Assessment of Narcissistic Personality Disorder: a Multi-method Review

AB!XRAm. This mview examines the available em@iud data& the diagnosis of mnrissistic person&y d&n&r (NPD) far three method3 of assessmen t: semi-sltzscturcd hztervhs, selfkport inventories, and pn@ctive techniques. Issues of n&bili@ validily, and clinical utility 071? examined for each instrument (or scale). An overview of the n&ztive advantages, disadvantages, and ern@ical support fm each method of assessment in the diagrwsk of NPD is pnsmtGd in a discussion a* the mview of the sa&ent literatun~. In pneraJ it was found that semi-structu~ intenkws an? a fairly r&a.tde and valid method of diagnosis for Ati II dismders but, for the most part, these studies have used woefully small samples of NPDs. In gene&, seljkport instruments wen best at screening fMthe place or absence of personality disonlq idmti&ag members of personality disorder clusters, and identafjng negative instmues of spccif;c persolurlity disorders or cluskrs. Self-report invenknies and the structured infnvieus am OF in disagmeme& wncerning#nzsnce of specif;c @smali~ pa&&~. In gmeral, pmvious studies have foupad the tendency for self&port measures to diqrwse @rsonulity disonks a.t much higherfnquncies than do clinici.ans. Monxn~eq selfk$ort measu~~ij attributed two or more personality disoraks to a particulur individual. Additiunally, research with projective methods over the last decade has shave thk mod-e of assessment to be us+1 in the diffkential diagnosis of hPD fiwn both