A Literature Review on the Formation of Narcissistic Personality Disorder: Behaviors of the Family as the Influence Factor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This literature review examines the behaviors of the family and how they are likely to lead to the formation of Narcissistic Personality disorder (NPD). While the disorder is caused by a complex interplay of genetic, environmental, and psychological factors, it is also evidently clear that some family dynamics play a role in the development of this disorder. Thus, to prevent or reduce the development of this personality disorder, it is necessary to look at the families and develop necessary interventions that may make families more suitable for the overall well-being of children. The review of the literature resulted in diverse findings. Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD) was found to be predicted by complex interactions between environmental, genetic, and psychological factors. NPD was related to the overvaluation of children by their children, leading to the development of an increased sense of worthiness. Inadequate or lack of boundaries in some families was found to influence children’s growth, causing the potential development of narcissistic behaviors and a sense of entitlement. Other significant factors that were found to impact the development of NPD are emotional neglect, demand for perfectionism, parental favoritism, unhealthy competition, and lack of empathy. These findings indicate that various and complex factors predict the development of NPD.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".