College students more narcissistic

**Mike Dura** · 03-06-2007, 02:43 PM

As a group, the same can probably be said about bodybuilders. I like to train and compete but there's a healthy detachment from it all. I get the impression that some others may be over-identified to being a "bodybuilder" and now it's the current college kids - thinking they are all dappered up and special for reading those damned long-headed books that many bodybuilders avoid. Damn! Here's to the down to earth folk out there - who are educated and look good but recognizes themselves as only human beings! Here's the link:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070227/...tered_students

**Jason865** · 03-06-2007, 02:50 PM

Who cares, most of us have better things to do than worry about teen culture.

**Pooks** · 03-06-2007, 02:52 PM

Yeah, and they are more medicated than previous teens too! lol
We'll all be mutants by year 2020

**Bojangles69** · 03-06-2007, 02:53 PM

Originally Posted by Pooks

Yeah, and they are more medicated than previous teens too! lol
We'll all be mutants by year 2020

double ditto

**Mike Dura** · 03-06-2007, 03:03 PM

I care about teen culture. There's always time to learn what's going on around you especially when it's relevant.

Originally Posted by Jason865

Who cares, most of us have better things to do than worry about teen culture.

***JDMSilviaSpecR*** · 03-06-2007, 03:25 PM

Hey I'm still in college, and that is very true

But I would say we're more confident then narcisisstic

**ph34rsh4ck** · 03-06-2007, 04:20 PM

Originally Posted by Mike Dura

As a group, the same can probably be said about bodybuilders. I like to train and compete but there's a healthy detachment from it all. I get the impression that some others may be over-identified to being a "bodybuilder" and now it's the current college kids - thinking they are all dappered up and special for reading those damned long-headed books that many bodybuilders avoid. Damn! Here's to the down to earth folk out there - who are educated and look good but recognizes themselves as only human beings! Here's the link:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070227/...tered_students

So if im 21 and im in college and i workout, then im consider a narcissistic egotistical bodybuilder, but if im 37 and my names mike dura, and i workout and i wanna compete, then im no longer narcissistic and egotistical, im "down to earth, educated, and i look good, but i recognize myself as a human bein"

sounds like your holding your mentality above that of college kids, sounds a lil conceided / cocky to me

**Mike Dura** · 03-07-2007, 03:12 PM

No bro, you've got the wrong idea. When studies are done they are based on studying groups as a whole. In this case a subset of the population (college students) were statistically compared with both the general population and students of the past. The researchers noted and reported a distinction in these comparisons. It's not about you (or me) so theres nothing to take personal. I read that bodybuilders as a group tend to score higher on the NPI (narcissistic personality inventory) too and this intuitively makes sense - you might call it "common sense." So we're not talking about you personally and I'm not putting myself "one-up" to people who score high in narcissism. I hope that clears it up for you.

Originally Posted by ph34rsh4ck

So if im 21 and im in college and i workout, then im consider a narcissistic egotistical bodybuilder, but if im 37 and my names mike dura, and i workout and i wanna compete, then im no longer narcissistic and egotistical, im "down to earth, educated, and i look good, but i recognize myself as a human bein"

sounds like your holding your mentality above that of college kids, sounds a lil conceided / cocky to me

**chest6** · 03-07-2007, 03:25 PM

Yep. A population or a sample its not meant to be personal a huge rule. Obviously there are ones that woudnt fit the general rule or they wouldnt have done the study in the first place.

**Mike Dura** · 03-07-2007, 03:31 PM

Yeah, in statistics they are called "outliers."

Originally Posted by chest6

Yep. A population or a sample its not meant to be personal a huge rule. Obviously there are ones that woudnt fit the general rule or they wouldnt have done the study in the first place.

**chest6** · 03-07-2007, 03:55 PM

u got it

**thegodfather** · 03-07-2007, 05:17 PM

Im not going to dispute what the article "shows." However I do have a bone to pick about the things its critiscizing. What is wrong with being career oriented? or worrying about ones self? You have to earn shit in this world, no one is going to ****ing hand it to you, and if I'm going to be where I eventually hope to be in my career then your damn right I need to be a little bit self centered. I have a CERTAIN quality of life which I hope to live and sustain, and I'm not going to attain it by hugging trees and devoting every saturday to picking up trash on the side of the road. The researchers conducting this study sound like a bunch of tree hugging hippy glue sniffers to me... I'll be dead honest with you about that.

"The new report follows a study released by UCLA last month which found that nearly three-quarters of the freshmen it surveyed thought it was important to be "very well-off financially." That compared with 62.5 percent who said the same in 1980 and 42 percent in 1966."

Who the hell checked the box that said "Yes, I hope and plan to live paycheck to paycheck for the rest of my ****ing life."

"But she is dismayed by the competitiveness of some students who seem prematurely focused on career status. " What was she hoping? That all of her constituents would all want to go into debt $20,000/yr to be focused on something like helping refugees? Isn't that what FEMA is for?

"The researchers traced the phenomenon back to what they called the "self-esteem movement" that emerged in the 1980s, asserting that the effort to build self-confidence had gone too far.

As an example, Twenge cited a song commonly sung to the tune of "Frere Jacques" in preschool: "I am special, I am special. Look at me."

Well, I'm sure we'll have a much more productive youth generation if we make them all start singing "Im a worthless piece of shit, piece of shit. Look at me" Sounds more like a generation of future Sociopaths...

The information is interesting, and I obviously am a little perturbed by it. I guess my point is there is nothing wrong with being a self-absorbed college student, so long as you graduate college, get a job, and become a productive member of society... I'm going to college to become a doctor, and I hope that after 8 years of self-absorbtion I can help a few more people than I could by picking up trash on the side of the road while in college.

**CoreyTampa09** · 03-07-2007, 08:03 PM

I personally think that study is absolutely ridiculous. Isn't something we have all lived by and known is something called survival of the fittest. If we didnt all strive to better OURSELVES we wouldnt be on top of our chain. I think the people who created this study have a vision of a futuristic eutopia rather than what reality actually consists of.

**DNoMac** · 03-07-2007, 10:28 PM

Originally Posted by thegodfather

Im not going to dispute what the article "shows." However I do have a bone to pick about the things its critiscizing. What is wrong with being career oriented? or worrying about ones self? You have to earn shit in this world, no one is going to ****ing hand it to you, and if I'm going to be where I eventually hope to be in my career then your damn right I need to be a little bit self centered. I have a CERTAIN quality of life which I hope to live and sustain, and I'm not going to attain it by hugging trees and devoting every saturday to picking up trash on the side of the road. The researchers conducting this study sound like a bunch of tree hugging hippy glue sniffers to me... I'll be dead honest with you about that.

"The new report follows a study released by UCLA last month which found that nearly three-quarters of the freshmen it surveyed thought it was important to be "very well-off financially." That compared with 62.5 percent who said the same in 1980 and 42 percent in 1966."

Who the hell checked the box that said "Yes, I hope and plan to live paycheck to paycheck for the rest of my ****ing life."

"But she is dismayed by the competitiveness of some students who seem prematurely focused on career status. " What was she hoping? That all of her constituents would all want to go into debt $20,000/yr to be focused on something like helping refugees? Isn't that what FEMA is for?

"The researchers traced the phenomenon back to what they called the "self-esteem movement" that emerged in the 1980s, asserting that the effort to build self-confidence had gone too far.

As an example, Twenge cited a song commonly sung to the tune of "Frere Jacques" in preschool: "I am special, I am special. Look at me."

Well, I'm sure we'll have a much more productive youth generation if we make them all start singing "Im a worthless piece of shit, piece of shit. Look at me" Sounds more like a generation of future Sociopaths...

The information is interesting, and I obviously am a little perturbed by it. I guess my point is there is nothing wrong with being a self-absorbed college student, so long as you graduate college, get a job, and become a productive member of society... I'm going to college to become a doctor, and I hope that after 8 years of self-absorbtion I can help a few more people than I could by picking up trash on the side of the road while in college.

Well said, especially the part, "i'm a worthless piece of shit, peice of shit" ROFLMAO! Seriously though, you made valid arguments. People can create all kinds of biases to achieve the results they desire. As Mark Twain once said, "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics."

I like this one better: statistics are like bikinis, what they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital

**RuhlFreak55** · 03-07-2007, 10:31 PM

Originally Posted by thegodfather

Im not going to dispute what the article "shows." However I do have a bone to pick about the things its critiscizing. What is wrong with being career oriented? or worrying about ones self? You have to earn shit in this world, no one is going to ****ing hand it to you, and if I'm going to be where I eventually hope to be in my career then your damn right I need to be a little bit self centered. I have a CERTAIN quality of life which I hope to live and sustain, and I'm not going to attain it by hugging trees and devoting every saturday to picking up trash on the side of the road. The researchers conducting this study sound like a bunch of tree hugging hippy glue sniffers to me... I'll be dead honest with you about that.

I agree with this 1000000000%.......guess what i'm gonna be a billionaire and i'm gonna flaunt it......so all the people that think having money is wrong and it shouldn't be important or it's not part of being happy in life can kiss my ass

**Logan13** · 03-08-2007, 12:07 AM

Originally Posted by ph34rsh4ck

So if im 21 and im in college and i workout, then im consider a narcissistic egotistical bodybuilder, but if im 37 and my names mike dura, and i workout and i wanna compete, then im no longer narcissistic and egotistical, im "down to earth, educated, and i look good, but i recognize myself as a human bein"

sounds like your holding your mentality above that of college kids, sounds a lil conceided / cocky to me

Damn, only 300 posts and ph34rsh4ck has already got you pegged Mike! Nicely done.

**Mike Dura** · 03-08-2007, 05:13 PM

You interpret me as well as you do current events and politics. I'm sure you have your niche in life but having an informed sense of the things you talk about on this forum is not one of them.

Originally Posted by Logan13

Damn, only 300 posts and ph34rsh4ck has already got you pegged Mike! Nicely done.

**Mike Dura** · 03-08-2007, 05:30 PM

I think you're missing the point. I think you lose context by focusing on one question (relating to being very well off financially). The NPI (narcistic personality inventory) is based on an overall score from 30 or more questions most of which have nothing to do with a desire to become wealthy.

No one is saying that there is anything wrong with being career oriented or looking out for your best interest. It's about a personality disorder. You may have your own idea about the meaning of the term narcissism but don't confuse that with what the researchers are talking about. A good start would be to research narcissism in the DSM-4 revised. There you'll learn how research psychologists define the term. It's a diagnosis based on a check list. There is quite a distinction between healthy self-esteem and pathological self-esteem. You seem to be talking about the former and confusing it with the latter.

A healthy level of self-esteem is essential to a persons functioning. Narcissism is self-esteem taken to a pathological extreme and it's destructive in a pervasive way. It's associated with what the researchers call "unstable self-esteem" and unstable self-esteem is associated with violence and interpersonal difficulties.

It's a good thing to be critical of research but it's better to first understand what you are critisizing. Suspend judgement, research, process, input, revise.

Originally Posted by thegodfather

Im not going to dispute what the article "shows." However I do have a bone to pick about the things its critiscizing. What is wrong with being career oriented? or worrying about ones self? You have to earn shit in this world, no one is going to ****ing hand it to you, and if I'm going to be where I eventually hope to be in my career then your damn right I need to be a little bit self centered. I have a CERTAIN quality of life which I hope to live and sustain, and I'm not going to attain it by hugging trees and devoting every saturday to picking up trash on the side of the road. The researchers conducting this study sound like a bunch of tree hugging hippy glue sniffers to me... I'll be dead honest with you about that.

"The new report follows a study released by UCLA last month which found that nearly three-quarters of the freshmen it surveyed thought it was important to be "very well-off financially." That compared with 62.5 percent who said the same in 1980 and 42 percent in 1966."

Who the hell checked the box that said "Yes, I hope and plan to live paycheck to paycheck for the rest of my ****ing life."

"But she is dismayed by the competitiveness of some students who seem prematurely focused on career status. " What was she hoping? That all of her constituents would all want to go into debt $20,000/yr to be focused on something like helping refugees? Isn't that what FEMA is for?

"The researchers traced the phenomenon back to what they called the "self-esteem movement" that emerged in the 1980s, asserting that the effort to build self-confidence had gone too far.

As an example, Twenge cited a song commonly sung to the tune of "Frere Jacques" in preschool: "I am special, I am special. Look at me."

Well, I'm sure we'll have a much more productive youth generation if we make them all start singing "Im a worthless piece of shit, piece of shit. Look at me" Sounds more like a generation of future Sociopaths...

The information is interesting, and I obviously am a little perturbed by it. I guess my point is there is nothing wrong with being a self-absorbed college student, so long as you graduate college, get a job, and become a productive member of society... I'm going to college to become a doctor, and I hope that after 8 years of self-absorbtion I can help a few more people than I could by picking up trash on the side of the road while in college.

**Mike Dura** · 03-08-2007, 05:35 PM

"Survival of the fittest" is adaptive under certain circumstances but with humans cooperation (win-win) versus competition (win-lose) is also highly adaptive and ensures survival of the species. Vision of futuristic utopia? I think you're off the mark with that one. Researchers can tell you that the idea of building up self-esteem too much is unhealthy and that has practical implications in education and parenting. The poor researchers are being profoundly misunderstood on this thread. They deliver gold and watch it turn to dust in your hands.

Originally Posted by CoreyTampa09

I personally think that study is absolutely ridiculous. Isn't something we have all lived by and known is something called survival of the fittest. If we didnt all strive to better OURSELVES we wouldnt be on top of our chain. I think the people who created this study have a vision of a futuristic eutopia rather than what reality actually consists of.

**RuhlFreak55** · 03-08-2007, 06:06 PM

ok you've bought way too deep into psychology in this country.....some is good....but everything that makes a person unique is not a disorder......narcissism is not a problem......you choose how to be no doctor is gonna tell me that my personality should be something else......wtf

**Hoggage_54** · 03-08-2007, 06:42 PM

I don't care what these researchers say. As a 22 year old college student, I am better than them in every way

**RuhlFreak55** · 03-08-2007, 06:44 PM

Originally Posted by Hoggage_54

I don't care what these researchers say. As a 22 year old college student, I am better than them in every way

i concur

**ph34rsh4ck** · 03-08-2007, 07:18 PM

so we have an accord?

**thegodfather** · 03-08-2007, 08:28 PM

Originally Posted by Mike Dura

No one is saying that there is anything wrong with being career oriented or looking out for your best interest. It's about a personality disorder. You may have your own idea about the meaning of the term narcissism but don't confuse that with what the researchers are talking about. A good start would be to research narcissism in the DSM-4 revised. There you'll learn how research psychologists define the term. It's a diagnosis based on a check list. There is quite a distinction between healthy self-esteem and pathological self-esteem. You seem to be talking about the former and confusing it with the latter.
It's a good thing to be critical of research but it's better to first understand what you are critisizing. Suspend judgement, research, process, input, revise.

Ok I agree its good to be critical of research, however the link you posted isn't even close to being considered an abstract out of a journal, its just a news article that really provided me with no solid data, terms, definitions, controls, or variables for me to even be able to examine it in such a way that you propose. I merely criticized the ARTICLE and the things that were presented in it. If you want to debate research from a peer reviewed journal I'd be happy to do so but at least post the article first. You're telling me to pick apart the research and form my own opinions based on the definitions, but theres only bits and pieces in that article. So as far as that article is concerned I believe I've made my point concerning what is said in there...

**Schmidty** · 03-08-2007, 08:37 PM

Im not fvckn special

**ph34rsh4ck** · 03-08-2007, 11:05 PM

^^ tell that to the guy that took that picture

**DNoMac** · 03-08-2007, 11:42 PM

Originally Posted by ph34rsh4ck

^^ tell that to the guy that took that picture

bahaha

**Hoggage_54** · 03-08-2007, 11:45 PM

As a college student, I'm not narcissistic, I'm just better than all of you.

**DNoMac** · 03-08-2007, 11:51 PM

Originally Posted by Hoggage_54

As a college student, I'm not narcissistic, I'm just better than all of you.

Community college doesn't count sucka!!

**ph34rsh4ck** · 03-09-2007, 07:20 AM

Originally Posted by DNoMac

Community college doesn't count sucka!!

dayum, hes gonna need some aloe vera for that burn

**RuhlFreak55** · 03-09-2007, 07:35 AM

Originally Posted by Hoggage_54

As a college student, I'm not narcissistic, I'm just better than all of you.

i've thought this since i was like 5 years old

**Mike Dura** · 03-09-2007, 01:09 PM

Bought too much into a specialized field that uses the scientfic method to get a sense of human behavior and personality? What alternative would you suggest?

Contrary to what you say, I think an informed viewpoint is superior to not thinking deep enough and relying on default oversimplfications to grasp the world around you. I also think learning to approach a subject systematically is superior than just have "common sense." Do you think an accountant is buying too much into economic theory?

Also, no one said that everything that makes a person unique is a disorder. To be sure, Narcissistic personality disorder is a problem - mostly for those close to the narcissist. It's mostly an interpersonal problem. In case where it becomes a problem for the narcissist, he or she commonly comes in with a vague description of feeling empty.

I agree with you, no doc is going to tell you that you're personality should be something else - no one implied that to begin with. A therapist, should a person seek to see one, would focus more on behaviors and thoughts (over personality) with suggestions of alternative ways of thinking. It's more about adress concrete and immediate stuff over personality traits. Many people don't realize that it's there way of thinking or behaving that is the cause of their suffering. Those can always be improved - even for the therapist. Just like in bodybuilding, you train in the right way and you get developed. Not training, whether bodybuilding or psychology = the absence of that developement.

Originally Posted by RuhlFreak55

ok you've bought way too deep into psychology in this country.....some is good....but everything that makes a person unique is not a disorder......narcissism is not a problem......you choose how to be no doctor is gonna tell me that my personality should be something else......wtf

**Mike Dura** · 03-09-2007, 01:11 PM

lol.

Originally Posted by Hoggage_54

I don't care what these researchers say. As a 22 year old college student, I am better than them in every way

**Mike Dura** · 03-09-2007, 01:35 PM

No, I've got a honda civic. Lol

Originally Posted by ph34rsh4ck

so we have an accord?

**Mike Dura** · 03-09-2007, 01:45 PM

Although the article doesn't have citations, it's clearly based on scientific research. On the other hand, how do you know whether the information supporting the article is from a peer reviewed journal? Good point.

Posting a technical article is beyond the scope of a steroid forum but if you're interested Roy Baumeister (Florida State University) is one of the most prominant researchers in the area of self-esteem (narcissism is obviously a sub topic). Probably best to search with a key word "review" to get an article that shows more of an overview of the research.

Originally Posted by thegodfather

Ok I agree its good to be critical of research, however the link you posted isn't even close to being considered an abstract out of a journal, its just a news article that really provided me with no solid data, terms, definitions, controls, or variables for me to even be able to examine it in such a way that you propose. I merely criticized the ARTICLE and the things that were presented in it. If you want to debate research from a peer reviewed journal I'd be happy to do so but at least post the article first. You're telling me to pick apart the research and form my own opinions based on the definitions, but theres only bits and pieces in that article. So as far as that article is concerned I believe I've made my point concerning what is said in there...

**Mike Dura** · 03-09-2007, 02:01 PM

Hey Godfather. Here's a more detailed account of the same article (still a secondary source). The primary article was published in the fall in the journal Personality and Social Psychology Review (peer reviewed journal).

http://www.uga.edu/columns/020122/news6.html

**Mike Dura** · 03-09-2007, 02:10 PM

Here's an article that gives a decent general sense of narcissism. It's balanced - it gives the benefits and costs of narcissism and it makes the destinction between healthy self-esteem and unhealthy self-esteem. It also talks more about cultural and historical trends in narcissism. I think it's an interesting and relevant topic.

Narcissism is a core concept for understanding things like scapegoating, racism, nationalism, the holocaust, and even the "family blacksheep."
The readings suggest that current media trends seem foster narcissism and so over time this is associated with a worsening of behavior in the work place and schools. Here's the link:

http://www.psychologytoday.com/rss/p...09-000005.html

**Logan13** · 03-10-2007, 01:49 AM

Originally Posted by Mike Dura

You interpret me as well as you do current events and politics. I'm sure you have your niche in life but having an informed sense of the things you talk about on this forum is not one of them.

Well then, I must be spot on about you. Maybe if I became a "Buddhist swinger", then maybe I'd have all the answers.

Stroke...we'll let everyone else decide:
http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm...endID=57108249

**thegodfather** · 03-10-2007, 01:53 AM

It doesn't interest me all that much...The problem with psychology is that it's such a hard thing to test or observe. I mean, the only real measure is a persons behavior/actions. Other then that, asking them questions, surverys, 1-on1's, etc, etc, dont really give me a clear indiciation of whether or not that person REALLY feels that way. I see a Psychiatrist because I have anxiety/panic attacks, to be honest she is pretty much just a pill pusher, she compares your condition to what medication she knows may have an effect, asks you about side effects, and adjusts dosage. So the Psychiatrist is clearly operating on the biological viewpoint of psychology. Whereas a therapist is using other methods of behavior modification and 1 on 1 therapy to change the individual. Then you have the ones who use a combination of both...I really feel that the field does not know enough about the brain to be altering its chemistry this early in the game (I say this somewhat hypocritically since i take psych meds everyday to control my anxiety attacks, but who knows what other side effects Im having that Im not even concious of)...

I guess Im on a pretty big rant here, but its basically my feelings on why psychology isn't a reliable field of study in my opinion. It's really still in its infancy and a lot less is known about it then the other functions of the body. It's also a field FLOOOOOODED by tons and tons of theorys a lot of which make sense, and its anyones guess as to which ones are law. Again, because you cant see inside the persons thoughts to understand the problem, you can only observe behavior, and go by what the person tells you, when neither one may really be indiciative of the problem.

**Mike Dura** · 03-10-2007, 12:53 PM

You're very literal minded and that's going to cause misunderstandings. Don't try too hard to understand things - better to say, "life is more complex then and my way of understanding." When you can get to that point, give yourself credit for having gained wisdom and self-insight. Good luck.

Originally Posted by Logan13

Well then, I must be spot on about you. Maybe if I became a "Buddhist swinger", then maybe I'd have all the answers.

Stroke...we'll let everyone else decide:
http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm...endID=57108249