Entitled vengeance: A meta‐analysis relating narcissism to provoked aggression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Narcissism has long been used to predict aggressive or vengeful responses to provocations from others. The strength of this relation can, however, vary widely from study to study. Narcissism and revenge were examined in 84 independent samples (N = 11297), along with the moderating role of sample type (i.e., child/adolescent, prisoner, undergraduate, or general samples), type of narcissism measure used (i.e., Narcissistic Personality Inventory, Psychological Entitlement Scale, Short D3, etc.), the nature of the provocation, and the type of provoked aggression examined. Narcissism was positively related to provoked aggression across studies (ρ = .25), but that relation was stronger in child/adolescent samples (ρ = .36) and when measures of entitlement or vulnerable narcissism were employed (ρ = .29). Implications for practical research, as well as neglected areas of research on narcissism and provoked aggression are discussed. Aggr. Behav. 42:362-379, 2016. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.014 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".