Consequences of collective narcissism

Thousands of studies have explored the consequences, and especially the drawbacks, of narcissism.  Fewer studies have examined the consequences of collective narcissism—the tendency of some individuals to gravely overestimate the status of their nation, ethnicity, demographic, or some other community to which they belong.  Nevertheless, some research has established the adverse impact of collective narcissism. 

For example, individuals who report collective narcissism tend to be especially sensitive to insults of their community or demographic—as well as more inclined to retaliate in response to these insults.  To illustrate, in an intriguing set of studies, published by Golec de Zavala et al. (2016), participants first completed a series of questions that assesses collective narcissism, such as “My group deserves special treatment”.  Next, they completed a range of measures that gauge their sensitivity to insults towards their collective and their inclination to retaliate.  To illustrate

• Turkish participants read a newspaper article that discussed the failed attempts of their nation to be an EU member and then indicated the degree to which they felt ashamed or humiliated,
• European participants indicated the degree to which they felt insulted after watching a movie they mocked their country—as well as the extent to which they want to express this anger to the producers, and so forth.

In general, if people reported collective narcissism, they were especially sensitive to insults about their nation or community and were more inclined to retaliate in some sense.  In contrast, neither grandiose narcissism nor vulnerable narcissism in individuals was associated with this sensitivity to these insults.   Thus, only people who exhibit collective narcissism feel especially affronted when their community or nation is insulted.   

The moderating effect of group affirmation

According to Golec de Zavala et al. (2016), group affirmations should, at least in principle, diminish this impact of collective narcissism on sensitivity to these insults.  Group affirmations refer to activities that individuals undertake that boost the perceived integrity and value of their collectives.  To illustrate, in a pioneering study, reported by Sherman et al. (2007), some participants were granted an opportunity to affirm the key values of their sports team.  That is, these individuals ranked the extent to which a series of values, like religion or relationships, are important to the team.  Next, they wrote three reasons to specify why the value ranked first is important to the team.

After these activities, participants were asked to indicate the extent to which a specific victory or defeat could be ascribed to the performance of their teammates or the own performance.  If participants had not completed the group affirmation task, they ascribed victories, but not defeats, to both the performance of teammates and their own performance.  That is, they showed an attribution bias, assuming responsibility for success and denying responsibility for failure. If participants had completed the group affirmation task, however, they were equally like to ascribe victories and defeats to the performance of teammates.

Accordingly, after individuals complete the group affirmation procedure, they do not need feel the need to defend their group.  That is, they are not as defensive and could ascribe failures to deficits in the team.

Many other studies have examined the benefits of group affirmations (for a review, see Smith & Grant, 2025).  After participants complete activities that reinforce the integrity and value of their collective, these individuals are more likely to acknowledge and accept criticisms of this collective and recognise the relative merits of other nations, teams, or communities.    

As research has revealed, racism in general and antisemitism in particular can often be ascribed to collective narcissism. That is, often to boost their self-esteem, some individuals like to perceive their collective—such as their nationality, ethnicity, or field of work—as superior and entitled to better treatment.  Because these beliefs are typically unjustified and thus fragile, individuals who experience collective narcissism become especially sensitive to events or changes that could challenge these assumptions.  These individuals are thus very susceptible to narratives about potential threats, such as threats from Jewish communities.  Therefore, collective narcissism may partly explain rampant antisemitism. 

Seminal research on collective narcissism and antisemitism

A seminal research project, conducted by Golec de Zavala and Cichocka (2012), and published in the journal Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, first corroborated this possibility. In the first study, 148 Polish undergraduate students, primarily women, completed a survey.  The survey comprised several validated scales or measures including

• the Collective Narcissism Scale, in which participants specified the degree to which they agree or disagree with nine statements such as “I wish other groups would more quickly recognize authority of my group”,
• a measure of antisemitism in which participants needed to indicate the degree to which they would like Jewish people to be neighbours or friends as well as the extent to which they would mind their children playing with Jewish peers or marrying a Jewish person,
• the degree to which the participants experienced a siege mentality, assessed by questions in which participants specify the degree to which they agree or disagree with statements like “Most nations will conspire against us, if only they have the possibility to do so” (Bar-Tal & Antebi, 1992).

As the analyses revealed, after utilising the bootstrapping method that Preacher and Hayes (2004) recommended, collective narcissism was positively associated with antisemitism.  A siege mentality fully mediated this relationship.  These findings suggest that Polish individuals who exhibit collective narcissism, in which they strive to perceive their community as superior, are especially inclined to perceive this community as under threat, evoking a siege mentality.  In Poland, where conspiracy theories about Jewish people abound, this siege mentality provokes significant antisemitism.    

The second study was similar but corrected some of the drawbacks of the first study.  For example, this study administered a more comprehensive measure of antisemitism.   Specifically, to measure antisemitism,

• participants evaluated Jewish people on five semantic differential scales, such as cold versus warmth, trustful versus distrustful, and admiration versus disgust,
• participants also indicated the likelihood they would choose various aggressive acts towards Jewish people, such as refuse to hire Jewish individuals or convince friends not to rent their property to Jewish individuals.  

Furthermore, to test a possible mediator—conspiracy beliefs towards Jewish people—participants indicated the degree to which they agree with six items, such as “Members of this group strive to rule the world” (Kofta & Sędek, 2005).  Finally, these individuals completed a measure that assessed the extent to which they feel a sense of identity with Poland.  Again, as the findings revealed,

• collective narcissism was positively associated with antisemitism,
• furthermore, both a siege mentality and conspiracy beliefs around Jewish people mediated this relationship,
• the extent to which the participants identified with Poland was not associated with antisemitism. 

These results, however, do not clarify why conspiracies are often directed to Jewish communities rather than many other possible religions, ethnicities, or peoples.  Alternative theories, such as the notion of enemy-ship, can perhaps explain this observation more effectively.  According to the pioneering work of Sullivan et al. (2010), people like to ascribe most of their problems and threats to one community.  That is, if they can impute these problems to one source, they feel a sense of control—a sense their hazards might subside if this community was defeated.  Typically, individuals choose a community that, from their perspective, is familiar but hazy, like a mysterious, surreptitious force.  In many nations, Jewish communities may fulfill these criteria.

Subsequent research on narcissism and antisemitism

Admittedly, antisemitism cannot be ascribed only to collective narcissism but also to other variants of narcissism and psychopathy.  Bertrams and Krispenz (2025) confirmed this possibility. Specifically, these researchers collated data from 15 datasets, collected over time from almost 4000 participants, recruited from multiple nations.  The study examined many predictors and measures of antisemitism including

• the five-factor narcissism inventory and the pathological narcissism inventory to gauge both grandiose narcissism and vulnerable narcissism,
• the Triarchic Psychopathy Measure, validated by Patrick (2010), to gauge three dimensions of psychopathy: boldness (e.g., “I am well-equipped to deal with stress”), meanness (e.g., “I don’t mind if someone I dislike gets hurt”), and disinhibition (20 items; “My impulsive decisions have caused problems with loved ones”),
• the Short Dark Tetrad scale to measure not only narcissism and psychopathy but also Machiavellianism and sadism (Paulhus, 2021),
• measures of aggression, dominance, sensation seeking, and virtue signalling,
• various measures of antisemitism to assess generalised antisemitism, antizionism, the belief that Jewish people enjoy undue power in the media, and pro-Palestinian attitudes.

The results were informative.  Antagonistic narcissism, a variant of narcissism that is common to both grandiose narcissism and vulnerable narcissism, characterised by contempt and distrust, predicted most facets of antisemitism. Grandiose narcissism and psychopathy were also positively associated with many variants of antisemitism.  These findings are compatible with the dark-ego-vehicle principle—the notion that individuals who exhibit narcissism and other dark personality traits gravitate to ideologies that reinforce their moral superiority and justify their aggression.   

The role of emotional recognition

Some of the effects of collective narcissism could be ascribed to an impairment in emotional recognition.  Across a series of four studies, Rogoza et al. (2025) showed that collective narcissism, and specifically the tendency of individuals to boost and to defend the status of their nation, impairs the capacity of individuals to recognise their feelings and decipher the emotions of other people.   

In the first study, over 400 Polish adults completed a measure of national narcissism, specifying the degree to which they agree or disagree with items such as “Polish people deserve special treatment” or “The true worth of Polish people is often misunderstood”.  In addition, participants completed the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (Bagby et al., 1994.) to gauge alexithymia or an impairment in the capacity of some individuals to recognise, decipher, and label their own emotions.  A typical item is “I find it hard to describe how I feel about people”.  National narcissism was positively associated with alexithymia, consistent with the possibility that collective narcissism might coincide with problems in emotional recognition.  This pattern of results persisted even after controlling individual narcissism and a sense of identity or attachment to Poland. 

The other studies were similar, except the researchers also administered other measures. For example, in one study, participants completed the Averaged Karolinska Directed Emotional Faces (Lundqvist & Litton, 1998).  Specifically, these participants observed a series of photographs displaying facial expressions and needed to indicate the emotion these expressions displayed.  This procedure assesses the capacity of individuals to recognise the emotions of other people.  Again, national narcissism was negatively associated with the capacity of individuals to recognise the emotions of other people, even after controlling a sense of identity or attachment to Poland. 

Arguably, if individuals experience national or collective narcissism, they become sensitive to possible threats against this nation or collective.  That is, they become attuned to insults or other affronts.  So, they misconstrue facial expressions as hostile, compromising their capacity to recognise emotions.