Can someone with DA attachment have low self esteem?

Research on narcissism’s underlying attachment organization

Functionally, attachment and narcissism can both be conceptualized as systems involved

in regulating emotional experience. Further shared theoretical components involve cognitiveaffective

patterns and the joint accommodation of healthy as well as pathological development

and functioning (Kernberg, 1998; Kohut, 1977; West & Sheldon-Keller, 1994; Pincus,

Lukowitsky, & Wright, 2010). Attachment, however, is more firmly rooted in a developmental
38

deficit model, stressing the caregiver’s role in reestablishing emotional equilibrium. Thus, the

emphasis of attachment theory is on the interpersonal dyad and its representation, as the

caregiver is conceptually portrayed as experienced as separate from the self (Silverman, 1991).

In contrast, leading theoretical conceptions of narcissism hone in on undifferentiated or merged

aspects of the self, or, as referred to in structural theory, the pathological ego organization

(Kernberg, 1998).

As outlined in more detail above, the clinical construct of narcissism has been weakened

by heterogeneity and low clinical utility leading up to its contested and rather precarious reinstallment

into the new diagnostic manual. Although relations between narcissistic

phenomenology and adult attachment styles have been proposed in both theoretical and clinical

accounts, there exists little empirical research to confirm this link. It is therefore highly relevant

to gather empirical evidence on the level of impairment in personality functioning (self and

interpersonal) of individuals exhibiting pathological trait narcissism.

Few studies have empirically examined the relationship between attachment and

narcissism. Only one study, conducted by Brennan and Shaver (1998), compared all classified

personality disorder types to categorical attachment styles. The authors used a fairly large

number of participants (N= 1407), mostly adolescents and young adults, to explore connections

between attachment styles and personality disorders in order to determine whether the two kinds

of variables share a common underlying structure. Across all 13 personality disorders, their

results indicated a substantial overlap between attachment style and personality-disorder

measures. Securely attached individuals were nearly twice as likely not to have a personality

disorder as to have one (75.0% versus 38.8%). A closer look at the narcissistic personality

disorder subtype, however, reveals only marginally discriminating power for attachment style:
39

30.4% Secure, 34.3% Fearful, 19.6% Preoccupied and 15.7% Dismissing. These results

exemplify narcissism’s inherent criterion problem, stemming from its over-inclusion of both

adaptive and pathological elements as well as its phenomenological diversity (grandiose versus

vulnerable).

Aware of the low discriminatory power between adaptive and maladaptive components

of narcissism as measured by the Narcissistic Personality Index (NPI; Raskin & Terry, 1988),

Dickinson and Pincus (2003) parsed the measure into its two components, grandiose and

vulnerable, and found that vulnerable narcissism was associated with high ratings on Fearful

attachment (50%) and avoidant personality disorder. However, they also found that the majority

of the grandiose group selected a Secure (60%) attachment style and only a minority was

associated with Dismissive attachment (16%).