"The Narcissistic Personality Inventory asks students to react to such statements as "If I ruled the world, it would be a better place," "I think I am a special person" and "I like to be the center of attention."
The study found that almost two-thirds of recent college students showed narcissism scores that were above the average 1982 score. Thirty percent more college students showed elevated narcissism in 2006 compared to 1982."
http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detai...&con_type=3What's behind this rise and what is the impact on society (if any)?
Blacknad.
Good question.
But the first thing I would do is determine whether the answers were the truth or just what they, in 2006-7, believed were the answers they were supposed to give.
After all we have spent a generation telling everyone they are special just like everybody else.
Here's a suggestion:
There may be a bias in this study from the start. The study specifically seeks out a trait that the investigators assume is negative, as indicated by the use of the word 'narcissism'. Perhaps another group of researchers investigating the level of 'self-esteem' might reach a very different conclusion.
The conclusions may be prejudiced by the philosophy and frame of reference of the research team.
Good point redewenur.
Investigators starting with a built-in prejudice are rarely going to be disappointed.
But I don't see this much different from studies of monogamy. When asked about cheating ... everybody knows the correct answer is no. And men, assuming their answers will be seen my other men, will always be competitive and inflate their response.
Quite. Investigator prejudice/bias - which I mentioned because it seems to me very possible in this case - is, surely, only one of many ways to arrive at dubious results.
I can think of a few other possiblilities:
- Cultural and social influences (such as you mentioned)
- Knowledge, or suspicion, about the anticipated outcome of the investigation.
- Knowledge, or suspicion, about the answer that the particular questioner wants to hear.
- The question structure.
I view psychology as a difficult and nebulous subject, and tend to take such surveys with the proverbial pinch-of-salt.
What makes something a science is if it is verifiable.
Psychology can not meet that test any more than can those who practice the dark art of political science.
Blacknad quoted:
"If I ruled the world, it would be a better place,"
A friend used to say (in the late 60s), "The ideal form of government is a dictatorship with me as dictator". I don't think there's much new in the idea. Perhaps more people feel that way today but I actually doubt it.