INT’L. J. AGING AND HUMAN DEVELOPMENT, Vol, 30(2)81-94, 1990
NARCISSISM AND LONELINESS*
LARS A N D E R S O N , PH.D. Stockholm Gerontology Research Center and Department of Stress Research Karolinska Institute
ABSTRACT
The research described here centers on how a narcissistic intrusion during early childhood may develop into narcissistic difficulties which manifest themselves, later in life, in feelings of loneliness. The results from a study of elderly women in Stockholm, Sweden, indicated that loneliness in old age is greater among an intruded group in comparison to those whose parental influence was not intrusive. The feelings of loneliness are even more severe if the mother was a housewife. There was also a relationship between social position and loneliness, but only for those women whose family orientation was not intrusive and whose mothers were housewives. The results encourage further study of the etiological contributions of parental influence during childhood on later experience of loneliness.
THE LONELINESS CONCEPT Reviewing what has been written about loneliness, Perlman and Peplau [ l ] conclude that loneliness has been looked at from several specific theoretical perspectives: Mainly 1) psychodynamic, 2) phenomenological, 3) existential, 4) sociological, 5 ) interactionist, and 6) cognitive. In comparing theoretical approaches, the authors conclude that only the existentialists regard loneliness as being (potentially) positive. According to the psychodynamic and phenomenological view, feelings of loneliness are regarded as pathological. This is in contrast to the interactionist and cognitive positions which state that this
* The research upon which this study is based was supported by grants from the Delegation for social research (75/546), the city of Stockholm, and the Stockholm Gerontology Research Center. 81 0 1990. Bavwood Publishing Co., Inc.
doi: 10.2190/VQRP-3N2X-DKHA-8A5K http://baywood.com
82 /
LARSANDERSSON
experience is normal. In the sociological analysis the appropriate term would be “normative.” According to the existentialist view loneliness is universal. The reason for loneliness, within the psychoanalytic and phenomenological traditions, are subjective and individual; the psychodynamic school focuses on past, i.e., childhood experiences, while the phenomenologists emphasize the present situation. To the existentialists, loneliness is part of the human nature and exists throughout life. Looking at it from the sociological standpoint, a historical and contemporary perspective is used to examine the reasons for feelings of loneliness. Finally, according to the interactionist and cognitive theories, the reasons for loneliness are to be found both in the individual and in the situation. The theoretical basis of the present project incorporates phenomenological, interactionist and existential perspectives. It is assumed that early socialization can influence feelings of loneliness at later life stages. In a previous article describing this theoretical background [2], loneliness is viewed as a multidimensional phenomenon and basically divided into a typology emanating from Weiss’s [3] distinction between emotional isolation (the response to the absence of an attachment figure) and social isolation (the response to the absence of a place in an accepting community). It has been noted by Shaver [4] that to avoid social isolation (estrangement), the “cure” is authentic community. Elsewhere [5] I have argued that this “cure” focuses on the future while the “cure” for emotional estrangement would require a kind of psychological or emotional reworking of basic personality patterns as developed in one’s family during the socialization process. This is connected to a fundamental distinction concerning whether feelings of loneliness have a developmental or a situational background [5] . In trying to trace the roots of loneliness in line with the former assumption, the researcher may run the risk of simply incorporating loneliness with the well over one hundred deficiencies identified in developmental psychology as the result of some neglect in childhood [5]. Certainly, research on this dimension of loneliness has attained strong influences from attachment theory. This holds that neglect-as with childhood separation or loss-will develop into relational problems in later years. Much work has been done on attachment [ 6 , 7 ] , and no doubt much of it is of relevance to loneliness research. A dichotomous notion of the loneliness of emotional estrangement, however, stimulates us to consider another possibility. Could opposite influences of one’s family-too little or too much emotional fusion-result in similar deficits in the ability to form the requisite socioemotional bonds that would prevent emotional estrangement? One side of the coin is neglect meaning too little attention, while the other side is too much attention or intrusion. Arguments pertaining to such parental influence in childhood can be found in works that have been done on narcissism.
NARCISSISM A N D LONELINESS / 83
THE CONCEPT OF NARCISSISM Popular and widely used concepts such as narcissism, unavoidably bring with them several interpretations. This disorder has been discussed from a number of perspectives from within different theoretical frameworks. Moore mentions that in “psychoanalytic literature “narcissistic” may refer descriptively to a type of libido or its object; to a stage of development; to a type or mode of objectchoice; t o an attitude; to psychic systems and processes; or to a personality type which may be relatively normal or pathological neurotic, psychotic, or borderline” [8] . In this article the primary concern is not with a psychiatric diagnosis of narcissism, but rather with what Loewenstein calls narcissistic difficulties which might be more or less severe [ 9 ] . A sketch of a narcissistic person can be represented by Kernberg’s description of someone with an unusual degree of self-reference in interaction with other people [ 101. Narcissistic individuals have a great need for approval and admiration, but show little empathy for the feelings of others. Charming and engaging manners are merely a surface. Their ruthlessness and coldness is turned against people from whom they expect nothing while they may idealize others. Kernberg describes their relationship with other people as “clearly exploitative and sometimes parasitic. It is as if they feel they have the right t o control and possess others” [lo] . At the same time their enjoyment of life comes from “tributes they receive from others or from their own grandiose fantasies.” As mentioned, narcissistic difficultes are not comparable to the diagnosis of narcissism in the picture of a person with narcissistic difficulties, however, certain characteristics from the above description d o apply depending on the extent of the deficiency.
THE DEVELOPMENT OF NARCISSISM In discussing the development of narcissism, structural, group, and individual level factors have been examined. Structural factors have, for example, been suggested as explaining the possible increase in narcissistic difficultes in our time [ 1I ] . If the observation that narcissism has become more frequent holds true, the explanation for this must be found on a societal level unless we engage in a far-fetched speculation-that there has been a sudden increase in the birth rate among narcissists. Many scholars agree that narcissistic difficultes are adopted in the family setting during the early years. A principal question concerning the transmission of difficulties is whether either or both of the parents must suffer from narcissistic difficulties themselves. The most common illustration of a narcissistic intrusion is the narcissistic mother interacting with her child; in a wider perspective this explanation of narcissism seems too simplified and static. Green notes that “it will not suffice to dismiss the matter with the parents’ own
84 J
LARSANDERSSON
neuroses” [12]. The narrowness of the outlook represented by the view that influence is strictly person-to-person is illuminated by using a longer time perspective. The prerequisite for the continuance of the deficiency over the generations according to the person-to-person view would be some variation on the theology of original sin.
NARC I SS I ST IC INT R US10Ni Green in his paper never uses the term narcissism but talks about “the most characteristic neurosis of modern society” [ 121 . Nevertheless, the manifestations are the same. Green identifies three elements in upbringing responsible for this deficiency: 1) love withdrawal, 2) personality absorption and 3) a conflict between initial adjustment of submissive propitiation and the later assumption of goal achievement. The threat of love withdrawal is one of the mechanisms used for the “soft” control of the child. Nonconforming behavior is punished by real or threatened abandonment which causes feelings of guilt in the child. When the child conforms, the process of building a pseudo ego is begun [ 131. The child is unable to express anger or disappointment due to the threat of love withdrawal. The child represses his or her anger and will so be unaware of his/her real needs and will also lack self-consciousness. Narcissistic children are often described by their parents as “nice” or “good-natured” and unaggressive. Anger threatens the equilibrium of the family and is therefore suppressed to maintain a superficial affinity. The tendency to uphold the family’s emotional equilibrium creates an illusion of normalcy and warmth. The price paid by offspring, however, is in the difficulties in initiating or maintaining satisfying relationships outside the family system. The narcissistic family cannot see the fallacy intrinsic in the fact that their logic works too well [ 131 . This “family myth” [14] “refers to a series of fairly well-integrated beliefs shared by all family members. . . beliefs that go unchallenged by everyone involved in spite of the reality distortions which they may conspicuously imply.” The family myth usually emphasizes “the theme of happiness” which is aimed at maintaining the status quo [ 141. The child’s impression of a family of warmth and without aggressions generally remains unaffected by later experiences. The influence from the primary caregiver is described by Green as an absorption of the personality of the child, when the child is used to justify the parent’s existence [12]. As Loewenstein notes, such children have difficulties in developing a clear sense of self because they remain mere extensions of their parents [ 9 ] . Richter mentions children serving as a copy of the parents’ own ego or as a substitute for the parents’ own ego-ideal [ 151. Concerning the third element-the conflict between initial submission and later expectations for achievement-Green writes that the child whose personality has been absorbed isexpected to accomplish, to “do things” [12]. The earliest social condition, however was dependence or submission therefore
NARCISSISM A N D LONELINESS / 85
the accomplishments will take place in fantasy. Loewenstein [9] suggests that narcissistically intruded children “will try to reach their ego-ideal through driven strivings for fame and glory or, lacking talent or opportunity, they may resort to defensive grandiosity. . . .” According to Green any striving or pressure to compete is painful and exaggerates anxiety, guilt and feelings of inadequacy because it violates the initial submissive adjustment [ 121. On the other hand, not making the effort to achieve results in an equal amount of guilt feelings. The three processes described illustrate behavior of a kind that can be enhanced by life in a secluded family. Parental intrusion may cause the child to experience difficulties in becoming differentiated from one or both parents and in developing a self-identity as an independent autonomous person. The child also develops an exaggerated sense of importance which may lead to difficulties in adult life in forming healthy bonds with others. The overall long range consequence can be a narcissistic personality trait which may include feelings of loneliness. A further indication that the three processes described by Green [ 121 can be in operation is that the family is projected as warm-in combination with secluded. In this context “warmth” can be interpreted as: inhibited aggressions. As the operational measure of these variables, instruments could be developed that measure a family’s seclusion or boundary maintenance in conjunction with the warmth of the family.
HYPOTHESES In accordance with the previous discussion, it is suggested that children experiencing narcissistic intrusion also have a greater risk of developing narcissistic difficulties that are later manifested in feelings of loneliness. The main hypothesis tested is that individuals who have been met with narcissistic intrusion will suffer to a larger degree from loneliness than those who have not experienced this intrusion. Two additional hypotheses were tested: since a component in the picture of a person with narcissistic difficulties is the need for achievements [9, 121characterized by continuous strivings for brilliance, wealth, power, and beauty [9], and this striving, particularly for some women, also can take the form of trying to attach oneself to successful partners, social position is introduced in the analysis. As mentioned, Green [12] claims that the accomplishments will only take place in fantasy, while Loewenstein [9] holds open the possibility for occasional successful endeavors. Assuming successful strivings, these may be reflected in a higher social position. The following hypothesis is posed: Individuals who have been met with narcissistic intrusion are to a large degree to be found in higher social positions. The third pair of possible combinations of the three variables narcissistic intrusion, social position and loneliness concerns the latter two. Based on previous research 121 it is hypothesized that the lower the social position the more severe the loneliness.
86 I LARSANDERSSON
METHOD Sample The subjects in this study were 207 elderly women in Stockholm who participated in a larger, intervention project [ 161. Subjects in this strategic sample were randomly chosen from a computerized waiting list of elderly who had requested admission to senior citizen apartments. There were some restrictions made before drawing the sample. Only females living alone in a modern flat in predominantly inner-city districts and having less than five hours of home help per week were selected. Before appearing on the list the applicants are ranked on a four-graded scale according to their (principally medical) need. The subjects of this study were chosen from the largest category (low-need). After drop-outs for natural causes, such as hospitalization or death, had been removed from the records, the nonresponse rate was 19.7 percent. The interviewers used a structured questionnaire with over a hundred questions. The mean age of the participants was seventy-seven years which means that childhood experiences were about seventy years in the past. The distribution on marital status was 62.8 percent widows, 23.7 percent unmarried and 13.5 percent divorced. For a complete description of the sample and the main study, see Anderson [ 161.
Measures Loneliness was measured with the UCLA Loneliness Scale-short version developed by Russel et al. [ 171 which is a well-documented and widely used instrument. Due to the advanced age of the participants, the four original statements were transformed into questions. This is in line with suggestions put forward by Schmidt [ 181 . The four items are rated o n a four-point-agree-disagree continuum. Socialposition was measured by an index including: education, size of the apartment, income and “occupational position of the household.” To examine the variable “occupational position of the household” two questions regarding occupation were asked: one to the interviewed person herself; and another concerning the former husband (for those previously married). They were both open-ended questions and the occupations were classified according to the revised version of SEI (“Socio-Economic-Grouping”) which has been developed by the Swedish National Central Bureau of Statistics [ 191. Although participants in this study are retired, previous occupational position is undoubtedly a good indicator of socio-economic status. When single the household code of course equals the individual code. When previously married, the household code equals that of the spouse’s code which has the highest rank according to system PRAGEL“mark” [20]. This system is “based on the premise that consumption, socialization, life-style and so on is marked more by one of the spouses than the
NARCISSISM A N D L O N E L I N E S S I 87
other if their socio-economic positions are different.” It has been tested by Erikson [20] and found useful. Due to the PRAGELdifferentiation, the occupational position of the household will be treated as an ordinal scale. Two four-graded questions concerning the respondents’ conception of the parent’s home were used as an indicator of narcissistic intrusion. The first question measured the degree of familial withdrawal by checking to what extent the family kept to itself. The second question measured the respondents’ impression of the warmth of the family. Response options for both questions included two positive and two negative alternatives. The two questions were combined into a single 2 X 2 table where for each question the two positive alternatives and the two negative alternatives were combined. The risk group for narcissistic intrusion consists of those respondents who assessed their parents’ home as secluded and as warm and secure ( n = 38). The remaining three groups were considered the control group ( n = 160). In nine cases, information was missing on either or both variables. it is the interaction between the variables that produces the risk of intrusion. Parental warmth is a foundation for psychological security, and it is negatively associated with feelings of loneliness. It is suggested here, however, that the negative correlation between warmth and loneliness is valid only in case the members of the family are open to those around them. The majority of cases in Figure 1 can be found in the positive box representing a childhood in an open and warm family. What in most cases would be regarded
WOULD YOU SAY THAT YOU H A 0 A WARM A N 0 SECURE C n i L o n o o o YOU ~ ~ WERE GROWING UP (WITHIN THE FAMILY71
HOW WAS YOUR PARENTS’ HOME RUN7 WERE ALL THE DOORS OPEN A N 0 FRIENDS A N 0 VISISTORS. WOULD COME A N 0 GO. OR WOULD YOU SAY THAT YOUR FAMILY KEPT MORE TO THEMSELVES?
THE FAMILY WAS ALWAYS RECEIVING VISITORS
I YES, AEWLUTELY
I
THE FAMILY RECEIVED A LOT OF VISITS
THE FAMILY KEPT FOR THE MOST PART TO ITSELF
THE FAMILY KEPT PRACTICALLY SPEAKING ENTIRELY TO ITSELF
128
YES, TO SOME EXTENT NO, NOT REALY
16
16
lS0
Figure 1. Determination of risk group for narcissistic intrusion.
88 I
LARSANDERSSON
as representing the negative extremity-a childhood that was not warm and secure-is found in the two bottom boxes. The risk group in this study, however, is found in the upper right hand box: those who had a warm but secluded childhood. There is much concern regarding social desirability response sets, i.e., tendencies to distort responses in a favorable direction [21]. From this perspective it is advantageous that the risk group in this study is selected through one positive and one fairly neutral response alternative. Through this approach it is more probable that the intended individuals are picked out than if they were to be selected through unfavorable response alternatives.
R ESULTS As hypothesized, the warm and open group experienced the lowest degree of loneliness, followed by the two groups without a warm family of origin while the warm and secluded group reported the highest degree of loneliness. When the degree of experienced loneliness was compared between the intruded group and the control group, it was found that the intruded group experienced loneliness to a significantly higher degree ( p < .001, t-test). Expressed in another way, narcissism explains 6 percent of the variance in loneliness ( F = 10.08, p < .002, Table 1). The opportunity for narcissistic intrusion in a family of the type described above can be hypothesized to be greater when the mother was a housewife due to the greater opportunity provided by the housewife role for rearing children in isolation from others [l 11. The results showed, however, that whether the mother was a housewife or was working is unrelated to family type. About Table 1. Relationship between Loneliness and the Independent Variables Narcissistic Difficulties and Social Position (ANOVA) In dependent Variables
Beta
F-value
P
Narcissistic intrusion (seclusion + warmth)
.24
10.08
< .002
6%
Narcissistic intrusion (seclusion + warmth + housewife)
.39
8.70
< .005
15%
Narcissistic intrusion (seclusion + warmth)
.26
11.92
Social position
.2 1
2.58
< .001 < .06
11%
Narcissistic intrusion (seclusion + warmth + housewife) Social position
.39
8.25
< .006
.14
0.35
ns
R2
~~
17%
NARCISSISM AND LONELINESS / 89
one-fifth of all families were of the secluded and warm kind, and there was even a slight indication that the secluded and warm family was less frequent when the mother was a housewife. When comparing the sub-group where the mother was a housewife in a secluded and warm family, with the control group who have had an employed mother, there is a striking difference in experiences of loneliness of the now aged c u d . The comparison between these two sub-groups explained 15 percent of the variance in loneliness (F = 8.70, p < .005, Table 1) with the feelings of loneliness being more severe for those who were brought up in a secluded and warm family with a mother who was a housewife. Given the certain complexity between loneliness and the many psychological and social variables associated with it, accounting for 15 percent of the variability in loneliness would seem meaningful. Thus the first hypothesis which read that individuals who have been met with narcissistic intrusion to a larger degree suffer from loneliness was confirmed. The correlation between narcissistic intrusion and social position, is not statistically significant (r = -0.3, n.s.). Dividing the social-position-index into four quartiles’ shows that the proportion of women who were brought UP with narcissistic intrusion does not differ between the four sub-groups-in all groups the proportion of intruded is around 20 percent, and if we look at each group separately, we find that in all groups the feelings of loneliness are more severe for those who have been narcissistically intruded. Thus the second hypothesis which read that individuals who have been met with narcissistic intrusion are to a larger degree to be found in higher social positions was not confirmed. This result indicates that Green’s [ 121 position that accomplishments mostly will take place in fantasy could be more useful than Loewenstein’s position. The third hypothesis, concerning the relationship between social position and loneliness was supported by the data-the higher the social position, the lower the feelings of loneliness (r = .20, p < .006). As can be seen in Table 1, the independent contribution from social position to the explained variance in loneliness almost approaches significance (p < .06) when placed together with the original measure of narcissistic intrusion. Once the mother’s employment status is included in the intrusion measure, however, the contribution from social position vanishes. In probing this matter, it turns out-leaving the mother’s employment status out for the moment-that among those not narcissistically intruded there is a relationship denoting that the higher the social position the lower the feelings of loneliness (r = .20, p < .03)while there is no such relationship among those intruded ( I = .16, n.s.). The difference between the coefficients is small, though, and whether the correlation is significant or not is also dependent on group size. Nevertheless there is an indication that with narcissistic intrusion there is no relationship between social position and
’
The way it is measured, it is less relevant to suggest a grouping built on proportions of social classes or the relation to the means of production.
90 / LARSANDERSSON
loneliness, and this applies when the mother’s employment status is taken into consideration as well. Among those not narcissistically intruded, however, there is a relationship between social position and loneliness, but only when the mother was a housewife, not if she was employed. In summary, there is a relationship between social position and loneliness, but only for those women whose family orientation was not secluded and warm and whose mothers were housewives.
DISCUSSION Although the result of this study supported the intrusion hypothesis, much further work is needed to ascertain the validity of the findings. The results cannot be generalized unless found in other populations since the studied group is a specific group of elderly women in a specific cultural context, and the use of retrospective data collection always raises questions regarding the reliability and validity of the information received. Particularly the influence of marital status might be of imporatnce. Intruded individuals who are married may be superficially protected from loneliness by the presence of the spouse or other family members. There may be room for some speculations emanating from the findings that the family of origin might have something to do with feelings of loneliness in old age. A fundamental question is concerned with how seclusion is conceptually connected to narcissistic difficulties. In line with the idea that structural factors and the family setting are of importance for the development of narcissistic difficulties, there is reason to separate, as Slater [22] does, different forms of withdrawal. He defines three principal forms of cathectic withdrawal:
1 . withdrawal of cathexis from larger aggregates to within the confines of the nuclear family Cfamilial withdrawal); 2. withdrawal of cathexis from larger aggregates to a single intimate dyad (dyudic w ithdrawal);and 3. withdrawal of cathexis from all objects to the self (narcissistic withdrawal). The first and third forms of withdrawal are elaborated in this discussion (the second form will be excluded since it does not include children). The discussion will follow a model where a two-step development is described, as illustrated in Figure 2. The model illustrates one possible way for the development of narcissistic difficulties and for the development of anxiety. It should be noted that although much of the background information upon which this discussion is built originates from the works of Kernberg [ 101 and Kohut [23], the model suggests a development of narcissism that differs markedly from their theories. According to Kernberg [lo], a child may not attain object love because of cold and rejecting parents, and Kohut [23] suggests that a child may not be able to idealize the parents due to indifference or rejection. In either case, the result is said to be pathological narcissism. In the present model, it is the intrusive parent that injects narcissism in the child.
NARCISSISM A N D LONELINESS / 91
STRUCTURAL CONDITIONS
SPOUSES WITH COMPLEMENTARY NEUROSES
FAMILIAL NARCISSISTIC CHILD WITH WITHDRAWAL L I N T R U S l o N -----)NARCISSISTIC FROM PRIMARY DIFF CULT1 €2 CAREGIVER
.f
PRIMARY CAREGIVER WITH NARCISSISTIC ---)FROM DIFFICULTIES
AMBIVALANCE CAREGIVER
CHILD WITH -ANXIETY
(NARCISSISTIC WITHDRAWAL)
Figure 2. A two-step model describing a possible development of narcissistic difficulties.
In the first step, certain societal conditions are suggested to influence the family structure and sex roles. The family structure affects the interaction within the family which in its turn exerts an influence on the socialization of the child. For an optimal effect, the neuroses of the parents should be complementary. In the case of familial withdrawal, the family is seen as an island of security in a turbulent, frightening or unfamiliar environment. Such a secluded life style may predispose the parent to a narcissistic intrusion, lavishing choking watchfulness on the child. The parent’s vigilance initiates a striving to secure a self of one’s own-separation. In the case of familial withdrawal, however, the chances are minimal for a successful separation. In correspondence with Adler’s description of the neurotic striving for superiority [24] ,the narcissistic striving for self-enhancement is directed far into the future. All present life appears only as a preparation. The present is not real, and life becomes future oriented toward hunting for the never developed self. The second step describes a situation where an adult, who was narcissistically intruded as a child (as shown in step l), now has the role of a parent with narcissistic difficulties. In this case, we find the parent described by Kernberg [ 101 as cold, hostile and rejecting, and behaving with “callousness, indifference, and nonverbalized, spiteful agression,” coupled with moments of superficial devotion and interest. During the attachment period, the child in step two has difficulties in developing a clear sense of self for reasons, in a way, opposite to
92 I LARSANDERSSON
those present in the first step situation. There is a lack of possibilities for the child to introject the ego-supportive parent. The child fears a separation. Instead there develops a past oriented striving for closeness with the idealized parent as the child clings to what little ego-support there is. This developmental picture shows itself as anxiety, insecurity and low self-worth. A comparison of the terms used here with those of Ainsworth and coworkers indicates both similarities and differences [25]. In their analysis of adult attachment types, they use the terms anxious-ambivalent and avoidant. Their analysis differs from the present one in its lack of division into familial withdrawal and narcissistic withdrawal. The intrusive attachment inherent in the former situation has no counterpart in their typology while their anxiousambivalent type corresponds to the situation of narcissistic withdrawal. Avoidant attachment, finally, corresponds to neglect. According to this model it is situations of family withdrawal that foster narcissistic difficulties in the child while narcissistic withdrawal fosters anxiety. Both situations will give rise to feelings of loneliness, though, for different reasons. The findings regarding loneliness and social position also inspire some speculations. The starting point is the division of loneliness into emotional and social estrangement [ 2 ]. Considering that social estrangement involves an experience of lack of relatedness to the social environment [ 2 ] , there is reason to assume that individuals in higher social strata are more bound by close ties to the societal life through the social norm system and formal social activities. The relationship found in the nonintruded between social position and loneliness might be an indication that it is the social estrangement part of loneliness that is particularly related to social position. According to data, however, it is only in cases where the mother was a housewife that the social position ingredient is important; perhaps a working mother permits a better integration of the child into societallife. In regard to loneliness (of social estrangement) this study suggests that girls in the lower so;ial positions benefit from having employed mothers. If the problem is loneliness of emotional estrangement, the situation is different. The problems following narcissistic intrusion are established in the early years irrespective of social position and remain relatively unaffected by later influences. The level of loneliness is comparatively high, and an additional contribution of loneliness of social estrangement makes less difference. Although only tentative, the results encourage further study of the distinction between emotional and social estrangement and their possible different developmental origins: emotional estrangement could have its origins in the earliest attachment-separation period and social estrangement in the later socialization period where the influence from social class is more manifest. There is an urgent need to develop a reliable measure that actually takes into account the division into emotional and social estrangement. Following from the assumption that loneliness can have both developmental and situational origins, there is a need to emphasize, more than is done presently,
NARCISSISM AND LONELINESS / 93
the etiological contributions of parental influence during childhood on later experiences of loneliness. It is important to examine the developmental influences themselves, but also.because of the effect they can have on how we cope with situations that could lead to loneliness of the latter, i.e., situational type. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The study has been carried through while the author holds a fellowship from the Medical Research Council. Appreciation is expressed t o Ellen Hall, MA, for her editorial assistance. REFERENCES
1. D. Perlman and L. Peplau, Loneliness. A Sourcebook o f Current Theory, Research and Therapy, L. Peplau and D. Perlman (eds.), John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1982. 2. L. Andersson, A Model of Estrangement-Including a Theoretical Understanding of Loneliness, Psychological Reports, 58, pp. 683-695, 1986. 3. R. Weiss, Loneliness. A Sourcebook of Current Theory, Research and Therapy, L. Peplau and D. Perlman (eds.), John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1982. 4. P. Shaver, Preventing the Harmful Consequences of Severe and Persistent Loneliness, L. Peplau and S. Goldstone (eds.), National Institute of Mental Health, DHSS, Publication No. (ADM) 84-13 12, Wash*gton, D.C., 1984. 5. L. Andersson, L. C. Mullins, and D. P. Johnsson, Parental Intrusion versus Social Isolation: A Dichotomous View of the Sources of Loneliness, Journal of Social Behavior and Personality (special issue) 2 , pp. 125-134, 1987. 6. J. Bowlby, Attachment and Loss, Vol. I. Attachment, Basic Books, New York, 1969. 7. -, The Making and Breaking of Affectional Bonds. I. Aetiology and Psychopathology in the Light of Attachment Theory, British Journal of Psychiatry, 130, pp. 20 172 10, 1977. 8. B. Moore, Toward a Clarification of the Concept of Narcissism, The Psychoanalytic Study of the Child, 30, pp. 243-276, 1975. 9. S. Loewenstein, An Overview of the Concept of Narcissism, Social Casework, pp. 136-142, March 1977. 10. 0. Kernberg, Borderline Conditions and Pathological Narcissism, Jason Aronson, New York, 1976. 11. M. Bader and I. Philipson, Narcissism and Family Structure, Psychoanalysis Contemporary Thought, 3, pp. 299-328, 1980. 12. A. Green, A Modern Introduction to the Family, N. Bell and E. Vogel (eds.), The Free Press, New York, 1968. 13. W. Brodey, On the Dynamics of Narcissism, The Psychoanalytic Study of the Child, 20, pp. 165-193, 1965. 14. A. Ferreira, A Modern Introduction to the Family, N . Bell and E. Vogel (eds.), The Free Press, New York, 1968.
94
I
LARSANDERSSON
15. H-E. Richter, Jahrbuch der Psychoanalyse, Band 1 ., Westdeutscher Verlag, Koln und Oplanden, 1960. 16. L. Andersson, Intervention against Loneliness in a Group of Elderly Women: A Process Evaluation, Human Relations, 37, pp. 295-310, 1984. 17. D. Russel, L. Peplau, and C. Cutrona, The Revised UCLA Loneliness Scale: Concurrent and Discriminant Validity Evidence, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, pp. 472-480, 1980. 18. M. Schmidt, Interviewing the Old-Old, The Gerontologist, 15, pp. 544-547, 1975. 19. SCB, Socio-ekonomisk indelning (SEI). Utvardering, oversyn och komplettering av 1974 drs forslag, Statistiska Centralbyrln, Stockholm, 1980. 20. R. Erikson, Om Socio-ekonomiska Indelningar av Hushbll. Overvaganden och ett Forslag. (On Socioeconomic Classifications of Households-Some Considerations and a Proposal), Statistisk Tidskrift (Statistical review) 19, pp. 11-23, 1981. 2 1. R. McCrae and P. T. Costa, Jr., Social Desirability Scales: More Substance than Style, Journal o f Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 5 1 , pp. 882-888, 1983. 22. P. Slater, A Modern Introduction to the Family, N. Bell and E. Vogel (eds.), The Free Press, New York, 1968. 23. H. Kohut, The Restoration o f the Self, International Universities Press, New York, 1976. 24. H. Ansbacher and R. Ansbacher (eds.), The Individual Psychology o f Alfred Adler. A Systematic Presentation in Selections from His Writings, George Allen and Unwin Ltd., London, 1958. 25. M. D. S. Ainsworth, M. C. Blehar, E. Waters, and S. Wall, Patterns of Attachment, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, New Jersey, 1978.
Direct reprint requests to:
Lars Andersson Department of Stress Research Karolinska Institute Box 60 205 S-104 01 Stockholm, Sweden
NARCISSISM AND LONELINESS*
LARS A N D E R S O N , PH.D. Stockholm Gerontology Research Center and Department of Stress Research Karolinska Institute
ABSTRACT
The research described here centers on how a narcissistic intrusion during early childhood may develop into narcissistic difficulties which manifest themselves, later in life, in feelings of loneliness. The results from a study of elderly women in Stockholm, Sweden, indicated that loneliness in old age is greater among an intruded group in comparison to those whose parental influence was not intrusive. The feelings of loneliness are even more severe if the mother was a housewife. There was also a relationship between social position and loneliness, but only for those women whose family orientation was not intrusive and whose mothers were housewives. The results encourage further study of the etiological contributions of parental influence during childhood on later experience of loneliness.
THE LONELINESS CONCEPT Reviewing what has been written about loneliness, Perlman and Peplau [ l ] conclude that loneliness has been looked at from several specific theoretical perspectives: Mainly 1) psychodynamic, 2) phenomenological, 3) existential, 4) sociological, 5 ) interactionist, and 6) cognitive. In comparing theoretical approaches, the authors conclude that only the existentialists regard loneliness as being (potentially) positive. According to the psychodynamic and phenomenological view, feelings of loneliness are regarded as pathological. This is in contrast to the interactionist and cognitive positions which state that this
* The research upon which this study is based was supported by grants from the Delegation for social research (75/546), the city of Stockholm, and the Stockholm Gerontology Research Center. 81 0 1990. Bavwood Publishing Co., Inc.
doi: 10.2190/VQRP-3N2X-DKHA-8A5K http://baywood.com
82 /
LARSANDERSSON
experience is normal. In the sociological analysis the appropriate term would be “normative.” According to the existentialist view loneliness is universal. The reason for loneliness, within the psychoanalytic and phenomenological traditions, are subjective and individual; the psychodynamic school focuses on past, i.e., childhood experiences, while the phenomenologists emphasize the present situation. To the existentialists, loneliness is part of the human nature and exists throughout life. Looking at it from the sociological standpoint, a historical and contemporary perspective is used to examine the reasons for feelings of loneliness. Finally, according to the interactionist and cognitive theories, the reasons for loneliness are to be found both in the individual and in the situation. The theoretical basis of the present project incorporates phenomenological, interactionist and existential perspectives. It is assumed that early socialization can influence feelings of loneliness at later life stages. In a previous article describing this theoretical background [2], loneliness is viewed as a multidimensional phenomenon and basically divided into a typology emanating from Weiss’s [3] distinction between emotional isolation (the response to the absence of an attachment figure) and social isolation (the response to the absence of a place in an accepting community). It has been noted by Shaver [4] that to avoid social isolation (estrangement), the “cure” is authentic community. Elsewhere [5] I have argued that this “cure” focuses on the future while the “cure” for emotional estrangement would require a kind of psychological or emotional reworking of basic personality patterns as developed in one’s family during the socialization process. This is connected to a fundamental distinction concerning whether feelings of loneliness have a developmental or a situational background [5] . In trying to trace the roots of loneliness in line with the former assumption, the researcher may run the risk of simply incorporating loneliness with the well over one hundred deficiencies identified in developmental psychology as the result of some neglect in childhood [5]. Certainly, research on this dimension of loneliness has attained strong influences from attachment theory. This holds that neglect-as with childhood separation or loss-will develop into relational problems in later years. Much work has been done on attachment [ 6 , 7 ] , and no doubt much of it is of relevance to loneliness research. A dichotomous notion of the loneliness of emotional estrangement, however, stimulates us to consider another possibility. Could opposite influences of one’s family-too little or too much emotional fusion-result in similar deficits in the ability to form the requisite socioemotional bonds that would prevent emotional estrangement? One side of the coin is neglect meaning too little attention, while the other side is too much attention or intrusion. Arguments pertaining to such parental influence in childhood can be found in works that have been done on narcissism.
NARCISSISM A N D LONELINESS / 83
THE CONCEPT OF NARCISSISM Popular and widely used concepts such as narcissism, unavoidably bring with them several interpretations. This disorder has been discussed from a number of perspectives from within different theoretical frameworks. Moore mentions that in “psychoanalytic literature “narcissistic” may refer descriptively to a type of libido or its object; to a stage of development; to a type or mode of objectchoice; t o an attitude; to psychic systems and processes; or to a personality type which may be relatively normal or pathological neurotic, psychotic, or borderline” [8] . In this article the primary concern is not with a psychiatric diagnosis of narcissism, but rather with what Loewenstein calls narcissistic difficulties which might be more or less severe [ 9 ] . A sketch of a narcissistic person can be represented by Kernberg’s description of someone with an unusual degree of self-reference in interaction with other people [ 101. Narcissistic individuals have a great need for approval and admiration, but show little empathy for the feelings of others. Charming and engaging manners are merely a surface. Their ruthlessness and coldness is turned against people from whom they expect nothing while they may idealize others. Kernberg describes their relationship with other people as “clearly exploitative and sometimes parasitic. It is as if they feel they have the right t o control and possess others” [lo] . At the same time their enjoyment of life comes from “tributes they receive from others or from their own grandiose fantasies.” As mentioned, narcissistic difficultes are not comparable to the diagnosis of narcissism in the picture of a person with narcissistic difficulties, however, certain characteristics from the above description d o apply depending on the extent of the deficiency.
THE DEVELOPMENT OF NARCISSISM In discussing the development of narcissism, structural, group, and individual level factors have been examined. Structural factors have, for example, been suggested as explaining the possible increase in narcissistic difficultes in our time [ 1I ] . If the observation that narcissism has become more frequent holds true, the explanation for this must be found on a societal level unless we engage in a far-fetched speculation-that there has been a sudden increase in the birth rate among narcissists. Many scholars agree that narcissistic difficultes are adopted in the family setting during the early years. A principal question concerning the transmission of difficulties is whether either or both of the parents must suffer from narcissistic difficulties themselves. The most common illustration of a narcissistic intrusion is the narcissistic mother interacting with her child; in a wider perspective this explanation of narcissism seems too simplified and static. Green notes that “it will not suffice to dismiss the matter with the parents’ own
84 J
LARSANDERSSON
neuroses” [12]. The narrowness of the outlook represented by the view that influence is strictly person-to-person is illuminated by using a longer time perspective. The prerequisite for the continuance of the deficiency over the generations according to the person-to-person view would be some variation on the theology of original sin.
NARC I SS I ST IC INT R US10Ni Green in his paper never uses the term narcissism but talks about “the most characteristic neurosis of modern society” [ 121 . Nevertheless, the manifestations are the same. Green identifies three elements in upbringing responsible for this deficiency: 1) love withdrawal, 2) personality absorption and 3) a conflict between initial adjustment of submissive propitiation and the later assumption of goal achievement. The threat of love withdrawal is one of the mechanisms used for the “soft” control of the child. Nonconforming behavior is punished by real or threatened abandonment which causes feelings of guilt in the child. When the child conforms, the process of building a pseudo ego is begun [ 131. The child is unable to express anger or disappointment due to the threat of love withdrawal. The child represses his or her anger and will so be unaware of his/her real needs and will also lack self-consciousness. Narcissistic children are often described by their parents as “nice” or “good-natured” and unaggressive. Anger threatens the equilibrium of the family and is therefore suppressed to maintain a superficial affinity. The tendency to uphold the family’s emotional equilibrium creates an illusion of normalcy and warmth. The price paid by offspring, however, is in the difficulties in initiating or maintaining satisfying relationships outside the family system. The narcissistic family cannot see the fallacy intrinsic in the fact that their logic works too well [ 131 . This “family myth” [14] “refers to a series of fairly well-integrated beliefs shared by all family members. . . beliefs that go unchallenged by everyone involved in spite of the reality distortions which they may conspicuously imply.” The family myth usually emphasizes “the theme of happiness” which is aimed at maintaining the status quo [ 141. The child’s impression of a family of warmth and without aggressions generally remains unaffected by later experiences. The influence from the primary caregiver is described by Green as an absorption of the personality of the child, when the child is used to justify the parent’s existence [12]. As Loewenstein notes, such children have difficulties in developing a clear sense of self because they remain mere extensions of their parents [ 9 ] . Richter mentions children serving as a copy of the parents’ own ego or as a substitute for the parents’ own ego-ideal [ 151. Concerning the third element-the conflict between initial submission and later expectations for achievement-Green writes that the child whose personality has been absorbed isexpected to accomplish, to “do things” [12]. The earliest social condition, however was dependence or submission therefore
NARCISSISM A N D LONELINESS / 85
the accomplishments will take place in fantasy. Loewenstein [9] suggests that narcissistically intruded children “will try to reach their ego-ideal through driven strivings for fame and glory or, lacking talent or opportunity, they may resort to defensive grandiosity. . . .” According to Green any striving or pressure to compete is painful and exaggerates anxiety, guilt and feelings of inadequacy because it violates the initial submissive adjustment [ 121. On the other hand, not making the effort to achieve results in an equal amount of guilt feelings. The three processes described illustrate behavior of a kind that can be enhanced by life in a secluded family. Parental intrusion may cause the child to experience difficulties in becoming differentiated from one or both parents and in developing a self-identity as an independent autonomous person. The child also develops an exaggerated sense of importance which may lead to difficulties in adult life in forming healthy bonds with others. The overall long range consequence can be a narcissistic personality trait which may include feelings of loneliness. A further indication that the three processes described by Green [ 121 can be in operation is that the family is projected as warm-in combination with secluded. In this context “warmth” can be interpreted as: inhibited aggressions. As the operational measure of these variables, instruments could be developed that measure a family’s seclusion or boundary maintenance in conjunction with the warmth of the family.
HYPOTHESES In accordance with the previous discussion, it is suggested that children experiencing narcissistic intrusion also have a greater risk of developing narcissistic difficulties that are later manifested in feelings of loneliness. The main hypothesis tested is that individuals who have been met with narcissistic intrusion will suffer to a larger degree from loneliness than those who have not experienced this intrusion. Two additional hypotheses were tested: since a component in the picture of a person with narcissistic difficulties is the need for achievements [9, 121characterized by continuous strivings for brilliance, wealth, power, and beauty [9], and this striving, particularly for some women, also can take the form of trying to attach oneself to successful partners, social position is introduced in the analysis. As mentioned, Green [12] claims that the accomplishments will only take place in fantasy, while Loewenstein [9] holds open the possibility for occasional successful endeavors. Assuming successful strivings, these may be reflected in a higher social position. The following hypothesis is posed: Individuals who have been met with narcissistic intrusion are to a large degree to be found in higher social positions. The third pair of possible combinations of the three variables narcissistic intrusion, social position and loneliness concerns the latter two. Based on previous research 121 it is hypothesized that the lower the social position the more severe the loneliness.
86 I LARSANDERSSON
METHOD Sample The subjects in this study were 207 elderly women in Stockholm who participated in a larger, intervention project [ 161. Subjects in this strategic sample were randomly chosen from a computerized waiting list of elderly who had requested admission to senior citizen apartments. There were some restrictions made before drawing the sample. Only females living alone in a modern flat in predominantly inner-city districts and having less than five hours of home help per week were selected. Before appearing on the list the applicants are ranked on a four-graded scale according to their (principally medical) need. The subjects of this study were chosen from the largest category (low-need). After drop-outs for natural causes, such as hospitalization or death, had been removed from the records, the nonresponse rate was 19.7 percent. The interviewers used a structured questionnaire with over a hundred questions. The mean age of the participants was seventy-seven years which means that childhood experiences were about seventy years in the past. The distribution on marital status was 62.8 percent widows, 23.7 percent unmarried and 13.5 percent divorced. For a complete description of the sample and the main study, see Anderson [ 161.
Measures Loneliness was measured with the UCLA Loneliness Scale-short version developed by Russel et al. [ 171 which is a well-documented and widely used instrument. Due to the advanced age of the participants, the four original statements were transformed into questions. This is in line with suggestions put forward by Schmidt [ 181 . The four items are rated o n a four-point-agree-disagree continuum. Socialposition was measured by an index including: education, size of the apartment, income and “occupational position of the household.” To examine the variable “occupational position of the household” two questions regarding occupation were asked: one to the interviewed person herself; and another concerning the former husband (for those previously married). They were both open-ended questions and the occupations were classified according to the revised version of SEI (“Socio-Economic-Grouping”) which has been developed by the Swedish National Central Bureau of Statistics [ 191. Although participants in this study are retired, previous occupational position is undoubtedly a good indicator of socio-economic status. When single the household code of course equals the individual code. When previously married, the household code equals that of the spouse’s code which has the highest rank according to system PRAGEL“mark” [20]. This system is “based on the premise that consumption, socialization, life-style and so on is marked more by one of the spouses than the
NARCISSISM A N D L O N E L I N E S S I 87
other if their socio-economic positions are different.” It has been tested by Erikson [20] and found useful. Due to the PRAGELdifferentiation, the occupational position of the household will be treated as an ordinal scale. Two four-graded questions concerning the respondents’ conception of the parent’s home were used as an indicator of narcissistic intrusion. The first question measured the degree of familial withdrawal by checking to what extent the family kept to itself. The second question measured the respondents’ impression of the warmth of the family. Response options for both questions included two positive and two negative alternatives. The two questions were combined into a single 2 X 2 table where for each question the two positive alternatives and the two negative alternatives were combined. The risk group for narcissistic intrusion consists of those respondents who assessed their parents’ home as secluded and as warm and secure ( n = 38). The remaining three groups were considered the control group ( n = 160). In nine cases, information was missing on either or both variables. it is the interaction between the variables that produces the risk of intrusion. Parental warmth is a foundation for psychological security, and it is negatively associated with feelings of loneliness. It is suggested here, however, that the negative correlation between warmth and loneliness is valid only in case the members of the family are open to those around them. The majority of cases in Figure 1 can be found in the positive box representing a childhood in an open and warm family. What in most cases would be regarded
WOULD YOU SAY THAT YOU H A 0 A WARM A N 0 SECURE C n i L o n o o o YOU ~ ~ WERE GROWING UP (WITHIN THE FAMILY71
HOW WAS YOUR PARENTS’ HOME RUN7 WERE ALL THE DOORS OPEN A N 0 FRIENDS A N 0 VISISTORS. WOULD COME A N 0 GO. OR WOULD YOU SAY THAT YOUR FAMILY KEPT MORE TO THEMSELVES?
THE FAMILY WAS ALWAYS RECEIVING VISITORS
I YES, AEWLUTELY
I
THE FAMILY RECEIVED A LOT OF VISITS
THE FAMILY KEPT FOR THE MOST PART TO ITSELF
THE FAMILY KEPT PRACTICALLY SPEAKING ENTIRELY TO ITSELF
128
YES, TO SOME EXTENT NO, NOT REALY
16
16
lS0
Figure 1. Determination of risk group for narcissistic intrusion.
88 I
LARSANDERSSON
as representing the negative extremity-a childhood that was not warm and secure-is found in the two bottom boxes. The risk group in this study, however, is found in the upper right hand box: those who had a warm but secluded childhood. There is much concern regarding social desirability response sets, i.e., tendencies to distort responses in a favorable direction [21]. From this perspective it is advantageous that the risk group in this study is selected through one positive and one fairly neutral response alternative. Through this approach it is more probable that the intended individuals are picked out than if they were to be selected through unfavorable response alternatives.
R ESULTS As hypothesized, the warm and open group experienced the lowest degree of loneliness, followed by the two groups without a warm family of origin while the warm and secluded group reported the highest degree of loneliness. When the degree of experienced loneliness was compared between the intruded group and the control group, it was found that the intruded group experienced loneliness to a significantly higher degree ( p < .001, t-test). Expressed in another way, narcissism explains 6 percent of the variance in loneliness ( F = 10.08, p < .002, Table 1). The opportunity for narcissistic intrusion in a family of the type described above can be hypothesized to be greater when the mother was a housewife due to the greater opportunity provided by the housewife role for rearing children in isolation from others [l 11. The results showed, however, that whether the mother was a housewife or was working is unrelated to family type. About Table 1. Relationship between Loneliness and the Independent Variables Narcissistic Difficulties and Social Position (ANOVA) In dependent Variables
Beta
F-value
P
Narcissistic intrusion (seclusion + warmth)
.24
10.08
< .002
6%
Narcissistic intrusion (seclusion + warmth + housewife)
.39
8.70
< .005
15%
Narcissistic intrusion (seclusion + warmth)
.26
11.92
Social position
.2 1
2.58
< .001 < .06
11%
Narcissistic intrusion (seclusion + warmth + housewife) Social position
.39
8.25
< .006
.14
0.35
ns
R2
~~
17%
NARCISSISM AND LONELINESS / 89
one-fifth of all families were of the secluded and warm kind, and there was even a slight indication that the secluded and warm family was less frequent when the mother was a housewife. When comparing the sub-group where the mother was a housewife in a secluded and warm family, with the control group who have had an employed mother, there is a striking difference in experiences of loneliness of the now aged c u d . The comparison between these two sub-groups explained 15 percent of the variance in loneliness (F = 8.70, p < .005, Table 1) with the feelings of loneliness being more severe for those who were brought up in a secluded and warm family with a mother who was a housewife. Given the certain complexity between loneliness and the many psychological and social variables associated with it, accounting for 15 percent of the variability in loneliness would seem meaningful. Thus the first hypothesis which read that individuals who have been met with narcissistic intrusion to a larger degree suffer from loneliness was confirmed. The correlation between narcissistic intrusion and social position, is not statistically significant (r = -0.3, n.s.). Dividing the social-position-index into four quartiles’ shows that the proportion of women who were brought UP with narcissistic intrusion does not differ between the four sub-groups-in all groups the proportion of intruded is around 20 percent, and if we look at each group separately, we find that in all groups the feelings of loneliness are more severe for those who have been narcissistically intruded. Thus the second hypothesis which read that individuals who have been met with narcissistic intrusion are to a larger degree to be found in higher social positions was not confirmed. This result indicates that Green’s [ 121 position that accomplishments mostly will take place in fantasy could be more useful than Loewenstein’s position. The third hypothesis, concerning the relationship between social position and loneliness was supported by the data-the higher the social position, the lower the feelings of loneliness (r = .20, p < .006). As can be seen in Table 1, the independent contribution from social position to the explained variance in loneliness almost approaches significance (p < .06) when placed together with the original measure of narcissistic intrusion. Once the mother’s employment status is included in the intrusion measure, however, the contribution from social position vanishes. In probing this matter, it turns out-leaving the mother’s employment status out for the moment-that among those not narcissistically intruded there is a relationship denoting that the higher the social position the lower the feelings of loneliness (r = .20, p < .03)while there is no such relationship among those intruded ( I = .16, n.s.). The difference between the coefficients is small, though, and whether the correlation is significant or not is also dependent on group size. Nevertheless there is an indication that with narcissistic intrusion there is no relationship between social position and
’
The way it is measured, it is less relevant to suggest a grouping built on proportions of social classes or the relation to the means of production.
90 / LARSANDERSSON
loneliness, and this applies when the mother’s employment status is taken into consideration as well. Among those not narcissistically intruded, however, there is a relationship between social position and loneliness, but only when the mother was a housewife, not if she was employed. In summary, there is a relationship between social position and loneliness, but only for those women whose family orientation was not secluded and warm and whose mothers were housewives.
DISCUSSION Although the result of this study supported the intrusion hypothesis, much further work is needed to ascertain the validity of the findings. The results cannot be generalized unless found in other populations since the studied group is a specific group of elderly women in a specific cultural context, and the use of retrospective data collection always raises questions regarding the reliability and validity of the information received. Particularly the influence of marital status might be of imporatnce. Intruded individuals who are married may be superficially protected from loneliness by the presence of the spouse or other family members. There may be room for some speculations emanating from the findings that the family of origin might have something to do with feelings of loneliness in old age. A fundamental question is concerned with how seclusion is conceptually connected to narcissistic difficulties. In line with the idea that structural factors and the family setting are of importance for the development of narcissistic difficulties, there is reason to separate, as Slater [22] does, different forms of withdrawal. He defines three principal forms of cathectic withdrawal:
1 . withdrawal of cathexis from larger aggregates to within the confines of the nuclear family Cfamilial withdrawal); 2. withdrawal of cathexis from larger aggregates to a single intimate dyad (dyudic w ithdrawal);and 3. withdrawal of cathexis from all objects to the self (narcissistic withdrawal). The first and third forms of withdrawal are elaborated in this discussion (the second form will be excluded since it does not include children). The discussion will follow a model where a two-step development is described, as illustrated in Figure 2. The model illustrates one possible way for the development of narcissistic difficulties and for the development of anxiety. It should be noted that although much of the background information upon which this discussion is built originates from the works of Kernberg [ 101 and Kohut [23], the model suggests a development of narcissism that differs markedly from their theories. According to Kernberg [lo], a child may not attain object love because of cold and rejecting parents, and Kohut [23] suggests that a child may not be able to idealize the parents due to indifference or rejection. In either case, the result is said to be pathological narcissism. In the present model, it is the intrusive parent that injects narcissism in the child.
NARCISSISM A N D LONELINESS / 91
STRUCTURAL CONDITIONS
SPOUSES WITH COMPLEMENTARY NEUROSES
FAMILIAL NARCISSISTIC CHILD WITH WITHDRAWAL L I N T R U S l o N -----)NARCISSISTIC FROM PRIMARY DIFF CULT1 €2 CAREGIVER
.f
PRIMARY CAREGIVER WITH NARCISSISTIC ---)FROM DIFFICULTIES
AMBIVALANCE CAREGIVER
CHILD WITH -ANXIETY
(NARCISSISTIC WITHDRAWAL)
Figure 2. A two-step model describing a possible development of narcissistic difficulties.
In the first step, certain societal conditions are suggested to influence the family structure and sex roles. The family structure affects the interaction within the family which in its turn exerts an influence on the socialization of the child. For an optimal effect, the neuroses of the parents should be complementary. In the case of familial withdrawal, the family is seen as an island of security in a turbulent, frightening or unfamiliar environment. Such a secluded life style may predispose the parent to a narcissistic intrusion, lavishing choking watchfulness on the child. The parent’s vigilance initiates a striving to secure a self of one’s own-separation. In the case of familial withdrawal, however, the chances are minimal for a successful separation. In correspondence with Adler’s description of the neurotic striving for superiority [24] ,the narcissistic striving for self-enhancement is directed far into the future. All present life appears only as a preparation. The present is not real, and life becomes future oriented toward hunting for the never developed self. The second step describes a situation where an adult, who was narcissistically intruded as a child (as shown in step l), now has the role of a parent with narcissistic difficulties. In this case, we find the parent described by Kernberg [ 101 as cold, hostile and rejecting, and behaving with “callousness, indifference, and nonverbalized, spiteful agression,” coupled with moments of superficial devotion and interest. During the attachment period, the child in step two has difficulties in developing a clear sense of self for reasons, in a way, opposite to
92 I LARSANDERSSON
those present in the first step situation. There is a lack of possibilities for the child to introject the ego-supportive parent. The child fears a separation. Instead there develops a past oriented striving for closeness with the idealized parent as the child clings to what little ego-support there is. This developmental picture shows itself as anxiety, insecurity and low self-worth. A comparison of the terms used here with those of Ainsworth and coworkers indicates both similarities and differences [25]. In their analysis of adult attachment types, they use the terms anxious-ambivalent and avoidant. Their analysis differs from the present one in its lack of division into familial withdrawal and narcissistic withdrawal. The intrusive attachment inherent in the former situation has no counterpart in their typology while their anxiousambivalent type corresponds to the situation of narcissistic withdrawal. Avoidant attachment, finally, corresponds to neglect. According to this model it is situations of family withdrawal that foster narcissistic difficulties in the child while narcissistic withdrawal fosters anxiety. Both situations will give rise to feelings of loneliness, though, for different reasons. The findings regarding loneliness and social position also inspire some speculations. The starting point is the division of loneliness into emotional and social estrangement [ 2 ]. Considering that social estrangement involves an experience of lack of relatedness to the social environment [ 2 ] , there is reason to assume that individuals in higher social strata are more bound by close ties to the societal life through the social norm system and formal social activities. The relationship found in the nonintruded between social position and loneliness might be an indication that it is the social estrangement part of loneliness that is particularly related to social position. According to data, however, it is only in cases where the mother was a housewife that the social position ingredient is important; perhaps a working mother permits a better integration of the child into societallife. In regard to loneliness (of social estrangement) this study suggests that girls in the lower so;ial positions benefit from having employed mothers. If the problem is loneliness of emotional estrangement, the situation is different. The problems following narcissistic intrusion are established in the early years irrespective of social position and remain relatively unaffected by later influences. The level of loneliness is comparatively high, and an additional contribution of loneliness of social estrangement makes less difference. Although only tentative, the results encourage further study of the distinction between emotional and social estrangement and their possible different developmental origins: emotional estrangement could have its origins in the earliest attachment-separation period and social estrangement in the later socialization period where the influence from social class is more manifest. There is an urgent need to develop a reliable measure that actually takes into account the division into emotional and social estrangement. Following from the assumption that loneliness can have both developmental and situational origins, there is a need to emphasize, more than is done presently,
NARCISSISM AND LONELINESS / 93
the etiological contributions of parental influence during childhood on later experiences of loneliness. It is important to examine the developmental influences themselves, but also.because of the effect they can have on how we cope with situations that could lead to loneliness of the latter, i.e., situational type. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The study has been carried through while the author holds a fellowship from the Medical Research Council. Appreciation is expressed t o Ellen Hall, MA, for her editorial assistance. REFERENCES
1. D. Perlman and L. Peplau, Loneliness. A Sourcebook o f Current Theory, Research and Therapy, L. Peplau and D. Perlman (eds.), John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1982. 2. L. Andersson, A Model of Estrangement-Including a Theoretical Understanding of Loneliness, Psychological Reports, 58, pp. 683-695, 1986. 3. R. Weiss, Loneliness. A Sourcebook of Current Theory, Research and Therapy, L. Peplau and D. Perlman (eds.), John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1982. 4. P. Shaver, Preventing the Harmful Consequences of Severe and Persistent Loneliness, L. Peplau and S. Goldstone (eds.), National Institute of Mental Health, DHSS, Publication No. (ADM) 84-13 12, Wash*gton, D.C., 1984. 5. L. Andersson, L. C. Mullins, and D. P. Johnsson, Parental Intrusion versus Social Isolation: A Dichotomous View of the Sources of Loneliness, Journal of Social Behavior and Personality (special issue) 2 , pp. 125-134, 1987. 6. J. Bowlby, Attachment and Loss, Vol. I. Attachment, Basic Books, New York, 1969. 7. -, The Making and Breaking of Affectional Bonds. I. Aetiology and Psychopathology in the Light of Attachment Theory, British Journal of Psychiatry, 130, pp. 20 172 10, 1977. 8. B. Moore, Toward a Clarification of the Concept of Narcissism, The Psychoanalytic Study of the Child, 30, pp. 243-276, 1975. 9. S. Loewenstein, An Overview of the Concept of Narcissism, Social Casework, pp. 136-142, March 1977. 10. 0. Kernberg, Borderline Conditions and Pathological Narcissism, Jason Aronson, New York, 1976. 11. M. Bader and I. Philipson, Narcissism and Family Structure, Psychoanalysis Contemporary Thought, 3, pp. 299-328, 1980. 12. A. Green, A Modern Introduction to the Family, N. Bell and E. Vogel (eds.), The Free Press, New York, 1968. 13. W. Brodey, On the Dynamics of Narcissism, The Psychoanalytic Study of the Child, 20, pp. 165-193, 1965. 14. A. Ferreira, A Modern Introduction to the Family, N . Bell and E. Vogel (eds.), The Free Press, New York, 1968.
94
I
LARSANDERSSON
15. H-E. Richter, Jahrbuch der Psychoanalyse, Band 1 ., Westdeutscher Verlag, Koln und Oplanden, 1960. 16. L. Andersson, Intervention against Loneliness in a Group of Elderly Women: A Process Evaluation, Human Relations, 37, pp. 295-310, 1984. 17. D. Russel, L. Peplau, and C. Cutrona, The Revised UCLA Loneliness Scale: Concurrent and Discriminant Validity Evidence, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, pp. 472-480, 1980. 18. M. Schmidt, Interviewing the Old-Old, The Gerontologist, 15, pp. 544-547, 1975. 19. SCB, Socio-ekonomisk indelning (SEI). Utvardering, oversyn och komplettering av 1974 drs forslag, Statistiska Centralbyrln, Stockholm, 1980. 20. R. Erikson, Om Socio-ekonomiska Indelningar av Hushbll. Overvaganden och ett Forslag. (On Socioeconomic Classifications of Households-Some Considerations and a Proposal), Statistisk Tidskrift (Statistical review) 19, pp. 11-23, 1981. 2 1. R. McCrae and P. T. Costa, Jr., Social Desirability Scales: More Substance than Style, Journal o f Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 5 1 , pp. 882-888, 1983. 22. P. Slater, A Modern Introduction to the Family, N. Bell and E. Vogel (eds.), The Free Press, New York, 1968. 23. H. Kohut, The Restoration o f the Self, International Universities Press, New York, 1976. 24. H. Ansbacher and R. Ansbacher (eds.), The Individual Psychology o f Alfred Adler. A Systematic Presentation in Selections from His Writings, George Allen and Unwin Ltd., London, 1958. 25. M. D. S. Ainsworth, M. C. Blehar, E. Waters, and S. Wall, Patterns of Attachment, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, New Jersey, 1978.
Direct reprint requests to:
Lars Andersson Department of Stress Research Karolinska Institute Box 60 205 S-104 01 Stockholm, Sweden
