The following research focuses on the age-old prejudice against only children as being more narcissistic than non-only children. The study first aimed to measure how rampant the stereotype is. The second study focused on proving whether the stereotype was scientifically correct.
The study explained in great detail the things it did differently from other research conducted on similar topics and highlighted the limitations it suffered from. The paper did not view narcissism as a singular concept. It studied the two sub-dimensions of narcissism – Narcissism Admiration and Narcissism Rivalry – which distinguishes it and makes the research more in-depth and accurate. However, the sub-dimensions are not explained very clearly which leads to confusion time and time again since they are a major theme in the paper. The research was conducted in Germany which makes it a little difficult to relate to in the Indian context.
In the first study, it was recorded whether claims from scientific literature, media reports, and popular science publications may have caused such widespread prejudices. It also tested whether the stereotype is present only in non-only child raters and whether it is comparatively weak or non-existent in only child raters. A large sample of participants was collected through Psyweb, an online forum. Seven hundred and eighty-four individuals attempted the questionnaire out of which five hundred and fifty-six were selected as the main sample. The participants were informed that they had to rate the six items from the short form of Narcissistic Admiration and Rivalry Questionnaire out of 6 to estimate the extent to which an only child differs from a non-only child. A scored rating of 1 meant ‘does not apply at all’ and 6 meant ‘fully applies’. The result of the survey showed that non-only child participants rated only children high in both narcissistic admiration as well as narcissistic rivalry than non-only children. Participants who were only children also rated only children high in narcissistic admiration but they did not ascribe a higher rating to the only child in the narcissistic rivalry dimension of the test as compared to the non-only child.
A commendable feature of the study was that the sample was large enough to be highly representative and measure the prevalence of the stereotype. The study was also precise in the sense that it also segregated only child raters from non-only child raters and calculate the result accordingly. Detailed statistics were provided of the sample for reference which is another plus point. A slight flaw that came to my notice was the reliabilities were not very high with the reliability for non-only child raters in narcissistic rivalry going as low as 0.64. Also, the NARQ (Narcissistic Admiration and Rivalry) questionnaire was reduced to just six questions for testing which might not be a necessarily good thing for research purposes.
In the second study, the aim was to provide a meticulous test of how an only child differs from an only child in terms of narcissism. The investigation done to collect the data was on a large scale which yields a lot of benefits. The sample size was large. The sample was representative of Germany. It was made sure that the demographic representatives were kept in check. Another feature of the study was that a separate assessment for the two sub-dimensions was done. The data used for analysis was collected from the Innovation Sample of the Socio-Economic Panel. A one-tailed t-test was used to test whether an only child is more narcissistic than a non-only child. Astonishingly, the scores came out lower for the only child than the non-only child on both the subdimensions of narcissism. To be completely sure, two-tailed p values were computed to check the significant difference between an only child and a non-only child in directions other than narcissistic admiration and narcissistic rivalry. Evidence proving that an only child is more narcissistic than a non-only child was not found here as well. Finally, a third test called the Bayesian t-test was conducted under an altered hypothesis which proved more or less the same thing.
The sample is said to be large enough to prevent it from being unrepresentative but it could not be revealed due to German Data Protection Law. Although that is understandable being a psychology student it makes the study a little vague and unclear. The good thing is, they did provide enough statistics about the sample to correct that defect. A lot of covariates of the sample were taken into account which is a perk. In the study, at first, the results were calculated by taking the covariates into account and again after controlling the covariates. This shows the researcher’s diligence to be as accurate as they can be. A highly praiseworthy thing is the fact that they conducted three different tests to check and recheck the result provided by one test. That requires a lot of time and effort which is commendable. Another benefit of conducting three different tests is that it made the study more trustworthy and explicable for readers like myself, who believed in the stereotype.
The research paper was very precise, consisting of important references and minute details but that came at the cost of it being a little less descriptive and difficult to understand, especially for people with little or no psychological background.
References:
Dufner, M., Back, M. D., Oehme, F. F., & Schmukle, S. C. (2020). The End of a Stereotype: Only Children Are Not More Narcissistic Than People With Siblings. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 11(3), 416–424. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550619870785
Comments