Status, rivalry and admiration-seeking in narcissism and depression: A behavioral study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Humans seek admiration to boost their social rank and engage in rivalry to protect it when fearing defeat. Traits such as narcissism and affective states such as depression are thought to influence perception of rank and motivation for dominance in opposite ways, but evidence of the underlying behavioral mechanisms is scant. We investigated the effects of dimensionally-assessed narcissism and depression on behavioral responses to social defeat in a rigged video game tournament designed to elicit rivalry (stealing points from opponents) and admiration-seeking (paying for rank). We tested an undergraduate sample (N = 70, mean age = 21.5 years) and a clinical sample of predominantly depressed elderly (N = 85, mean age = 62.6 years). Both rivalry and admiration-seeking increased with time on task and were particularly enhanced in individuals high in narcissism. Participants engaged in more rivalry when pitted against high-ranked opponents, but depression partially mitigated this tendency. Our findings provide behavioral evidence that narcissism manifests in increased rivalry and admiration-seeking during social contests. Depression does not suppress general competitiveness but selectively inhibits upward-focused rivalry.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".