fathers. In examining differences between vulnerable and
grandiose narcissistic subtypes, Ksinan and Vazsonyi (2016) found a preference for
online social interactions to mediate the relationships between vulnerable narcissism and
social anxiety and inefficacy. Similar mediations were not found for grandiose
narcissism. Studies have also linked narcissistic traits among young adults with a
childhood history of abuse and neglect (Bachar et al., 2015; Van Buren & Meehan,
2015), as well as aggressive driving behavior (Edwards, Warren, Tubré, Zyphur, &
Hoffner-Prillaman, 2013) and aggressive retaliation (Bushman & Baumeister, 1998).
However, while emerging research has begun to distinguish between grandiose
and vulnerable narcissistic subtypes in exploring correlates (e.g., Ksinan & Vazsonyi,
2016; Lamkin et al., 2014; Van Buren & Meehan, 2015), due in large part to recent
advances in assessment of these traits (Pincus, 2013), progress in examining this
7
distinction is still lacking. Further exploration of this distinction is likely warranted, due
to the phenotypic variation and hypothesized differences in associated outcomes between
these two subtypes (Miller et al., 2011). Furthermore, while researchers differ in their
understanding of the etiology of narcissism (e.g., the role of multiple interacting social
systems; Washburn & Paskar, 2011), several studies have implicated specific parenting
practices in the development of narcissistic traits, including parenting practices which
may differ relative to narcissistic phenotypes (Horton et al., 2006).
Parenting and Narcissism
A great deal of research has examined the impact of parenting and childhood
experiences on the development of narcissism (Norton, 2011). In fact, Horton et al.
(2006) outlined a number of views of parenting on the etiology of narcissism, two of
which are particularly relevant for the present study. Both of these theories have their
foundation in Kohut’s (1977) self-psychology. Kohut (1977) theorized that a child’s
development of self-identity is dependent upon: 1) parental responsiveness to the child’s
desires, emotions, and behaviors, as well as 2) the child’s idealizing of their parents as a
model of interpersonal behavior to be emulated. So long as parents respond appropriately
and empathically to their children, and children idealize this pattern of interaction, a
healthy sense of self, including a sense of self distinct from their parents’ self, may be
developed. Kohut (1977) also emphasized the role of “optimal frustrations” (i.e.,
occasions where the child is forced to confront challenges independently from their
parents), which he theorized were necessary for the child to limit his/her sense of
grandiosity to an appropriate level. Therefore, the failure to appropriately experience
8
“optimal frustrations” can lead to the expression of narcissistic traits; however, this
failure can be achieved in multiple ways, and with different results.
One view of the etiology of narcissism, posited by Imbesi (1999), emphasizes the
role of parental permissiveness, which is a style of parenting characterized by a low level
of parental control, involvement, and discipline (Baumrind, 1966; 1967; 1971). Imbesi
(1999) theorized that permissive parents fail to ensure sufficient opportunities for
“optimal frustrations” for their children, due to their relative lack of discipline and
control. This failure to ensure “optimal frustrations” results in an unrealistically elevated
grandiose self by the child, as the child is not given appropriate feedback as to their own
limits and responsibilities. The resulting exaggerated grandiosity is a key component of
pathological narcissism, and specifically of grandiose narcissism (Miller et al., 2011;
Pincus, 2013). Additionally, this theoretical understanding of the etiology of narcissism
converges with other theories, including social learning theory, which argues that
children learn from permissive parenting that they are superior and deserving of
preferential treatment (Horton, 2011; Millon & Everly, 1985), and Young’s (1990)
Schema-Focused Cognitive Approach, which emphasizes the need for children to
internalize their own “limits,” which can only result from appropriate parental discipline.
Therefore, while theories on the development of narcissism may differ as to the specific
mechanism of action, there appears to be convergence in implicating permissive
parenting as an important mechanism in the development of these grandiose traits
(Horton et al., 2006). In fact, research has supported this perspective, including linking
permissive parenting (Baumrind, 1967) and “pampering” to the development of
grandiose narcissistic traits in adolescents (Mechanic & Berry, 2015) and young adults
9
(Capron, 2004; Ramsey, Watson, Biderman, & Reeves, 1996; Watson, Little, &
Biderman, 1992). However, the present study will more closely examine a second
theoretical understanding of the development of narcissism, which focuses on excessive
parental control, rather than permissiveness.
Whereas Imbesi (1999) emphasized parenting so permissive that it leads to
uninhibited grandiosity, a second perspective emphasizes parenting so restrictive that it
inhibits the development of an independent sense of self. In keeping with Kohut’s (1977)
self-psychology theory, these parents also fail to provide “optimal frustrations” for their
children; however, this failure is instead due to inappropriate and intrusive over-
involvement, rather than permissiveness, on the part of the parent. This style of
“overinvolved enmeshment” (Horton et al., 2006; p. 350), rather than leading to
unimpeded grandiosity, leads to children who are dependent on external sources for their
sense of identity and worth, which is a pattern also consistent with pathological
narcissism, and especially vulnerable narcissism (Miller et al., 2011; Pincus, 2013).
This theoretical approach also converges with additional theoretical perspectives
(e.g., Millon & Everly, 1985; Rothstein, 1979), and research examining excessive
parental control practices (e.g., authoritarian parenting; Baumrind, 1966; 1967; 1971),
have demonstrated a link with narcissistic traits (Watson et al., 1992), including
vulnerable narcissistic traits specifically (Cramer, 2015). Additionally, parenting
practices related to psychological control (e.g., withholding love and approval in order to
influence and manipulate children), have been empirically linked in several studies to
unhealthy narcissism in adolescents and young adults (Givertz & Segrin, 2014; Horton, et
al., 2006; Horton & Tritch, 2014).
10
Where these two theories appear to diverge is in their explanation of narcissism as
it relates to either the grandiose or vulnerable type. While parental permissiveness
appears to predict children’s unimpeded grandiosity (Capron, 2004; Imbesi, 1999),
parental over-control and intrusiveness appears more closely linked to individuals’
narcissistic dependency and insecurity (Horton et al., 2006; Rothstein, 1979), which are
traits more closely associated with narcissistic vulnerability (Miller et al., 2011;
Dickinson & Pincus, 2003). Given the degree to which these phenotypes of narcissism
may differ in their presentation and related outcomes, future research should distinguish
between these related, but distinct constructs (Miller et al., 2011). Additionally, more
contemporary patterns of parenting behavior should be examined, including
overparenting (i.e., “helicopter parenting”), which is a style of parenting that exhibits
well-intentioned over-control and intrusiveness (Padilla-Walker & Nelson, 2012), and
which has recently been linked to pathological narcissism among young adults (Segrin et
al., 2012; Segrin, Woszildo et al., 2013). Therefore, the present study will seek to build
on the research exploring parenting and narcissism, by examining the emerging body of
research on overparenting, including its relationship to both grandiose and vulnerable
narcissistic phenotypes.
Overparenting
Overparenting, often referred by media as “helicopter parenting” (e.g., Kantrowitz
& Tyre, 2006), is a distinct style of parenting characterized by parental over-involvement
(i.e., “hovering”) in young adult children’s lives (Schiffrin et al., 2014). This includes
parents’ withholding of autonomy and excessive doling of support (Padilla-Walker &
Nelson, 2012; Segrin, Givertz, Swaitkowski, & Montgomery, 2013). Researchers have
11
argued that this style of parental intrusiveness may stem from parents’ excessive fears
and anxiety that, while well-intentioned, may ultimately impede appropriate child
development (Nelson, 2010; Segrin, Givertz et al., 2013). While parental involvement has
traditionally been conceptualized as positive (Combs-Orme, Wilson, Cain, Page, &
Kirby, 2003; Lamborn, Mounts, Steinberg, & Dornbusch, 1991), recent research has
highlighted the risks of developmentally inappropriate parental over-involvement on
individuals’ emotional health (Gar & Hudson, 2008; Marano, 2008) and adjustment upon
entering adolescence (Grolnick, Kurowski, Dunlap, & Hevey, 2000). In fact, researchers
have noted the similarity of overparenting among young adults to overprotective, or over-
solicitous parenting, in young children (Padilla-Walker & Nelson, 2012). For example,
over-solicitous parents often intrude in their children’s play activities, and exhibit an
excess of affection incongruent with the situational context (Rubin, Hastings, Stewart,
Henderson, & Chen, 1997). Similar research has also linked over-solicitous parenting
practices with anxiety and depressive symptoms among young children (Bayer, Sanson,
& Hemphill, 2006; McShane & Hastings, 2009) and social inhibition among toddlers
(Rubin, Burgess, & Hastings, 2002). Taken together, these studies suggest that parental
over-involvement, despite being well-intentioned, may prove detrimental at any stage of
development (Padilla-Walker & Nelson, 2012).
However, in some ways parental over-involvement may be uniquely problematic
during young adulthood, given the growing independence and maturity expected of
individuals as they enter adulthood (Arnett, 2004; Nelson & Barry, 2005; Padilla-Walker
& Nelson, 2012). For example, many experts argue that the difficulties associated with
overparenting manifest in an occupational setting, as young adults leave college and enter
12
the workforce (Ludden, 2012; Tyler, 2007). It should be noted that, similar to over-
solicitous parenting of young children, the risks associated with overparenting young
adults pertain to the nature of parental involvement (Schiffrin et al., 2014), with
involvement that inhibits the development of autonomy in young adults being especially
problematic (Padilla-Walker & Nelson, 2012). Additionally, while overparenting shares
aspects of various other forms of parental control, including behavioral control (e.g.,
monitoring and behavior regulation) and an authoritarian parenting style (Odenweller et
al., 2014), overparenting tends to be uniquely characterized by a high level of parental
warmth and age-inappropriate, albeit well-intentioned, parental intrusiveness (Padilla-
Walker & Nelson, 2012; Schiffrin et al., 2014).
While research is yet emerging, overparenting has been linked to a variety of
negative outcomes among young adults, including poorer psychological and emotional
health (Segrin, Woszildo et al., 2013; Schiffrin et al., 2014), and potentially even the
abuse of prescription medication for depression and anxiety (LeMoyne & Buchanan,
2011). Various other studies have drawn links between overparenting and young adult
neuroticism, maladaptive coping (Odenweller et al., 2014; Segrin, Woszildo et al., 2013),
lower levels of self-efficacy (Bradley-Geist & Olson-Buchanan, 2014; van Ingen et al.,
2015), and interpersonal difficulties (Segrin, Givertz et al, 2013). Additionally, while
classical theoretical formulations of the etiology of narcissism (e.g., Kohut, 1977) did not
address overparenting explicitly, researchers have recently linked overparenting with
narcissistic traits, including entitlement specifically (Segrin et al., 2012) and pathological
narcissism broadly (Segrin, Woszildo et al., 2013) among young adults. However, neither
of these studies measured overparenting using well-established measures, nor did either
13
of these studies make a distinction between grandiose and vulnerable narcissism when
examining the predictive ability of overparenting. Given the mechanism by which
overparenting may plausibly lead to pathological narcissism (i.e., parental over-
involvement leading to dependence in young adults), which is broadly consistent with
Kohut’s (1977) etiological formulation and has been suggested by overparenting
researchers (Locke, Campbell, & Kavanagh, 2012), the distinction between narcissistic
phenotypes may be warranted. Additionally, research has yet to account for mediators in
the relationship between overparenting and narcissistic traits, which is an important next
step for researchers to consider. An exploration of mediators between overparenting and
narcissism ought to lend further support to a causal link between the two constructs, as
well as help clarify the manner by which overparenting leads to narcissistic traits.
Psychological Control
One potential mediator in the relationship between overparenting and young adult
narcissism is parental psychological control, defined by Barber (1996, p. 3296) as
“control attempts that intrude into the psychological and emotional development of the
child.” Research has conceptualized psychological control as the parents’ exploitation of
the child’s emotional bond with the parent (Barber, 1996; Becker, 1964), and parenting
practices associated with psychological control, including forms of emotional
manipulation such as the withholding of love and the use of guilt tactics (Horton et al.,
2006), are generally considered to be malevolent and invasive in nature (Baumrind,
1991), dissimilar to overparenting. However, overparenting and psychological control
share key similarities, including the withholding of appropriate autonomy and an
unhealthy over-involvement in young adult children’s lives, although these constructs
14
nevertheless remain theoretically distinct (Padilla-Walker & Nelson, 2012).
Psychological control also differs from behavioral control (i.e., parents’ monitoring
activity and use of rules in regulating children’s behavior), although these constructs also
appear related (Li, Li, & Newman, 2013; Padilla-Walker & Nelson, 2012). Overall,
established parenting research suggests that a promotion of independence and autonomy
is an important component of development across childhood (Grolnick, 2003; Peterson,
2005), and that parental involvement which does not ultimately aim to foster
independence may prove to be counterproductive (Padilla-Walker & Nelson, 2012;
Steinberg, 1990; Steinberg, Lamborn, Dornbusch, & Darling, 1992).
In regards to outcomes, failure for parents to foster appropriate autonomy,
including the utilization of psychological control practices, has been shown to be
predictive of emotional difficulties in children (Barber, 1996; Barber, Olsen, & Shagle,
1994; Allen et al., 2015), preadolescents (Kunz & Grych, 2013), and adolescents
(Murray, Dwyer, Rubin, Knighton-Wisor, & Booth-LaForce, 2014; Herman, Dornbusch,
Herron, & Harting, 1997). The risks associated with psychological control may also
persist into young adulthood, with studies linking psychological control to outcomes
associated with relational aggression (Wagner & Abaied, 2016), emotion dysregulation
(Manzeske & Stright, 2009), and impaired identity development (Luyckx, Soenens,
Vansteenkiste, Goossens, & Berzonsky, 2007). Researchers have also linked
psychological control practices to dependent traits among adolescents (Steinberg, 1990)
and young adults (Kins et al., 2012; Kins, Soenens, & Beyers, 2011), although research in
examining these specific outcomes is still lacking.
15
Furthermore, psychological control has been linked to the development of
unhealthy narcissistic traits in young adults (Givertz & Segrin, 2014; Horton et al., 2006),
consistent with Kohut’s (1977) theoretical formulation of the etiology of narcissism.
Specifically, Givertz and Segrin (2014) found young adults’ reports of their parents’
psychological control practices were associated with scores on the Psychological
Entitlement Scale (Campbell, Bonacci, Shelton, Exline, & Bushman, 2004). Similarly,
studies have shown young adults’ reports of their parents’ psychological control practices
to be linked with scores on the Narcissistic Personality Inventory (Horton & Tritch,
2014), including when extracting variance associated with trait self-esteem from these
scores (Horton et al., 2006), which suggests that psychological control may be predictive
of both grandiose and vulnerable narcissistic subtypes. However, a direct comparison of
the predictive value of psychological control on these narcissistic subtypes has yet to be
explored.
While overparenting and psychological control appear related, they nevertheless
remain distinct constructs (Padilla-Walker & Nelson, 2012). Additionally, both
overparenting and psychological control have been linked to narcissistic traits among
young adults (Segrin et al., 2012; Segrin, Woszildo et al., 2013; Sonnenberg, 2013).
Therefore, examining psychological control as a mediator between overparenting and
narcissism appears theoretically consistent.
Interpersonal Dependency
Another mechanism by which overparenting may plausibly predict narcissism is
through the facilitation of interpersonal dependency. Given that overparenting is
characterized by parental over-involvement (Schiffrin et al., 2014) which may predict
16
children’s reliance on external validation and direction (Kohut, 1977; Rothstein, 1979)
and failure to obtain age-appropriate independence (Padilla-Walker & Nelson, 2012),
young adult dependency may serve a pivotal role in the relationship between
overparenting and narcissism.
Interpersonal dependency has been defined as a pattern of “thoughts, beliefs,
feelings, and behaviors which revolve around the need to associate closely with, interact
with, and rely upon valued other people” (Hirschfeld et al., 1977, p. 610). While
subsequent research and theoretical frameworks have differed subtly in the
conceptualization of interpersonal dependency (e.g., Bornstein & Languirand, 2003;
Pincus & Gurtman, 1995), these approaches converge on their distinction of unhealthy
interpersonal dependency from more adaptive interpersonal patterns by an unhealthy
overreliance on valued others, with dependent individuals perceiving themselves as
incapable or powerless (Bornstein, 2012; McClintock, Anderson, & Cranston, 2015), and
possessing maladaptive self-perceptions rooted in the perceived need for others’ support
and affirmation (Bornstein, 2016). Moreover, unhealthy dependency is thought to
manifest broadly across contexts, rather than remaining specific to certain appropriate
situations (e.g., in sickness; Bornstein, 2005).
A dependent interpersonal pattern has been linked to greater levels of adult
depression across gender (Dinger et al., 2015; Brewer & Olive, 2014; Nuns & Loas,
2005), and social anxiety in romantic relationships among young adults (Darcy, Davila,
& Beck, 2005). Furthermore, interpersonal dependency has been shown to be predictive
of elevated fears of abandonment, due to dependent individuals’ overemphasis on
external sources of support, rather than an intrinsic sense of self and security (Blatt,
17
2004). In fact, interpersonal dependency is a trait related to various cluster B personality
disorders, including borderline (Bornstein, Becker-Matero, Winarick, & Reichman, 2010;
Bornstein, Hilsenroth, Padawer, & Fowler, 2000), histrionic (Bornstein, 1998), and
narcissistic traits (Barber & Morse, 1994; Ekselius, Lindstrom, Knorring, Bodlund, &
Kullgren, 1994), although the link between dependent and narcissistic traits has
demonstrated mixed results (Meyer, Pilkonis, Proietti, Heape, & Egan, 2001; Sinha &
Watson, 2001). For example, while Bornstein et al. (2000) failed to find a link between
dependency and narcissism when utilizing projective measures, Sonnenberg’s (2013)
utilization of the objective Interpersonal Dependency Inventory (Hirshfeld et al., 1977)
demonstrated a positive relationship with narcissistic traits among young adults. These
findings are consistent with research which has linked dependent and narcissistic traits
among young adults using objective measures (Tomoko, 2013). Therefore, these
somewhat inconsistent results may be attributable to the varied means by which
researchers assess these traits, including the assessment or non-assessment of subclinical
levels of dependency (Bornstein, 2005).
Additionally, dependent traits may manifest differently across grandiose and
vulnerable narcissism, given grandiose narcissists’ failure to recognize their own
dependent interpersonal patterns (Bornstein, 1998a). In fact, a recent study by Luyten,
Crowley, Janssen, and Mayes (2014) offered support for this hypothesis, as these
researchers found vulnerable narcissism, but not grandiose narcissism, to mediate the
relationship between dependency and sensitivity to social exclusion among adolescents.
Alternately, Sonnenberg (2013) found interpersonal dependency to be predictive of both
grandiose and vulnerable narcissism. Therefore, additional research appears necessary,
18
and particularly among young adults, who experience shifting social roles and
responsibilities in young adulthood (Bornstein, 2005; Tanner, 2006). In fact, researchers
have noted the unique risks of interpersonal dependency upon entering adulthood,
including its relationship to loneliness and maladaptive social functioning (Mahon, 1982;
Pritchard & Yalch, 2009). Given these concerns, it is imperative to better understand the
role of parenting in predicting interpersonal dependency, in order to attenuate the risks
associated with this problematic interpersonal pattern.
Consistent with Kohut (1977) and Rothstein’s (1979) view on the implication of
parental over-involvement in the etiology of narcissism, researchers have linked parental
psychological control to the emergence of dependent traits in adolescence and young
adulthood (Kins, Soenens, & Beyers, 2012; Soenens, Vansteenkiste, & Luyten, 2010).
Various other forms of excessive control, including parenting practices associated with
parental overprotection and an authoritarian parenting style, have also traditionally been
linked to the emergence of dependent personality characteristics (Bornstein, 1992), which
may even put individuals at risk for negative mental health outcomes, including social
anxiety (Spokas & Heimberg, 2009) and depression among young adults (McCranie &
Bass, 1984). Given the noted overlap between overparenting and various forms of
parental over-control, including psychological and behavioral control (Padilla-Walker &
Nelson, 2012), as well as the emphasis of overparenting on parental intrusiveness and
decreased child perceptions of autonomy (Schiffrin et al., 2014), the link between
overparenting and interpersonal dependency appears theoretically consistent.
In fact, Odenweller et al. (2014) recently implicated overparenting in the
development of interpersonal dependency among young adults. Given this finding, as
19
well as the noted link between interpersonal dependency and pathological narcissism
(Barber & Morse, 1994; Ekselius et al., 1994; Sonnenberg, 2013; Tomoko, 2013),
interpersonal dependency appears to be a plausible mediator between overparenting and
narcissism. Therefore, the current study sought to test the mediating effect of
interpersonal dependency between overparenting and young adult narcissism.
Statement of Purpose
Emerging research has linked overparenting with narcissistic traits among young
adults (Segrin et al., 2012; Segrin, Woszildo et al., 2013), although mediating variables in
this relationship have remained largely unexplored. While research has also linked
interpersonal dependency with both overparenting (Odenweller et al., 2014) and
narcissism (Sonnenberg, 2013; Tomoko, 2013) in college students, no study has yet
examined interpersonal dependency as a mediator between the two. Previous research has
found that dependent traits may mediate the relationship between parental over-control
and problematic mental health outcomes within these populations (McCranie & Bass,
1984; Spokas & Heimberg, 2009).
Parental psychological control has also remained unexplored as a mediator,
despite research linking this construct to overparenting (Padilla-Walker & Nelson, 2012)
and pathological narcissism (Givertz & Segrin, 2014; Horton et al., 2006), as well as
interpersonal dependency among young adults (Kins et al., 2012; Kins et al., 2011).
Therefore, the present study sought to examine parental psychological control and
interpersonal dependency as mediators between overparenting and narcissistic traits in
young adults. Given the growing concern within research and the media regarding the
consequences of overparenting, or “helicopter parenting” (Kantrowitz & Tyre, 2006;
20
LeMoyne & Buchanan, 2011; Ludden, 2012; Padilla-Walker & Nelson, 2012; Schiffrin et
al., 2014; Tyler, 2007), this study sought to further clarify the risks associated with this
parenting style to the mental health outcomes of young adults. Additionally, differences
between grandiose and vulnerable narcissism were explored, with the mediating effects
of psychological control and interpersonal dependency predicted to be more robust
between overparenting and vulnerable narcissism. This hypothesis was appropriate, given
emerging research suggestive of the role of excessive parental control and over-
involvement in the development of vulnerable narcissistic traits (Cramer, 2015; Horton et
al., 2006; Rothstein, 1979). This research should therefore help clarify the various
phenotypical variations of narcissism and their respective etiologies (Horton et al., 2006;
Miller et al., 2011; Pincus, 2013).
Research Questions and Hypotheses
Question 1: Will parental psychological control mediate the relationship between
overparenting and pathological narcissism among college students?
Hypothesis 1: Parental psychological control will mediate the relationship
between overparenting and pathological narcissism among college students.
Question 2: Will the mediation of psychological control between overparenting and
pathological narcissism differ across vulnerable narcissism and grandiose narcissism?
Hypothesis 2: The mediation of psychological control between overparenting
and pathological narcissism will be more robust across vulnerable narcissism
compared to grandiose narcissism.
Question 3: Will interpersonal dependency mediate the relationship between
overparenting and pathological narcissism among college students?
21
Hypothesis 3: Interpersonal dependency will mediate the relationship between
overparenting and pathological narcissism among college students.
Question 4: Will the mediation of interpersonal dependency between overparenting and
pathological narcissism differ across vulnerable narcissism and grandiose narcissism?
Hypothesis 4: The mediation of interpersonal dependency between
overparenting and pathological narcissism will be more robust across
vulnerable narcissism compared to grandiose narcissism.
Question 5: Will both parental psychological control and interpersonal dependency
sequentially mediate the relationship between overparenting and pathological narcissism
among college students?
Hypothesis 5: Both parental psychological control and interpersonal
dependency will sequentially mediate the relationship between overparenting
and pathological narcissism among college students, such that greater levels
of overparenting will predict greater levels of parental psychological control,
which will predict greater interpersonal dependency, which in turn will predict
greater pathological narcissism.
Question 6: Will the sequential mediation between overparenting and pathological
narcissism differ across vulnerable narcissism and grandiose narcissism?
Hypothesis 6: The sequential mediation between overparenting and
pathological narcissism will be more robust across vulnerable narcissism
compared to grandiose narcissism.
22
CHAPTER II - METHODOLOGY
Participants and Procedure
This study was approved by The University of Southern Mississippi’s
Institutional Review Board Human Subjects Protection Review Committee (see
Appendix A). All participants were recruited through the Department of Psychology’s
research participation program (http://usm/sona-systems.com/). Participants
acknowledged their informed consent (see Appendix B), before completing the remaining
questionnaire measures through Qualtrics, a secure online survey system. Following
completion of the informed consent, participants completed a brief demographic
questionnaire followed by randomly ordered measures of parenting behaviors,
interpersonal dependency, and narcissistic traits. Completion of the study lasted
approximately 15-20 minutes.
Quality assurance checks included two directed response items, which instructed
participants to answer in a specific way (e.g., Answer “agree” to this question).
Participants who answered incorrectly to either item were removed from further analyses
(N = 44). Additionally, participants who completed study measures within a
predetermined amount of time (i.e., 80 seconds for PNI, 60 seconds for IDI, 30 seconds
for HPI, and 30 seconds for PCS), suggesting inattentiveness to item content, were also
removed from further analyses (N = 48; Huang, Curran, Keeney, Poposki, & DeShon,
2012).
Four hundred thirty-one participants initially responded to the online survey. A
total of 92 failed at least one validity check, an additional 20 participants did not
complete each study measure, and 18 participants fell outside the age range of 18 to 26.
23
Therefore, a total of 301 participants were retained for further analyses. None of the
remaining participants missed more than 75% of any measure items, and therefore all
missing values were replaced with linear trend-at-point imputation, which predicts a
value based on the trend for that specific item (Field, 2013).
Participants for the present study included 258 female (85.7%), 41 male (13.6%),
and 2 other (i.e., “agender” and “Transgender FTM”; 0.7%) young adult college students.
The average age for participants was 19.80 years (SD = 1.904), and included mostly
Freshmen (N = 120; 39.9%), followed by Sophomores (N = 73; 24.3%), Juniors (N = 53;
17.6%), Seniors (N = 54; 17.9%), and one “other” (N = 1; 0.3%). The racial breakdown
of the sample consisted of 191 White/non-Hispanic (63.5%), 98 Black/African-American
(32.6%), 5 Asian-American (1.7%), 1 Native American (0.3%) and 6 “other” (2%)
students. The majority of participants identified their mother as their primary caregiver
(N = 257; 85.4%), followed by fathers (N = 31; 10.3%), grandmothers (N = 9; 3%), aunts
(N = 2; 0.7%), and “other” (N = 2; 0.7%). Socioeconomic status (SES) was assessed by
having participants rank themselves based on their perceived social standing on a 9-point
scale (Adler et al., 1994). Results of this item approximated a normal distribution (M =
4.98, SD = 1.39).
Measures
Demographic Questionnaire
In addition to completion of study measures, a demographic questionnaire was
used for participants to self-report basic demographic information. Participants also
24
identified a “primary caregiver,” and were asked to refer to this primary caregiver when
answering subsequent questionnaires related to parenting.
Helicopter Parenting Instrument (HPI)
The Helicopter Parenting Instrument (HPI; Odenweller et al., 2014) is a 15-item
measure used to assess participants’ reports of their parents’ use of overparenting
behaviors. In response to inadequate development of previous overparenting measures,
Odenweller (2014) created the HPI items using verbiage from previous research and
popular media. Each item is rated on a 7-point Likert, with a score of 1 indicating “Very
strongly disagree” and a score of 7 indicating “Very strongly agree.” Items are summed
(with items 2 and 14 reverse-coded) to form a total score ranging from 15 to 105, with
higher scores indicative of greater perceived overparenting behaviors. Example items
include, “My parents tried to make all of my major decisions,” and “My parent overreacts
when I encounter a negative experience;” however, the term “parent” in this study was
replaced with “primary caregiver” for each item. The HPI has demonstrated adequate
reliability among a sample of college students (α = .78), and evidence of concurrent
validity with LeMoyne and Buchanan’s (2011) Helicopter Parenting Scale (Odenweller et
al., 2014). The HPI demonstrated a coefficient alpha of .77 for the present study.
Pathological Narcissism Inventory (PNI)
The Pathological Narcissism Inventory (PNI; Pincus et al., 2009) is a 52-item
measure used to assess participants’ self-reported narcissistic characteristics. Each item is
rated on a 6-point Likert scale, with a score of 0 indicating “Not at all like me” and a
score of 5 indicating “Very much like me.” The PNI includes two higher-order scales of
Narcissistic Grandiosity and Narcissistic Vulnerability, which represent the two primary
25
phenotypical manifestations of pathological narcissism (Pincus, 2013; Pincus et al.,
2009). Narcissistic Grandiosity is further comprised of three subscales (i.e., Grandiose
Fantasy, Exploitativeness, and Self-Sacrificing Self-Enhancement), and Narcissistic
Vulnerability is comprised of four subscales (i.e., Contingent Self-Esteem, Hiding the
Self, Devaluing, and Entitlement Rage). Narcissistic Grandiosity has a range of 0 to 90,
and Narcissistic Vulnerability has a range of 0 to 170, with higher scores on each scale
indicative of greater levels of their respective phenotypical variations of pathological
narcissism. Example items for Narcissistic Grandiosity include, “I often fantasize about
being admired and respected,” and “Everybody likes to hear my stories.” Example items
for Narcissistic Vulnerability include, “It’s hard to show others the weaknesses I feel
inside,” and “I can get pretty angry when others disagree with me.”
The PNI has demonstrated evidence of internal consistency, with coefficients
ranging from .84 to .93 in a sample of young adult college students (Wright, Lukowitsky,
Pincus, & Conroy, 2010). Pincus et al. (2009) also displayed evidence of concurrent
validity for the PNI, with correlations between the PNI and the Narcissism-
Hypersensitivity Scale (NHS; Serkownek, 1975) and the Hypersensitivity Narcissism
Scale (HSNS; Hendin & Cheek, 1997) ranging from .51 to .62, respectively, despite
modest coefficient alphas for the NHS (α = .65) and the HSNS (α = .75). Furthermore,
Thomas, Wright, Lukowitsky, and Donnellan (2012) have provided evidence of criterion
validity of the PNI among college students, while Wright et al. (2010) demonstrated a
similar factor structure for the PNI across gender among college students, suggesting that
PNI scores do not significantly vary across male and female young adults. For the present
study, reliability coefficients for the total PNI total score, Narcissistic Grandiosity
26
subscale score, and Narcissistic Vulnerability subscale score were .96, .89, and .95,
respectively.
Psychological Control Scale- Youth Self-Report (PCS-YSR)
The Psychological Control Scale- Youth Self-Report (PCS-YSR; Barber, 1996) is
a 16-item measure used to assess participants’ reports of their parents’ use of parenting
practices related to psychological control. The PCS-YSR was developed to build upon
the utility of previous measures of psychological control (Schaefer, 1965), and was also
found to be compatible with observational measures (Barber, 1996). Each item of the
PCS-YSR is rated on a 3-point Likert scale (i.e., 1 = not like him/her; 3 = a lot like
him/her) with items summed to create a total score ranging from 16 to 48. Higher scores
are indicative of greater parental usage of psychological control tactics. Example items
for the PCS-YSR include, “my mother/father changes the subject, whenever I have
something to say,” and “my mother/father acts like he/she knows what I am thinking or
feeling;” however, the term “parent” was replaced with “primary caregiver” for each
item.
Originally constructed among a sample of adolescents (Barber, 1996), the PCS-
YSR has also demonstrated adequate reliability among a sample of young adult college
students (α = .91; Givertz & Segrin, 2014). Additionally, the PCS-YSR has shown
evidence of discriminant validity when compared to a measure of behavioral control
(Barber, 1996; Brown, Mounts, Lamborn, & Steinberg, 1993), and has been shown to
demonstrate superior predictive validity compared to other measures of psychological
control (Barber, 1996; Schaefer, 1965). An internal consistency coefficient of .91 was
found for the present study.
27
Interpersonal Dependency Inventory (IDI)
The Interpersonal Dependency Inventory (IDI; Hirshfeld et al., 1977) is a 48-item
measure used to assess participants’ self-reported interpersonal dependency. Preliminary
scale development began by examining 98 items, either uniquely created or revised from
previous measures, among both a sample of college students and psychiatric patients.
Factor analysis led to the retention of three main subscales, composed of 48 items total.
Each item is rated on a 4-point Likert scale, with a score of 1 indicating “Not
characteristic of me” and a score of 4 indicating “Very characteristic of me.” The IDI is
composed of three subscales (i.e., Emotional Reliance on Another Person, 18 items; Lack
of Social Self-Confidence, 16 items; Assertion of Autonomy, 14 items), which are
summed (with the Assertion of Autonomy subscale reverse-scored) to form a total score
ranging from 48 to 192, with higher scores indicating a greater degree of interpersonal
dependency. Example items include, “I would be completely lost if I didn’t have
someone special” for Emotional Reliance on Another Person, “When I have a decision to
make, I always ask for advice” for Lack of Social Self-Confidence,” and “I don’t need
other people to make me feel good” for Assertion of Autonomy. This total IDI score was
utilized for the present study.
The IDI has demonstrated adequate reliability among a diverse sample of college
students, with coefficient alphas ranging from .72 to .91 on each subscale (Cogswell,
Alloy, Karpinski, & Grant, 2010), comparable to additional studies which have examined
this measure among college students (e.g., Shahar, 2008; Wigman, Graham-Kevan, &
Archer, 2008). Bornstein (1997) also demonstrated adequate test-retest reliability (r =
.71) for the IDI over an 84-week period. Additionally, the IDI has demonstrated evidence
28
of convergent validity when compared to the Dependency subscale of the Depressive
Experiences Questionnaire (Cogswell et al., 2010), and has been shown to be predictive
of dependent behaviors and symptoms of Dependent Personality Disorder (Bornstein,
2005; Loas et al., 2002). A coefficient alpha of .79 was obtained for the total IDI score in
the present study.
29
CHAPTER III - RESULTS
Means, standard deviations, and bivariate correlations for all study measures can
be seen in Table 1. As noted, all variables were correlated at the p < .01 level, with the
exception of parental psychological control and young adult interpersonal dependency,
which were not significantly correlated. There were no significant differences for male
and female primary caregivers for either overparenting (F (1, 297) = 1.17, p = .51) or
psychological control (F (1, 297) = 0.25, p = .76). Additionally, there were no significant
gender differences for PNI total scores (F (1, 297) = 1.11, p = .40), Narcissistic
Grandiosity scores (F (1, 297) = 0.24, p = .93), or Narcissistic Vulnerability scores (F (1,
297) = 1.16, p = .23); however, there were significant gender differences for interpersonal
dependency (F (1, 297) = 3.5, p = .014), with females (M = 116.34, SD = 14.67)
demonstrating higher mean scores than males (M = 110.38, SD = 11.38).
Table 1
Means, Standard Deviations, and Bivariate Correlations for Study Measures
Measure M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6
1. HPI 53.66 13.19 - .35** .23** .27** .25** .23**
2. PCS 23.66 6.98 - .11 .27** .27** .22**
3. IDI 115.46 14.40 - .46** .52** .21**
4. PNI 120.83 42.87 - .96** .81**
5. VN 71.04 31.64 - .62**
6. GN 49.79 15.39 -
Note: HPI = Helicopter Parenting Inventory; PCS = Psychological Control Scale- Youth Self-Report; IDI = Interpersonal Dependency
Inventory; PNI = Pathological Narcissism Inventory (total score); VN = Narcissistic Vulnerability subscale of PNI; GN = Narcissistic
Grandiosity subscale of PNI; ** p < .01
Structural equation modeling using MPlus software (Muthén & Muthén, 2012)
was utilized to examine the mediating roles of parental psychological control and
interpersonal dependency between overparenting and pathological narcissism.
Bootstrapping was utilized to assess indirect effects, which included 10,000 resamples of
30
the data set (Preacher & Hayes, 2008). This process was intended to provide an estimate
of indirect effects which was not constrained by a non-normal distribution, and statistical
significance was indicated by confidence intervals which did not cross zero. Model fit
was examined by the comparative fit index (CFI), the Tucker-Lewis index (TLI), and the
root mean square of error approximate (RMSEA). Adequate CFI and TLI are regarded as
values >.90, and adequate RMSEA is considered values <.05 (Cheung & Rensvold,
2002).
A preliminary analysis was conducted to examine whether the effect of
overparenting differed between vulnerable and grandiose narcissism. A chi-square
difference test was utilized for this analysis (see Figure 1). Results indicated that the chi-
square value of the model when constraining the paths between overparenting and
narcissistic phenotypes (χ² (1, 1) = 10.01, p = .002) was significantly greater than the chi-
square value of the unconstrained model (χ² (1, 0) = 0.00, p < .001), indicating that these
paths were significantly different (Δχ21 = 10.01, p < .005). As predicted, the R² value of
vulnerable narcissism (R² = .066, p = .035) was found to be greater than the value for
grandiose narcissism (R² = .052, p = .036), although both values were significant.
Figure 1. Differences in Effect of Overparenting on Narcissistic Phenotypes.
op = Overparenting; vn = Vulnerable Narcissism; gn = Grandiose Narcissism.
31
Hypotheses 1 stated that parental psychological control would mediate the
relationship between overparenting and pathological narcissism. Results supported this
hypothesis (see Figure 2). Specifically, the total effect (β = .271, p < .001) of
overparenting on narcissistic traits was found to be significant. When examining the
mediating role of psychological control, both the relationships between overparenting and
psychological control (β = .345, p < .001), and psychological control and narcissistic
traits (β = .205, p < .001) were significant, as well as the direct effect of overparenting (β
= .200, p = .001) and the indirect effect of psychological control (β = .071, 95% CI [.033-
.119]). Therefore, the results supported the present hypotheses that psychological control
would partially mediate the relationship between overparenting and pathological
narcissism, with this mediation accounting for approximately 26.2% of this relationship.
Mediation of Parental Psychological Control between Overparenting and Narcissistic
Traits.
op = Overparenting; pcs = Parental Psychological Control; pni = Pathological Narcissism.
Next, to examine Hypothesis 2, the mediating role of psychological control was
examined separately across vulnerable and grandiose narcissism (see Figure 3). The
indirect effects of psychological control between overparenting and vulnerable narcissism
32
and between overparenting and grandiose narcissism were then compared across
constrained versus unconstrained versions. A chi-square difference test determined that
the constrained version (χ² (1, 1) = 6.78, p = .009) was significantly greater than the
unconstrained version (χ² (1, 0) = 0.00, p < .001) of this model, which indicates that the
indirect paths were significantly different (Δχ21 = 6.78, p < .01). More specifically, the
indirect effect of psychological control on vulnerable narcissism (indirect effect = .069,
95% CI [.032-.119]) was greater than the indirect effect of psychological control on
grandiose narcissism (indirect effect = .054, 95% CI [.015-.100]). As the total effect of
overparenting differed between vulnerable narcissism (total effect = .256) and grandiose
narcissism (total effect = .229), psychological control accounted for 27% (% mediated =
.069/.256) of the mediation between overparenting and vulnerable narcissism, and 23.6%
(% mediated = .054/.229) of the mediation between overparenting and grandiose
narcissism.
Figure 2. Mediation of Parental Psychological Control between Overparenting and Narcissistic Phenotypes.
op = Overparenting; pcs = Parental Psychological Control; vn = Vulnerable Narcissism; gn = Grandiose Narcissism.
.187 pcs .345
.175 .157
.201
.581
.187
33
Hypothesis 3 predicted that interpersonal dependency would also mediate the
relationship between overparenting and narcissistic traits. Similarly to Hypothesis 1, both
the relationships between overparenting and interpersonal dependency (β = .234, p <
.001) and between interpersonal dependency and pathological narcissism (β = .420, p <
.001) were significant (see Figure 4). The indirect effect of interpersonal dependency (β =
.098, 95% CI [.048-.157]), and the direct effect of overparenting were also both
statistically significant (β = .173, p = .001), with interpersonal dependency mediating
approximately 36.2% of this relationship.
Figure 3. Mediation of Young Adult Interpersonal Dependency between Overparenting and Narcissistic Traits.
op = Overparenting; idi = Young Adult Interpersonal Dependency; pni = Pathological Narcissism.
The next phase of analyses examined Hypothesis 4, which predicted that
interpersonal dependency would mediate vulnerable narcissism more robustly than
grandiose narcissism (see Figure 5). Similar to analyses for Hypothesis 2, a chi-square
difference test determined that the chi-square value when constraining the indirect paths
(χ² (1, 1) = 89.12, p < .001) was significantly greater than the value when leaving the
paths unconstrained (χ² (1, 0) = 0.00, p < .001). Therefore, these indirect paths differ
significantly (Δχ21 = 89.12, p < .005). In examining these paths, the indirect effect of
34
interpersonal dependency for vulnerable narcissism (indirect effect = .114, 95% CI [.056-
.180]) was greater than for grandiose narcissism (indirect effect = .038, 95% CI [.013-
.078]). Furthermore, interpersonal dependency accounted for a greater proportion of the
mediation between overparenting and vulnerable narcissism (% mediated = indirect effect
/ total effect = .114/.256 = 44.5%) compared to overparenting and grandiose narcissism
(% mediated = .038/.229 = 16.6%).
Figure 4. Mediation of Young Adult Interpersonal Dependency between Overparenting and Narcissistic Phenotypes.
op = Overparenting; idi = Young Adult Interpersonal Dependency; vn = Vulnerable Narcissism; gn = Grandiose Narcissism.
The next step in the present study was to assess both psychological control and
interpersonal dependency together as parallel mediators (Hypothesis 5; see Figure 6). In
this model, both the indirect effects of psychological control (β = .066, 95% CI [.030-
.112]) and interpersonal dependency (β = .097, 95% CI [.047-.154]) were significant, and
together these variables accounted for 59.9% of the total effect of overparenting on
pathological narcissism. Additionally, the direct effect of overparenting on narcissism
was no longer significant once these mediators were included in the model (β = .109, p =
.051), indicating that psychological control and interpersonal dependency fully mediated
35
the relationship between overparenting and narcissistic traits. Fit indices included a CFI
and TLI of 1.00, and an RSMEA of 0.00 (90% CI [.000-.127]), indicating an excellent fit.
Figure 5. Parallel Mediation of Parental Psychological Control and Young Adult Interpersonal Dependency between Overparenting and Narcissistic Traits.
op = Overparenting; pcs = Parental Psychological Control; idi = Young Adult Interpersonal Dependency; pni = Pathological
Narcissism.
Finally, Hypothesis 6 aimed to examine differences in the parallel mediation of
psychological control and interpersonal dependency between overparenting and
vulnerable narcissism and between overparenting and grandiose narcissism (see Figure 7
in Appendix I). A chi-square difference test determined that the parallel mediation paths
between overparenting and grandiose narcissism and overparenting and vulnerable
narcissism differed significantly between constrained (χ² (1, 2) = 38.44, p < .001) and
unconstrained (χ² (1, 1) = 0.34, p < .001) versions of the model, which demonstrates that
these mediation paths differ significantly (Δχ21 = 38.10, p < .005). Fit indices for the
unconstrained version of the model also indicate an excellent fit (i.e., CFI = 1.00, TLI =
1.00, and RMSEA = 0.00 (90% CI [.000-.127])). While both parallel mediations
36
remained statistically significant, the mediation for vulnerable narcissism (% mediated =
.177/.257 = 68.9%) was found to be more robust than the mediation for both grandiose
narcissism (% mediated = .090/.229 = 39.3%). In fact, the mediation for vulnerable
narcissism was found to be a full mediation, as the direct effect of overparenting was no
longer significant (β = .080, p = .170), while a partial mediation was found for grandiose
narcissism (β = .139, p = .018). Moreover, each specific indirect effect of psychological
control on grandiose (β = .052, 95% CI [.014-.098], 22.7% mediated) and vulnerable
narcissism (β = .064, 95% CI [.028-.111], 24.9% mediated), as well as each specific
indirect effect of interpersonal dependency on grandiose (β = .037, 95% CI [.012-.076],
16.2% mediated) and vulnerable narcissism (β = .113, 95% CI [.056-.178], 44.0%
mediated) were found to be significant.
Figure 6. Parallel Mediation of Parental Psychological Control and Young Adult Interpersonal Dependency between Overparenting and Narcissistic Phenotypes.
op = Overparenting; pcs = Parental Psychological Control; idi = Young Adult Interpersonal Dependency; vn = Vulnerable Narcissism;
gn = Grandiose Narcissism.
37
CHAPTER IV – DISCUSSION
The findings of the present study demonstrated that parental psychological control
and young adult interpersonal dependency both mediate the relationship between
overparenting and narcissistic traits among young adults. Additionally, these two
mediators accounted for a full parallel mediation when examined together, which offers
further support for psychological control and interpersonal dependency as key
mechanisms in the relationship between overparenting and narcissistic personality traits.
In addition to a parallel mediation, the present study also found differences in the
relationships between overparenting and vulnerable-, and overparenting and grandiose-
narcissistic phenotypes. Specifically, while overparenting predicted both grandiose and
vulnerable narcissism, this relationship appeared to be more robust for vulnerable
narcissism. Moreover, the mediating roles of both psychological control and interpersonal
dependency were more robust between overparenting and vulnerable narcissism (and
particularly for interpersonal dependency), as compared to the relationship between
overparenting and grandiose narcissism. In fact, when examining the parallel mediation
separately between vulnerable and grandiose narcissistic phenotypes, only the mediation
for vulnerable narcissism indicated a full mediation, while the mediation for grandiose
narcissism remained partial.
Findings from the present study are consistent with past research which has linked
overparenting to narcissistic traits (Segrin et al., 2012; Segrin, Woszildo et al., 2013),
although this is the first study to examine mediators of this relationship. While both
psychological control and interpersonal dependency have been linked to the development
of narcissistic traits (Givertz & Segrin, 2014; Horton et al., 2006; Sonnenberg, 2013),
38
results from the present study suggest that these variables also play a mediating role
between overparenting and narcissism. Thus, the present findings suggest overparenting,
and particularly aspects of overparenting associated with intrusive control and the
withholding of appropriate independence and autonomy (LeMoyne & Buchanan, 2011;
Padilla-Walker & Nelson, 2012), lead to greater dependency among young adult children.
This characterization of the effects of overparenting on young adult children appears
consistent with critics of this parenting style, who have lamented an apparent increase in
dependent traits among millennials, including in the classroom and work settings
(Ludden, 2012; Tyler, 2007). In turn, the present findings suggest that the dependent
traits resulting from overparenting appear to be a key mechanism in the development of
narcissism. Given the conceptualization of narcissism as resulting from an unhealthy
need for external validation (i.e., dependency; Pincus, 2013), this interpretation appears
theoretically consistent. However, given the cross-sectional nature of the study,
speculation regarding causality should obviously remain tentative.
Additionally, results from the current study suggest that overparenting may be
more predictive of vulnerable narcissistic traits, as opposed to grandiose narcissistic
traits. While this study is the first to examine the differential predictive ability of
overparenting on separate narcissistic phenotypes, these results are nonetheless consistent
with historical conceptualizations of narcissism, which emphasize the manner in which
over-controlling and intrusive parenting behaviors may lead to young adult children
becoming overly dependent on the validation of others (Kohut, 1977). This pattern of
overdependence and insecurity is more consistent with vulnerable narcissism, compared
to grandiose narcissism (Miller et al., 2011; Dickinson & Pincus, 2003). Nonetheless,
39
overparenting appears to also be predictive of grandiose narcissistic traits (Horton &
Tritch, 2014), albeit to a lesser degree. Moreover, results indicate that both psychological
control and interpersonal dependency play a mediating role in the relationships between
overparenting and both narcissistic phenotypes. Therefore, these findings likely speak to
the related and overlapping nature of both grandiose and vulnerable narcissistic
phenotypes (Pincus, 2013; Ronningstam, 2009), as well as the complex manner in which
parenting may lead to the development of narcissistic traits (Horton et al., 2006).
Limitations
The present study includes a number of pertinent limitations. First, the sample
was limited to young adult college students (mostly freshmen and sophomores) residing
in the southeastern United States, which may not be generalizable to broader populations.
Additionally, the sample of the present study was predominantly female. Given that
significant gender differences were observed in examining dependent traits, this
limitation appears noteworthy. A majority of participants also identified their “primary
caregivers” as their mothers, which further limits the generalizability of the results to
other childrearing figures.
Another limitation of the study pertains to the cross-sectional, correlational nature
of the data. As previously noted, while causal relationships may be implied in a
mediation analysis, no conclusive statements regarding causality can be made. Relatedly,
the causal role of overparenting on personality characteristics appears somewhat unclear.
While overparenting is considered to be a unique type of parenting style seen in late
adolescence and young adulthood (Padilla-Walker & Nelson, 2012), personality
characteristics (e.g., dependency, narcissistic traits) are generally considered to have their
40
origin earlier in childhood (Kohut, 1977). Therefore, parenting practices involving over-
control may be more pertinent earlier in childhood, rather than later. In this way,
overparenting may be conceptualized as a later manifestation of parental overcontrol,
which is assumed to have appeared earlier in childhood. However, this hypothesis should
clearly remain tentative.
Additionally, it should be noted that all study measures were self-report measures,
including participants’ reports of their parents’ parenting behaviors. Limitations
regarding the validity of the study are therefore relevant, given the indirect assessment of
parenting. It should also be noted that self-report measures which pertain to potentially
undesirable behaviors and traits (e.g., narcissism) may be somewhat underreported.
Finally, assumptions regarding the direction of the relationships between variables
is limited. While parenting practices plausibly predict outcomes in young adults, these
relationships may be bidirectional, in that particular parenting practices may develop in
response to certain personality traits among young adult children (Van den Akker,
Deković, Asscher, & Prinzie, 2014). This possibility cannot be ruled out given the cross-
sectional design of the present study.
Areas for Future Research
While psychological control and interpersonal dependency were found to fully
mediate the relationship between overparenting and narcissistic traits, additional
mediators should also be explored. More specifically, given potential links between
authoritarian parenting and narcissism (Cramer, 2015; Watson et al., 1992), parenting
practices which are shared by both overparenting and authoritarian parenting (e.g., over-
involvement, withholding of autonomy; Baumrind, 1971; Padilla-Walker & Nelson,
41
2012) should be examined as potential mediators between overparenting and narcissistic
traits. Additionally, moderators in the relationship between overparenting and narcissism
should also be explored. For example, sex may be a potential moderator in the
relationship of interpersonal dependency between overparenting and narcissistic traits.
Given the composition of the current sample as primarily female, this possibility could
not be explored within the present study. Race may also be explored as a potential
moderator, and it should be noted that research has yet to explore racial differences in
overparenting. Therefore, future studies should account for greater cultural variability in
examining overparenting as a predictor of narcissistic traits. Additionally, alternate
personality constructs which may also be associated with interpersonal dependency (e.g.,
borderline features) should be examined in relation to overparenting. Finally, future
research should include procedures which attempt to measure overparenting directly, and
the development of parental over-control across childhood development more broadly, in
order to provide greater evidence for a causal link between overparenting and the
development of narcissism.
Conclusion
The results of the present study suggest that an over-controlling and intrusive
parenting approach, particularly when combined with dependent traits among young
adults, appears to explain the manner in which “helicopter parenting” predicts narcissistic
traits, and particularly traits more commonly associated with vulnerable narcissism (e.g.,
insecurity, anxious-avoidant tendencies). These findings speak to the importance of
accounting for parenting when assessing the etiology of narcissistic traits among college
students, and interventions focused on parenting young adult children (e.g., orientations
42
upon transitioning to college) should look to incorporate the results of these findings. The
findings of the present study build on a growing body of research implicating
overparenting in the development of narcissistic traits, and future research should look to
confirm and expand on these findings.
43
APPENDIX A – IRB Approval Letter
44
APPENDIX B – Electronic Informed Consent
PURPOSE: The present study seeks to better understand the relationship between
parenting and personality functioning among college students.
DESCRIPTION OF STUDY: The present study will consist of completing several brief
questionnaires on the internet. Completion of the study should take approximately 20-30
minutes, and participants will receive .5 points of SONA credit. Questions will be asked
regarding your thoughts, feelings, and experiences. Quality assurance checks are being
used in this study to make sure that participants read each question before answering.
Participants who do not pass these quality assurance checks will not receive research
credit.
BENEFITS: Participants are not expected to directly benefit from this research.
However, the researchers hope this study will lead to a greater understanding of families,
race, and parenting.
RISKS: There are no foreseeable risks, beyond those already present in routine daily life,
involved in the present study. If a participant at any time feels distressed while answering
any of the study’s questions, they should contact the researcher immediately.
CONFIDENTIALITY: All data collected from the study will be stored in aggregate
form with no identifying information to ensure confidentiality. Data will be stored in a
secure location for six (6) years, after which time it will be destroyed.
PARTICIPANT’S ASSURANCE: This project has been reviewed by the Institutional
Review Board, which ensures that research projects involving human subjects follow
federal regulations. Any questions or concerns about rights as a research participant
should be directed to the Chair of the Institutional Review Board, The University of
45
Southern Mississippi, Box 5147, Hattiesburg, MS 39406, (601) 266-6820. Participation
in this project is completely voluntary, and participants may withdraw from this study at
any time without penalty, prejudice, or loss of benefits. Questions concerning the
research should be directed to the primary researcher Nathan Winner
([email protected]) or the research supervisor, Dr. Bonnie Nicholson
If you experience distress as a result of your participation in this study, please notify the
primary researcher Nathan Winner ([email protected]) or the research
supervisor, Dr. Bonnie Nicholson ([email protected]). A list of available
agencies that may able to provide services for you are provided below:
Community Counseling and Assessment Clinic (601) 266-4601
Student Counseling Services (601) 266-4829
Pine Belt Mental Healthcare (601) 544-4641
Forrest General Psychology Service Incorporated (601) 268-3159
Consent is hereby given to participate in this study
46
REFERENCES
Adler, N. E., Boyce, T., Chesney, M. A., Cohen, S., Folkman, S., & Kahn, R. L. (1994).
Socioeconomic status and health: The challenge of the gradient. American
Psychologist, 49, 15–24.
Allen, K. B., Silk, J. S., Meller, S., Tan, P. Z., Ladouceur, C. D., Sheeber, L. B., Forbes,
E. E., Dahl, R. E., Siegle, G. J., McMakin, D. L., & Ryan, N. D. (2015). Parental
autonomy granting and child perceived control: Effects on the everyday emotional
experience of anxious youth. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry,
doi:10.1111/jcpp.12482
American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental
disorders (5th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
Arnett, J. J. (2004). Emerging adulthood: The winding road from the late teens through
the twenties. New York: Oxford University Press.
Bachar, E., Canetti, L., Hadar, H., Baruch, J., Dor, Y., & Freedman, S. (2015). The role
of narcissistic vulnerability in predicting adult posttraumatic symptoms from
childhood sexual abuse. Child Psychiatry & Human Development,46(5), 800-809.
Barber, B. K. (1996). Parental psychological control: Revisiting a neglected construct.
Child Development, 67, 3296–3319.
Barber, B. K., Olsen, J. E., & Shagle, S. C. (1994). Associations between parental
psychological control and behavioral control and youth internalized and
externalized behaviors. Child Development, 65, 1120–1136.
47
Barber, J. P. & Morse, J. Q. (1994). Validation of the Wisconsin Personality Disorder
Inventory with the SCID-II and PDE. Journal of Personality Disorders, 8, 307-
319.
Barry, C. T., Grafeman, S. J., Adler, K. K., & Pickard, J. D. (2007). The relations among
narcissism, self-esteem, and delinquency in a sample of at-risk adolescents.
Journal of Adolescence, 30, 933–944.
Barry, C. T., & Wallace, M. T. (2010). Current considerations in the assessment of youth
narcissism: Indicators of pathological and normative development. Journal of
Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 32, 479–489. doi:10.1007/s10862-
010- 9188-3.
Baumeister, R. F., Catanese, K. R., & Wallace, H. M. (2002). Conquest by force: A
narcissistic reactance theory of rape and sexual coercion. Review of General
Psychology, 6(1), 92-135. doi:10.1037/1089-2680.6.1.92
Baumrind, D. (1966). Effects of authoritative control on child behavior. Child
Development, 37(4), 887-907.
Baumrind, D. (1967). Child care practices anteceding three patterns of preschool
behavior. Genetic Psychology Monographs, 75(1), 43-88.
Baumrind, D. (1971). Current patterns of parental authority. Developmental Psychology,
4(1, Pt.2), 1-103.
Baumrind, D. (1991). Effective parenting during the early adolescent transition. In P. A.
Cowan, E. M. Hetherington, P. A. Cowan, E. M. Hetherington (Eds.), Family
transitions (pp. 111-163). Hillsdale, NJ, England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,
Inc.
48
Bayer, J. K., Sanson, A. V., & Hemphill, S. A. (2006). Parent Influences on Early
Childhood Internalizing Difficulties. Journal of Applied Developmental
Psychology, 27(6-), 542-559.
Becker, W. C. (1964). Consequences of different kinds of parental discipline. In M. L.
Hoffnian & W. W. Hoffman (Eds.), Review of child development research (Vol.
1, pp. 169-208). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Blatt, S. J. (2004). Experiences of depression: Theoretical, clinical and research
perspectives. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Book, A., Visser, B. A., & Volk, A. A. (2015). Unpacking 'evil': Claiming the core of the
Dark Triad. Personality and Individual Differences, 7329-38.
doi:10.1016/j.paid.2014.09.016
Bornstein, R. F. (2016). Interpersonal dependency. In V. Zeigler-Hill, D. K. Marcus, V.
Zeigler-Hill, D. K. Marcus (Eds.), The dark side of personality: Science and
practice in social, personality, and clinical psychology (pp. 341-359).
Washington, DC, US: American Psychological Association. doi:10.1037/14854-
018
Bornstein, R. F. (2012). Illuminating a neglected clinical issue: Societal costs of
interpersonal dependency and dependent personality disorder. Journal of Clinical
Psychology, 68(7), 766-781.
Bornstein, R. F. (2005). The dependent patient: A practitioner’s guide. Washington, DC:
American Psychological Association.
Bornstein, R. F. (1998a). Dependency in the personality disorders: Intensity, insight,
expression, and defense. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 54(2), 175-189.
49
Bornstein, R. F. (1998). Implicit and self-attributed dependency needs in Dependent and
Histrionic Personality Disorders. Journal of Personality Assessment, 71(1), 1.
Bornstein, R. F. (1997). Long-Term Retest Reliability of Interpersonal Dependency
Inventory Scores in College Students. Assessment, 4(4), 359-64.
Bornstein, R. F. (1992). The dependent personality: Developmental, social, and clinical
perspectives. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 3-23. doi:10.1037/0033-
2909.112.1.3
Bornstein, R. F., Becker-Matero, N., Winarick, D. J., & Reichman, A. L. (2010).
Interpersonal dependency in borderline personality disorder: Clinical context and
empirical evidence. Journal of Personality Disorders, 24, 109–127.
doi:10.1521=pedi.2010.24.1.109
Bornstein, R. F., Hilsenroth, M. J., Padawer, J. R., & Fowler, J. C. (2000). Interpersonal
dependency and personality pathology: Variations in Rorschach Oral Dependency
scores across Axis II disorders. Journal of Personality Assessment, 75(3), 478-
491. doi:10.1207/S15327752JPA7503_08
Bornstein, R. F. & Languirand, M. A. (2003). Healthy dependency. New York:
Newmarket.
Bradley-Geist, J. C. & Olson-Buchanan, J. B. (2014). Helicopter parents: An examination
of the correlates of over-parenting of college students. Education &
Training, 56(4), 314-328. doi:10.1108/ET-10-2012-0096
Brewer, G., & Olive, N. (2014). Depression in men and women: Relative rank,
interpersonal dependency, and risk-taking. Evolutionary Behavioral
Sciences, 8(3), 142-147. doi:10.1037/h0097761
50
Brown, B. B., Mounts, N., Lamborn, S. D., & Steinberg, L. (1993). Parenting practices
and peer group affiliation in adolescence. Child Development, 63, 391-400.
Bushman, B. J., & Baumeister, R. F. (1998). Threatened egotism, narcissism, self-esteem,
and direct and displaced aggression: Does self-love or self-hate lead to
violence?. Journal of Personality And Social Psychology, 75(1), 219-229.
doi:10.1037/0022-3514.75.1.219
Bushman, B. J., Bonacci, A. M., van Dijk, M., & Baumeister, R. F. (2003). Narcissism,
sexual refusal, and aggression: Testing a narcissistic reactance model of sexual
coercion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(5), 1027-1040.
doi:10.1037/0022-3514.84.5.1027
Cain, N. M., Pincus, A. L., & Ansell, E. B. (2008). Narcissism at the crossroads:
Phenotypic description of pathological narcissism across clinical theory,
social/personality psychology, and psychiatric diagnosis. Clinical Psychology
Review, 28(4), 638-656. doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2007.09.006
Campbell, W. K., Bonacci, A. M., Shelton, J., Exline, J. J., & Bushman, B. J. (2004).
Psychological entitlement: Interpersonal consequences and validation of a self-
report measure. Journal of Personality Assessment, 83, 29-45.
doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa8301_04
Campbell, W. K., Foster, C. A., & Finkel, E. J. (2002). Does self-love lead to love for
others? A story of narcissistic game playing. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 83(2), 340-354. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.83.2.340
Capron, E. W. (2004). Types of pampering and the narcissistic personality trait. The
Journal of Individual Psychology, 60(1), 77-93.
51
Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing
measurement invariance. Structural equation modeling, 9(2), 233-255.
Cogswell, A., Alloy, L. B., Karpinksi, A., & Grant, D. (2010). Assessing dependency
using self-report and indirect measures: Examining the significance of
discrepancies. Journal of Personality Assessment, 92, 306–316.
Combs-Orme, T., Wilson, E., Cain, D. S., Page, T., & Kirby, L. D. (2003). Context-based
parenting in infancy. Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, 20, 437–472.
doi:10.1023/B:CASW. 0000003138.32550.a2
Cramer, P. (2015). Adolescent parenting, identification, and maladaptive
narcissism. Psychoanalytic Psychology, 32(4), 559-579. doi:10.1037/a0038966
Darcy, K., Davila, J., & Beck, J. G. (2005). Is social anxiety associated with both
interpersonal avoidance and interpersonal dependence?. Cognitive Therapy &
Research, 29(2), 171-186. doi:10.1007/s10608-005-3163-4
Dickinson, K. A., & Pincus, A. L. (2003). Interpersonal analysis of grandiose and
vulnerable narcissism. Journal of Personality Disorders, 17(3), 188-207.
doi:10.1521/pedi.17.3.188.22146
Ding, L., Velicer, W. F., & Harlow, L. L. (1995). Effects of estimation methods, number
of indicators per factor, and improper solutions on structural equation modeling fit
indices. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 2, 119-143.
Dinger, U. P., Barrett, M. S., Zimmermann, J., Schauenburg, H., Wright, A. G. C.,
Renner, F., Zilcha-Mano, S., Barber, J. P. (2015). Interpersonal problems,
dependency, and self-criticism in Major Depressive Disorder. Journal of Clinical
Psychology, 71(1), 93-104.
52
Edwards, B. D., Warren, C. R., Tubré, T. C., Zyphur, M. J., & Hoffner-Prillaman, R.
(2013). The validity of narcissism and driving anger in predicting aggressive
driving in a sample of young drivers. Human Performance, 26(3), 191-210.
Ekselius, L., Lindstrom, E., Knorring, L., Bodlund, O., & Kullgren, G. (1994).
Comorbidity among the personality disorders in DSM-III-R. Personality and
Individual Differences, 17, 155-160.
Field, A. P. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics: And sex and drugs
and rock 'n' roll (4th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
Finzi-Dottan, R., & Cohen, O. (2011). Young adult sibling relations: The effects of
perceived parental favoritism and narcissism. Journal of Psychology, 145(1), 1-
22. doi:10.1080/00223980.2010.528073
Gabbard, G. O. (1989). Two subtypes of narcissistic personality disorder. Bulletin of the
Menninger Clinic, 53, 527-532.
Gar, N. S., & Hudson, J. L. (2008). An examination of the interactions between mothers
and children with anxiety disorders. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 46(12),
1266-1274. doi:10.1016/j.brat.2008.08.006
Givertz, M. & Segrin, C. (2014). The association between overinvolved parenting and
young adults’ self-efficacy, psychological entitlement, and family
communication. Communication Research, 4(8), 1111-1136.
Grafeman, S. J., Barry, C. T., Marcus, D. K., & Leachman, L. L. (2015). Interpersonal
perceptions of narcissism in an at-risk adolescent sample: A social relations
analysis. Journal of Research on Adolescence (Wiley-Blackwell), 25(1), 92-100.
doi:10.1111/jora.12088
53
Grolnick, W. C., Kurowski, C. O., Dunlap, K. G., & Hevey, C. (2000). Parental resources
and the transition to Junior High. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 10(4),
465-488.
Grolnick, W. S. (2003). The psychology of parental control: How well-meant parenting
backfires. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Hendin, H. M., & Cheek, J. M. (1997). Assessing hypersensitive narcissism: A
reexamination of Murray’s Narcissism Scale. Journal of Research in Personality,
31, 588–599.
Herman, M. R., Dornbusch, S. M., Herron, M. C., & Harting, J. R. (1997). The influence
of family regulation, connection, and psychological autonomy on six measures of
adolescent functioning. Journal of Adolescent Research, 12, 34–67.
Hirschfeld, R. M., Klerman, G. L., Gouch, H. G., Barrett, J., Korchin, S. J., & Chodoff,
P. (1977). A measure of interpersonal dependency. Journal of Personality
Assessment, 41(6), 610.
Horton, R. S. (2011). On environmental sources of child narcissism: Are parents really to
blame? In Barry, C.T., Kerig, P.K., Stellwagen, K.K., & Barry, T.D. (Eds.),
Narcissism and Machiavellianism in youth: Implications for the development of
adaptive and maladaptive behavior (pp. 125-143). Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association.
Horton, R. S., Bleau, G., & Drwecki, B. (2006). Parenting Narcissus: What are the links
between parenting and narcissism? Journal of Personality, 74(2), 345-376.
doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.2005.00378.x
54
Horton, R. S., & Tritch, T. (2014). Clarifying the links between grandiose narcissism and
parenting. Journal of Psychology, 148(2), 133-143.
doi:10.1080/00223980.2012.752337
Huang, J. L., Curran, P. G., Keeney, J., Poposki, E. M., & DeShon, R. P. (2012).
Detecting and deterring insufficient effort responding to surveys. Journal of
Business and Psychology, 27(1), 99-114.
Imbesi, L. (1999). The making of a narcissist. Clinical Social Work Journal, 27(1), 41-
54.
Kantrowitz, B., & Tyre, P. (2006, May 26). The fine art of letting go. Newsweek.
Retrieved from http://www.usc.edu/student-
affairs/parents/images/TheFineArtofLettingGo.pdf
Kernberg, O.F. (1974). Further contributions to the treatment of narcissistic personalities.
International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 55, 215-240.
Kernberg, P. (1998). Developmental aspects of normal and pathological narcissism. In
Ronningstam, E. (Ed.) Disorders of Narcissism (pp. 103-120). Washington, DC:
American Psychiatric Press.
Kins, E., Soenens, B., & Beyers, W. (2012). Parental psychological control and
dysfunctional separation–individuation: A tale of two different dynamics. Journal
of Adolescence, 35(5), 1099-1109. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2012.02.017
Kins, E., Soenens, B., & Beyers, W. (2011). 'Why do they have to grow up so fast?'
Parental separation anxiety and emerging adults' pathology of separation-
individuation. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 67(7), 647-664.
doi:10.1002/jclp.20786
55
Ksinan, A. J., & Vazsonyi, A. T. (2016). Narcissism, Internet, and social relations: A
study of two tales. Personality and Individual Differences, 94118-123.
doi:10.1016/j.paid.2016.01.016
Kline, R. B. (2016). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th ed.).
New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Kohut, H. (1977). The restoration of self. Madison, CT: International Universities Press.
Kunz, J. H., & Grych, J. H. (2013). Parental psychological control and autonomy
granting: Distinctions and associations with child and family
functioning. Parenting: Science & Practice, 13(2), 77-94.
doi:10.1080/15295192.2012.709147
Lamborn, S. D., Mounts, N. S., Steinberg, L., & Dornbusch, S. M. (1991). Patterns of
competence and adjustment among adolescents from authoritative, authoritarian,
indulgent, and neglectful families. Child Development, 63, 1043-1065.
Lamkin, J., Clifton, A., Campbell, W. K., & Miller, J. D. (2014). An examination of the
perceptions of social network characteristics associated with grandiose and
vulnerable narcissism. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment,
5(2), 137–145
LeMoyne, T., & Buchanan, T. (2011). Does ‘‘hovering’’ matter? Helicopter parenting
and its effect on well-being. Sociological Spectrum, 31, 399–418.
doi:10.1080/02732173.2011.574038.
Li, X., Li, D., Newman, J. (2013). Parental behavioral and psychological control and
problematic internet use among Chinese adolescents: The mediating role of self-
56
control. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 16(6), 442-447.
doi:10.1089/cyber.2012.0293
Links, P. R., Gould, B., & Ratnayake, R. (2003). Assessing suicidal youth with
Antisocial, Borderline, or Narcissistic Personality Disorder. Canadian Journal of
Psychiatry, 48(5), 301.
Loas, G., Corcos, M., Perez-Diaz, F., Verrier, A., Guelfi, J. D., Halfon, O., Lang, F.,
Bizouard, P., Venisse, J. L., Flament, M., & Jeammet, P. (2002). Criterion
validity of the Interpersonal Dependency Inventory: A preliminary study on 621
addictive subjects. European Psychiatry, 17(8), 477-478. doi:10.1016/S0924-
9338(02)00713-7
Locke, J. Y., Campbell, M. A., & Kavanagh, D. (2012). Can a parent do too much for
their child? An examination by parenting professionals of the concept of
overparenting. Australian Journal of Guidance and Counselling, 22(2), 249-265.
doi:10.1017/jgc.2012.29
Luyckx, K., Soenens, B., Vansteenkiste, M., Goossens, L., & Berzonsky, M. D. (2007).
Parental psychological control and dimensions of identity formation in emerging
adulthood. Journal of Family Psychology, 21(3), 546-550.
Ludden, J. (2012). Helicopter parents hover in the workplace. National Public Radio.
Retrieved from http://www.npr.org/2012/02/06/146464665/helicopter-parents-
hover-in-the-workplace
Luyten, P., Crowley, M., Janssen, S., & Mayes, L. (2014). Dependency, self-critical
perfectionism, narcissism, and sensitivity to ostracism among male adolescent
offenders with severe conduct disorder: A cyberball study. In A. Besser, A.
57
Besser (Eds.), Handbook of the psychology of narcissism: Diverse
perspectives (pp. 379-397). Hauppauge, NY, US: Nova Science Publishers.
MacCallum, R. C., Browne, M. W., & Sugawara, H. M. (1996). Power analysis and
determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychological
Methods, 1(2), 130-149. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.1.2.130
Mahon, N. E. (1982). The relationship of self-disclosure, interpersonal dependency, and
life changes to loneliness in young adults. Nursing Research, 31(6), 343-347.
doi:10.1097/00006199-198211000-00005
Manzeske, D. P., & Stright, A. D. (2009). Parenting styles and emotion regulation: The
role of behavioral and psychological control during young adulthood. Journal of
Adult Development, 16(4), 223-229.
Marano, H. E. (2008). A nation of wimps: The high cost of invasive parenting. New York,
NY, US: Broadway Books.
McClintock, A. S., Anderson, T., & Cranston, S. (2015). Mindfulness therapy for
maladaptive interpersonal dependency: A preliminary randomized controlled
trial. Behavior Therapy, 46(6), 856-868. doi:10.1016/j.beth.2015.08.002
McCranie, E. W. & Bass, J. D. (1984). Childhood family antecedents of dependency and
self-criticism: Implications for depression. Journal of Abnormal
Psychology, 93(1), 3-8. doi:10.1037/0021-843X.93.1.3
McShane, K. E., & Hastings, P. D. (2009). The New Friends Vignettes: Measuring
Parental Psychological Control that Confers Risk for Anxious Adjustment in
Preschoolers. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 33(6), 481-495.
58
Mechanic, K. L., & Barry, C. T. (2015). Adolescent grandiose and vulnerable narcissism:
Associations with perceived parenting practices. Journal of Child and Family
Studies, 24(5), 1510-1518. doi:10.1007/s10826-014-9956-x
Meyer, B., Pilkonis, P. A., Proietti, J. M., Heape, C. L., & Egan, M. (2001). Attachment
styles and personality disorders as predictors of symptom course. Journal of
Personality Disorders, 15(5), 371-389. doi:10.1521/pedi.15.5.371.19200
Miller, J. D., & Campbell, W. K. (2008). Comparing clinical and social-personality
conceptualizations of narcissism. Journal of Personality, 76(3), 449-476.
doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.2008.00492.x
Miller, J. D., Hoffman, B. J., Gaughan, E. T., Gentile, B., Maples, J., & Campbell, W. K.
(2011). Grandiose and vulnerable narcissism: A nomological network
analysis. Journal of Personality, 79(5), 1013-1042. doi:10.1111/j.1467-
6494.2010.00711.x
Millon, T., & Everly, G. (1985). Personality and its disorders: A biosocial learning
approach. New York: Wiley.
Murray, K. W., Dwyer, K. M., Rubin, K. H., Knighton-Wisor, S., & Booth-LaForce, C.
(2014). Parent-child relationships, parental psychological control, and aggression:
Maternal and paternal relationships. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 43, 1361-
1373
Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2012). Mplus user’s guide (7th ed.). Los Angeles, CA:
Authors.
Nelson, M. K. (2010). Parenting out of control: Anxious parents in uncertain times. New
York: New York University Press.
59
Nelson, L. J., & Barry, C. M. (2005). Distinguishing features of emerging adulthood: the
role of self-classification as an adult. Journal of Adolescent Research, 20, 242–
262.
Norton, R. S. (2011). Parenting as a cause of narcissism: Empirical support for
psychodynamic and social learning theories. In W. K. Campbell, J. D. Miller, W.
K. Campbell, J. D. Miller (Eds.), The handbook of narcissism and narcissistic
personality disorder: Theoretical approaches, empirical findings, and
treatments (pp. 181-190). Hoboken, NJ, US: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
Nuns, N., & Loas, G. (2005). Interpersonal dependency in suicide
attempters. Psychopathology, 38(3), 140-143. doi:10.1159/000085846
Odenweller, K. G., Booth-Butterfield, M., & Weber, K. (2014). Investigating helicopter
parenting, family environments, and relational outcomes for
millennials. Communication Studies, 65(4), 407-425.
doi:10.1080/10510974.2013.811434
Padilla-Walker, L.M., & Nelson, L.J. (2012) Black hawk down? Establishing helicopter
parenting as a distinct construct from other forms of parental control during
emerging adulthood. Journal of Adolescence, 35(5), 1177-1190.
doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2012.03.007
Paulhus, D. L., & Williams, K. M. (2002). The Dark Triad of personality: Narcissism,
Machiavellianism and psychopathy. Journal of Research in Personality, 36(6),
556-563. doi:10.1016/S0092-6566(02)00505-6
60
Peterson, G. W. (2005). Family influences on adolescent development. In T. P. Gullotta
& G. R. Adams (Eds.), Handbook of adolescent behavioral problems: Evidence-
based approaches to prevention and treatment (pp. 27-55). New York: Springer.
Pincus, A. L. (2013). The Pathological Narcissism Inventory. In J. S. Ogrodniczuk, J. S.
Ogrodniczuk (Eds.), Understanding and treating pathological narcissism (pp. 93-
110). Washington, DC, US: American Psychological Association.
doi:10.1037/14041-006
Pincus, A.L., Ansell, E.B., Pimentel, C.A., Cain, N.M., Wright, A.G.C., & Levy, K.N.
(2009). Initial construction and validation of the Pathological Narcissism
Inventory. Psychological Assessment, 21(3), 365-379.
Pincus, A. L., & Gurtman, M. B. (1995). The three faces of interpersonal dependency:
Structural analyses of self-report dependency measures. Journal of Personality &
Social Psychology, 69(4), 744-758.
Preacher, K. J., Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing
and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research
Methods, 40 (3), 879-891.
Pritchard, M. E., & Yalch, K. L. (2009). Relationships among loneliness, interpersonal
dependency, and disordered eating in young adults. Personality and Individual
Differences, 46(3), 341-346. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2008.10.027
Ramsey, A., Watson, P. J., Biderman, M. D., & Reeves, A. L. (1996). Self-reported
narcissism and perceived parental permissiveness and authoritarianism. The
Journal of Genetic Psychology: Research and Theory on Human
Development, 157(2), 227-238. doi:10.1080/00221325.1996.9914860
61
Raskin, R. N., & Hall, C. S. (1979). A narcissistic personality inventory. Psychological
Reports, 45(2), 590. doi:10.2466/pr0.1979.45.2.590
Ronningstam, E. (1996). Pathological narcissism and narcissistic personality disorder in
Axis I disorders. Harvard Review of Psychiatry, 3(6), 326-340.
doi:10.3109/10673229609017201
Ronningstam, E. (2009). Narcissistic personality disorder: Facing DSM-V. Psychiatric
Annals, 39(3), 111-121. doi:10.3928/00485713-20090301-09
Ronningstam, E. F., & Maltsberger, J. T. (1998). Pathological narcissism and sudden
suicide-related collapse. Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior, 28(3), 261-271.
Rothstein, A. (1979). The theory of narcissism: An object-relations perspective.
Psychoanalytic Review, 66, 35–47.
Rubin, K. H., Burgess, K. B., & Hastings, P. D. (2002). Stability and Social–Behavioral
Consequences of Toddlers’ Inhibited Temperament and Parenting Behaviors.
Child Development, 73(2), 483.
Rubin, K. H., Hastings, P. D., Stewart, S. L., Henderson, H. A., & Chen, X. (1997). The
consistency and concomitants of inhibition: some of the children, all of the time.
Child Development, 68, 467–483.
Schaefer, E. S. (1965). A configurational analysis of children's reports of parent behavior.
Journal of Consulting Psychology, 29, 552-557.
Schiffrin, H.H., Liss, M., Miles-McLean, H., Geary, K.A., Erchull, M.J., & Tashner, T.
(2014). Helping or hovering? The effects of helicopter parenting on college
students’ well-being. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 23(1), 548-557.
doi:10.1007/a10826-013-9716-3
62
Sedikides, C., Rudich, E. A., Gregg, A. P., Kumashiro, M., & Rusbult, C. (2004). Are
normal narcissists psychologically healthy? Self-esteem matters. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 87 (3), 400–416.
Segrin, C., Givertz, M., Swaitkowski, P., & Montgomery, N. (2013). Overparenting is
associated with child problems and a critical family environment. Journal of
Child and Family Studies, 1-10.
Segrin, C. N., Woszidlo, A., Givertz, M., & Montgomery, N. (2013). Parent and child
traits associated with overparenting. Journal of Social & Clinical
Psychology, 32(6), 569-595.
Segrin, C., Woszidlo, A., Givertz, M., Bauer, A., & Murphy, M. T. (2012). The
association between overparenting, parent-child communication, and entitlement
and adaptive traits in adult children. Family Relations, 61(2), 237-252.
doi:10.1111/j.1741-3729.2011.00689.x
Serkownek, K. (1975). Subscales for scale 5 and 0 of the MMPI. Unpublished
manuscript.
Shahar, G. (2008). What Measure of Interpersonal Dependency Predicts Changes in
Social Support?. Journal of Personality Assessment, 90(1), 61-65.
Sinha, B. K., & Watson, D. C. (2001). Personality disorder in university students: A
multitrait-multimethod matrix study. Journal of Personality Disorders, 15(3),
235-244. doi:10.1521/pedi.15.3.235.19205
Soenens, B., Vansteenkiste, M., & Luyten, P. (2010). Toward a domain-specific approach
to the study of parental psychological control: Distinguishing between
63
dependency-oriented and achievement-oriented psychological control. Journal of
Personality, 78(1), 217-256. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.2009.00614.x
Sonnenberg, M. B. (2013). Contrasting personality profiles in arrogant and depleted
narcissism: Preliminary test of a PDM distinction (Doctoral dissertation).
Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No.
AAI3520353)
Spokas, M. & Heimberg, R. G. (2009). Overprotective parenting, social anxiety, and
external locus of control: Cross-sectional and longitudinal relationships. Cognitive
Therapy & Research, 33(6), 543-551.
Steinberg, L. (1990). Autonomy, conflict, and harmony in the family relationship. In S. S.
Feldman & G. R. Elliot (Eds.), At the threshold: The developing adolescent (pp.
255-276). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Steinberg, L., Lamborn, S. D., Dornbusch, S. L., & Darling, N. (1992). Impact of
parenting practices on adolescent achievement: Authoritative parenting, school
involvement, and encouragement to succeed. Child Development, 63(5), 1266-
1281. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.ep9301210142
Tanner, J. L. (2006). Recentering during emerging adulthood: A critical turning point in
life span human development. In J. J. Arnett, J. L. Tanner, J. J. Arnett, J. L.
Tanner (Eds.), Emerging adults in America: Coming of age in the 21st
century (pp. 21-55). Washington, DC, US: American Psychological Association.
doi:10.1037/11381-002
Thomas, K. M., Wright, A. C., Lukowitsky, M. R., Donnellan, M. B., & Hopwood, C. J.
(2012). Evidence for the criterion validity and clinical utility of the Pathological
64
Narcissism Inventory. Assessment, 9(2), 135-145.
doi:10.1177/1073191112436664
Tomoko, M. (2013). Gender differences in pathological narcissism: dependency and
grandiosity. Japanese Journal of Personality, 22(3), 239-251.
Tyler, K. (2007, May 1). The tethered generation. HR Magazine, 52(5), 41–46. Retrieved
from
http://www.shrm.org/Publications/hrmagazine/EditorialContent/Pages/0507cover.
aspx
Vaglum, P. (1999). The narcissistic personality disorder and addiction. In J. Derksen, C.
Maffei, H. Groen, J. Derksen, C. Maffei, H. Groen (Eds.), Treatment of
personality disorders (pp. 241-253). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic
Publishers.
Van Buren, B. R., & Meehan, K. B. (2015). Child maltreatment and vulnerable
narcissism: The roles of shame and disavowed need. Journal of The American
Psychoanalytic Association, 63(3), 555-561. doi:10.1177/0003065115593058
Van den Akker, A. L., Deković, M., Asscher, J., & Prinzie, P. (2014). Mean-level
personality development across childhood and adolescence: A temporary defiance
of the maturity principle and bidirectional associations with parenting. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 107(4), 736-750.
van Ingen, D. J., Freiheit, S. R., Steinfeldt, J. A., Moore, L. L., Wimer, D. J., Knutt, A.
D., Scapinello, S., & Roberts, A. (2015). Helicopter parenting: The effect of an
overbearing caregiving style on peer attachment and self‐ efficacy. Journal of
College Counseling, 18(1), 7-20. doi:10.1002/j.2161-1882.2015.00065.x
65
Wagner, C. & Abaied, J. (2016). Skin conductance level reactivity moderates the
association between parental psychological control and relational aggression in
emerging adulthood. Journal of Youth & Adolescence, 45(4), 687-700.
Washburn, J. J., & Paskar, L. D. (2011). Moving beyond parents in the etiology of
narcissistic traits. In C. T. Barry, P. K. Kerig, K. K. Stellwagen, & T. D.
Barry. Narcissism and Machiavellianism in youth: Implications for the
development of adaptive and maladaptive behavior (pp. 145-157). Washington,
DC, US: American Psychological Association. doi:10.1037/12352-008
Watson, P. J., Little, T., & Biderman, M. D. (1992). Narcissism and parenting
styles. Psychoanalytic Psychology, 9(2), 231-244. doi:10.1037/h0079344
Wigman, S. A., Graham-Kevan, N., & Archer, J. (2008). Investigating sub-groups of
harassers: The roles of attachment, dependency, jealousy and aggression. Journal
of Family Violence, 23(7), 557-568. doi:10.1007/s10896-008-9171-x
Wright, A. C., Lukowitsky, M. R., Pincus, A. L., & Conroy, D. E. (2010). The Higher
Order Factor Structure and Gender Invariance of the Pathological Narcissism
Inventory. Assessment, 17(4), 467-483.
Young, J. (1990). Cognitive therapy for personality disorders: A schema-focused
approach. Sarasota, FL: Professional Resource Press.
- Overparenting and Young Adult Narcissism: Psychological Control and Interpersonal Dependency as Mediators
- Recommended Citation
- citation
