What do highly narcissistic people think and feel about (their) intelligence? (1 / 3)

03 Sep, 2025

Link: https://www.annaczarna.pl/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/Zajenkowski-Czarna-Szymaniak.-Dufner-2019.pdf

Pasteable Citation: Zajenkowski, M., Czarna, A. Z., Szymaniak, K., & Dufner, M. (2020). What do highly narcissistic people think and feel about (their) intelligence?. Journal of Personality, 88(4), 703-718.

Again, the same conversations is coming up, again seeing the same attempts to silence it as found on the narcissistic entitlement article. The learning process is not going well. https://www.reddit.com/r/zeronarcissists/comments/1g3v3s1/live_reddit_case_study_for_excessive_entitlement/

"Again. I have had this conversation over and over. Between being told to dumb down my comments, and being told to stop "corrupting" myself to get along with people while sounding dumb, I have decided to err more on the side of doing integrity to my thoughts as they organically occur instead of editing them to avoid triggering narcissists.

And again, it was literally me who specified my knowledge from teaching that when people don't do well with content, the first thing you try is to space it out more. And just like the content on narcissistic entitlement once again, it's being fed back to me like it was always just them that knew and did this when it was not. Absolutely NOBODY endogenously put forward this solution until I, through research and six years of teaching experience, put forward specifically and on purpose, instead of incidentally and gravitationally to two competing social media designs, specifically for the purpose of increasing comprehension, what I have seen to work with massive results. I chose X on purpose for that congruence, and left it on purpose because of Elon Musk abusing his backend privileges with sincere, and I mean sincere, entitlement. But then once I do put that forward, specifically, on purpose, and because of my experience on Reddit when it is actually best suited for X, where I will not return because of Elon Musk, that's just the norm that's always been the case. It has not. The issue kept repeatedly happening and I'm the one that specifically put the solution forward. Now it's being treated like it's textbook knowledge, when literally nobody, and I mean nobody, was endogenously trying out this solution instead. I can't believe it. I can't stand it. It's just gotten disgusting. I have never seen anything this disrespectful. I mean it.

It has not. At all. While I'm out here citing, doing due diligence to people's content with respect and integrity, I'm getting fed the very thing I put forward to HELP and then told that they just knew that and did that on their own when they did NOT. Since WHEN. Since WHEN. I cannot emphasize enough how disgusting it is getting. The complete parasitism, the complete lack of respect for me, the complete lack of even basic returning energies for me while still demanding and even enforcing. It is a repulsive energy. It really is. I don't come back because THERE IS NOTHING IN IT FOR ME. Since when does that have to be spelled out. When we see people not buying or not interested in something, we quickly say, "Oh, there must not be a lot in it for them." Yet, this is not the first thing that clearly comes to people's mind when I stop accommodating for free, unpaid, only to be completely disrespected. I am not doing it because it would be legitimately INSANE AND MASOCHISTIC to do so. Not happening.

https://www.reddit.com/r/zeronarcissists/comments/1g3v3s1/live_reddit_case_study_for_excessive_entitlement/

(1/2)

Both sides attack me about equally, it's gotten disgusting. None of them is showing a general pattern matching about how and when I adapt, despite me repeatedly, specifically, and point by point breaking it down for both sides.

If you want to understand something more, space it out. It's not even academic. Even though my subreddit, r/zeronarcissists, is based on academic content, most of my comments, though somewhere of that caliber, are genuine expressions and again, not inherently meant to impress academics.

When I was even using twitter AS AN ACCOMMODATION for this bite-size cognitive structuring, even that wasn't enough. Even that got even more regression to a mean that was starting to not be the mean anymore, and really regressing down to something not sustainable anymore, being told to, not only space it out which was already a massive accommodation given my natural expression, but then to slow it down on top of it. I decided to just leave that site and block once the backend was abused regressing to not only the mean anymore, but way further than was even a norm. It led to me being forced to have a conversation about demanding accommodations unpaid in non-learning settings.

So even though what you said about this not being an academic setting is true, my nature, bite-size, dumbed-down expression because of these complaints was STILL, NEVERTHELESS, DESPITE actively doing this treated like a learning experience, not the non-academic, non-learning experience you're saying it is, where he could demand disability accommodations unpaid, and not just that, but actively enforce them.

I SPECIFICALLY selected Reddit over Twitter because I can do long form uninterrupted. If bite-sized cognitions were the norm, Twitter, now X, is designed for that. Not Reddit. I specifically selected it for its long form capacity, and now I’m seeing something it is not designed for, short form, trying to normalized where it is sincerely not appropriate and where its strength lies in the opposite.

And unfortunately, you have done something similar to that, while, simultaneously, claiming it's not educational or academic, so accommodations cannot be demanded. Nor can profit; I'm clearly not doing this for the likes. I keep having this conversation over and over. I do it because I love it and I'm naturally into science and understanding the world. I'm going to do it anyway, and there are a few nerds that are with me on it, and that's my social experience. If it's not yours, just block me. I'll probably block you with a few more of these repeated conversations, so it's not a loss in either direction if it's that aggravating for you.

It was NOT ok. I had to write a whole comment about speaking to people with learning disabilities about viewing the backend of payment for the aid and support they get so they learn you can't just treat all things like the cloistered teaching environment and demand this help unpaid. When it happens in these environments, it is PAID for, and that is the only reason why people actively accommodate it. In the organic, unadulterated world, people will not accommodate you because the endogenous economy has its own inherent speeds that do not wait for anyone. And unfortunately, if those who have disabilities want to do well, they can't slow down the very people taking caring of them that have to go at speeds they must go to sink or swim when they are NOT in the learning environment.

If pro-disability people are artificially slowed down in naturally contesting environments, they may even slow down their support to the point of drowning and then nobody can afford anybody and the whole disabled population goes out with the person who should not have been slowed down.

impressing narcissists has done nothing for me and everything for them. Similar to Elon Musk throwing twitter fits when things aren't about him enough, I've decided to just block it as it does absolutely 0, if not negative for me, and everything for him. Similar to editing my natural thoughts as they emerge. There is literally nothing in it for me anymore.

You can see me repeatedly have this conversation ad nauseam in many of my comments and I'm sure u/Natural_Professor809 can tell you about it themselves. (2/2)"

Grandiose narcissists, even though they did not strongly relate perceived to actual IQ scores, had an impressive and enviable less intense testing experience with low distress during IQ testing. However, they failed to reflect on the experience afterwards. Vulnerable narcissists had no real relation between self-perceived intelligence and actual intelligence, but showed markedly increased distress in the context of IQ testing, and this distress was not even intensity toward the task in an achievement-focused manner, but a general feeling of malaise about themselves and who they were that didn’t even have anything to do with the task.

Both forms of narcissism (grandiose and vulnerable) were unrelated to objective intelligence. Grandiose narcissism was associated with high self‐perceived intelligence (Studies 1–3) and explained more variance in self‐perceived intelligence than objective intelligence and the Big Five personality traits. It was correlated with reduced distress in the context of IQ testing and low engagement in cognitive performance (Study 2). Individuals with high grandiose narcissism based their well‐being (Study 3) partly on intelligence and considered intelligence important for success in different life domains, especially for social relations (Study 4). Vulnerable narcissism was unrelated to self‐perceived intelligence (Studies 1–3) and went along with increased distress in the context of IQ testing (Study 2).

Intelligence is important to vulnerable and grandiose narcissists.

The results indicate that the topic of intelligence is of key importance for people with high grandiose narcissism psychological functioning and it also has some relevance for individuals with high vulnerable narcissism.

Donald Trump has strong feelings of well-being and confidence about his IQ. This is admirable in itself in the age of neuroticism and intelligence insecurity/excessive competition, even though backup facts are absolutely critical.

“I’m much smarter than them. I think I have a much higher IQ.” “Sorry losers and haters, but my IQ is one of the highest, and you all know it!” Donald J. Trump (CNN Politics, n.d.)

Alfred Binet was not only the first person to develop the IQ test, but the first to use Narcissus to describe a patient who admired himself exclusively

Alfred Binet, who is known for having developed the first intelligence test, is also among the first to use the term “Narcissus” to describe a patient whose admiration focused exclusively on himself (Binet, 1887). The term “narcissism” became popular in clinical psychology and was historically used to describe patients with strong egocentrism (e.g., Freud, 1914). Nowadays, researchers are also interested in narcissism as a personality trait that varies in the population (Hermann, Brunell, & Foster, 2018).

Intelligence is found to be agentic and therefore is highly valued among narcissists.

It has been suggested that among nonclinical narcissistic individuals, agentic constructs such as intelligence are highly valued (Campbell & Foster, 2007).

An unrealistically positive self–view, strong self–focus, feelings of entitlement and a lack of regard for others are found amount nonclinical narcissistic individuals.

This variant is characterized by an unrealistically positive self‐view, a strong self‐focus, feelings of entitlement, and a lack of regard for others (Campbell & Foster, 2007; Miller et al., 2011)

Grandiose narcissists tend to feel better about their subjective experience but they tend to be more dominant and arrogant as well.

Grandiose narcissism typically goes along with high subjective well‐being (Czarna, Zajenkowski, & Dufner, 2018; Dufner et al., 2012; Dufner, Gebauer, Sedikides, & Denissen, 2018; Sedikides, Rudich, Gregg, Kumashiro, & Rusbult, 2004). In terms of social behavior, grandiose narcissism is characterized by open displays of dominance and arrogance (Back et al., 2013; Campbell, 1999).

IQ scores predict major life outcomes such as educational attainment (Deary, Strand, Smith, & Fernandes, 2007), occupational success (Schmidt, 2002), income (Zagorsky, 2007), and longevity (Gottfredson & Deary, 2004). However, objectively assessed intelligence (OAI) is essentially unrelated to most personality traits with the exception of the openness/intellect factor of the Big Five

When investigating the relations between narcissism and intelligence, objective IQ scores are relevant. Intelligence can be measured with high precision, and IQ scores predict major life outcomes such as educational attainment (Deary, Strand, Smith, & Fernandes, 2007), occupational success (Schmidt, 2002), income (Zagorsky, 2007), and longevity (Gottfredson & Deary, 2004). However, objectively assessed intelligence (OAI) is essentially unrelated to most personality traits with the exception of the openness/intellect factor of the Big Five, to which it is positively correlated (Ackerman & Haggestad, 1997). Additionally, OAI shows weak negative correlations with traits related to maladjustment such as Neuroticism and negative emotionality (Austin et al., 2011)

Neuroticism, including a tendency to personalize instead of focus on the task at hand, and negative emotionality, have a weak negative correlation with measured IQ. So, though there are cases where this actually led to a low IQ, it doesn’t really necessarily mean that enough for it to be something you can predict strongly and someone can still have a high IQ with these traits, it’s just less likely.

We are not aware of any previous research addressing the relation between vulnerable narcissism and OAI. Given that Neuroticism and negative emotionality (Austin et al., 2011) are both modestly negatively associated with OAI, one might expect a weak negative correlation between vulnerable narcissism and OAI.

Intelligence is seen as part of social dominance, ironically enough. For people scoring high on grandiose narcissism, the topic of intelligence is nevertheless central to their cognition and emotions. Saying they are smart, being believed, and being now treated like smart is a sufficient enough experience of competence getting people to do something that actually feels like being smart. And in some ways it is if that’s all it takes, why add extra steps. If that’s all that is required, in that case, that was actually an intelligent, time-saving tactic. This feeling of competence and social success leads to positive feelings as long as no sufficiently hard inquiry is made into the actual backup competence actions required of this assignment.

Even though narcissism might be unrelated to OAI, there is a reason to believe that for people scoring high on grandiose narcissism, the topic of intelligence is nevertheless central to their cognition and emotions. According to the extended agency model of narcissism (Campbell & Foster, 2007), they have a focus on agentic attributes such as social dominance and, importantly for the current context, competence. Being high in agency is highly rewarding for individuals with high grandiose narcissism and enables them to experience positive feelings. To feel that way, they use various agentic intrapersonal and interpersonal strategies.

In an environment specifically comprised of highly agreeable people, merely bragging about IQ can be a sufficiently similar experience to having visible, actual accolades earned from high intelligence work. Thus, in such sectors, grandiose narcissists do well, bragging about IQ more or less to a large captive audience and being believed to social success, which leads them to feeling more smart as well since they are being treated with the social success of someone who is really that way. This obviously would have skipped the step of actually looking for evidence, which can be a problem for more agreeable populations.

Among the intrapersonal strategies is the tendency to maintain unrealistically positive self‐views regarding agentic attributes such as intelligence. As Campbell and Foster (2007) state, inflated views of their IQ can boost social confidence and thereby lead to social success (e.g., high social status) among narcissistic persons. Social success, in turn, can lead to even more inflated self‐ views. Correspondingly, maintaining a subjective belief of high intelligence should be an important part of narcissistic individuals’ psychological functioning including their beliefs, emotions, and motivations

In the past, one’s subjective feelings about one’s IQ overlap moderately with actual IQ scores.

If this is really the case, then grandiose narcissism should go along with a positive self‐concept with regard to intelligence. Past research indicates that subjectively assessed intelligence (SAI) overlaps moderately with IQ (Freund & Kasten, 2012)

Unrealistically positive views of one’s abilities go along with stress resistance

Maintaining high SAI might be particularly important for people with high grandiose narcissism because it contributes to their subjective well‐being. Unrealistically positive views of one’s abilities go along with stress resistance (Gramzow, Willard, & Mendes, 2008) and previous research has shown that that global self‐esteem mediates the positive link between grandiose narcissism and well‐being indicators (Sedikides et al., 2004).

Intelligence is considered a highly desirable trait so those high in grandiose narcissism can be seen trying to be regarded as intelligent.

If the topic of intelligence is indeed central to the self‐ regulation of people with high grandiose narcissism, it is likely that they generally consider intelligence a very important trait. When asked about the importance of intelligence for overall life success and for success in specific life domains, individuals with high grandiose narcissism should rate intelligence as more important than people low in grandiose narcissism.

Vulnerable narcissists were predicted to be insecure and have less security with their intelligence in particular, showing high signs of insecurity in relationship to their intelligence.

. Because vulnerable narcissism goes along with low self‐esteem, negative emotionality, and insecurity (Miller et al., 2011; Wink, 1991), it is conceivable that individuals with high vulnerable narcissism might be doubtful about their intelligence. In this case, vulnerable narcissism would correlate negatively with SAI.

Study 2 investigated how people high in narcissism experience IQ. Study 3 studied the difference between high SAI and grandiose narcissism and well-being.

. In Study 2, we also investigated how people high in narcissism experience IQ test. We assessed their cognitions, emotions, and motivations shortly before and after an IQ test. In Study 3, we tested whether high SAI accounts for a positive link between grandiose narcissism and well‐being. In Study 4, we investigated the importance that narcissistic individuals attribute to intelligence for attaining success in different life domains.

Grandiose narcissism was assessed with the Narcissistic Personality Inventory (Raskin & Hall, 1979). The Polish adaptation (Bazińska & Drat‐Ruszczak, 2000) is composed of 34 items with a 5‐point response scale

Vulnerable narcissism was measured with the Polish version (Czarna, Dufner, & Clifton, 2014) of the Hypersensitive Narcissism Scale (HSNS; Hendin & Cheek, 1997).

Vulnerable narcissism was measured with the Polish version (Czarna, Dufner, & Clifton, 2014) of the Hypersensitive Narcissism Scale (HSNS; Hendin & Cheek, 1997). The scale contains 10 items with a 5‐point Likert‐type scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Objectively assessed intelligence (OAI) was assessed with two tests.

Cattell’s Culture Fair Intelligence Test (CFT; Cattell, 1973) consists of four nonverbal subtests with strict time limits.

Cattell’s Culture Fair Intelligence Test (CFT; Cattell, 1973) consists of four nonverbal subtests with strict time limits. The first part consists of 13 items each comprising a series of three abstract shapes/figures with one piece missing. Respondents must complete the series by selecting the single correct answer from six options. In the second subtest, respondents are required to identify the two patterns from a set of 5 that do not belong to the group; there are 14 sets of patterns. The third subtest is similar to the Raven test and consists of 13 matrices. The last subtest (10 items) requires the respondents to select one out of five answers to replicate the relationships between figures and a dot in the model. A total number of correct answers across all subtests constituted the CFT final score. The second measure of intelligence was Raven’s test in the advanced version (Raven, Court, & Raven, 1983). There are 36 original matrices, and the administration time in the current study was 30 min. Additionally, a factor score (g) was calculated (z‐standardized composite score) for each participant from the two intelligence test scores.