To your likelihood of kissing to your address, there’s a life threatening telecommunications anywhere between grandiose narcissism and fellow member gender, ? = .161, t = dos.819, p = .005 https://datingranking.net/es/citas-con-barba/. This communication are displayed into the Fig dos. The easy hills for males (effortless slope = 0.051., t = .007, p = .995) and you can lady (simple mountain = -0.011., t = -0.002, p = .999) just weren’t tall. Grandiose narcissists didn’t express an increased probability of making out that have an affixed address more than a single one (? = .068, t = step 1.127, p = .261), indicating one grandiose narcissism wasn’t on the mate poaching to have a primary-name affair.
Grandiose narcissists commonly declaration partner poaching -particularly for the latest brief-identity . However, a question remains on whether they find people in relationships significantly more really worth searching for than people who are solitary. Widman and you can McNulty reason that grandiose narcissistic tendencies would be activated across the facts typically (like the self-report of life prevalence of intimate choices), but not become activated whenever placed in a specific state. Hence, you are able you to grandiose narcissists disclose a reputation interesting for the mate poaching, but do not fundamentally get a hold of those in relationships are greatest mates. I checked out this chance in the four studies.
Companion poaching list.
For long-title companion poaching, grandiose narcissism is actually a critical predictor for women (? = .306, t = dos.623, p = .010) and you will a marginally extreme predictor for men (? = .218, t = step 1.725, p = .088). Not one of your own Big Four parameters have been significant. Grandiose narcissism wasn’t a serious predictor out of triumph within poaching into the much time-title for males (? = .120, t = 0.718, p = .476), nonetheless it is actually for ladies (? = .340, t = 2.369, p = .021). Nothing of one’s other variables was high except for ladies neuroticism; whenever females had been way more neurotic, they reported so much more achievements from the poaching for some time-term intimate dating.
Of interest, grandiose narcissism wasn’t of the partner poaching among boys. So it result is in line with show reported because of the Kardum and you may acquaintances . For this reason, you’ll be able to one grandiose narcissistic ladies are with greater regularity guilty off partner poaching.
Content and you may processes
There was a significant three-way interaction between grandiose narcissism, participant relationship status, and participant sex for the likelihood of pursuing the target for a relationship (? = .162, t = 2.666, p = .008). This three-way interaction is displayed in Fig 1. Data are plotted at ±1 SD from the mean of grandiose narcissism. The simple slope for attached men was significant (simple slope = .05, t = 9.24, p < .001), revealing that men in a relationship were more likely to pursue the target for a relationship at higher levels of grandiose narcissism. The simple slope for attached women (simple slope = -.04, t = -3.27, p = .001) revealed that women in a relationship were less likely to pursue the target for a relationship at higher levels of grandiose narcissism. The simple slope for single men was also significant (simple slope = -.02, t = -2.38, p = .02), revealing that single men were less interested in pursuing the target for a relationship at higher levels of grandiose narcissism. The simple slope for single women was not significant (simple slope = .024, t = 1.56, p = .12). With the exception of the slope differences between single women and attached men (t = -1.65, p = .10), the differences in slopes were all significant (ts ? -2.16, ps ? .03). The grandiose narcissism ? target relationship status interaction was not significant (? = .068, t = 1.127, p = .261), indicating that grandiose narcissism was not associated with mate poaching for a long-term affair.