The Mediating Role of Self-Compassion and Mentalization in the Relationship between Idealistic Expectations and Emotional Deficiency with Narcissism in Men
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim and Background: Narcissism originates from the intertwining of cognitive and emotional processes and may lead to maladaptive patterns in self-perception and interpersonal relationships. The present study aimed to examine the mediating role of self-compassion and mentalization in the relationship between idealistic expectations and emotional deficiency with narcissism among adult men. Methods and Materials: This descriptive-correlational study employed structural equation modeling SEM for data analysis. The statistical population consisted of all adult men in Isfahan, from which 300 participants were selected through convenience sampling. Data were collected using the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (Bagby, Parker & Taylor, 1994), the Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (Hewitt & Flett, 1991), the Self-Compassion Scale (Raes et al., 2011), the Mentalization Questionnaire (Fonagy et al., 1997), and the Narcissistic Personality Inventory (Ames et al., 2006). Findings: Results showed that idealistic expectations and emotional deficiency had direct and significant effects on narcissistic tendencies. In contrast, self-compassion and mentalization exerted negative and significant influences, acting as powerful mediators that clearly explained the indirect pathways. The model demonstrated satisfactory fit, and all hypothesized relationships were confirmed. Conclusions: Therefore, it can be concluded that Enhancing mentalization capacity and cultivating self-compassion can reduce vulnerabilities associated with emotional deficiency and idealistic expectations, thereby playing an effective role in moderating narcissism. These findings may provide a foundation for designing targeted psychotherapeutic interventions for men who struggle with emotion regulation difficulties and narcissistic traits.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".