International Journal of Psychology:

SCIENTIFIC PUBLICATIONS

 

Biopsychosocial Approach 2016 / 19                          ISSN 1941-7233 (Print), ISSN 2345-024X (Online)

http://dx.doi.org/10.7220/2345-024X.19.4

 

 

Dovilė Petronytė-Kvedarauskienė1, Gražina Gudaitė

Vilnius University, Lithuania

 

Abstract. Background. Relationship with authority is a significant social as well as psycho- logical factor which was destructively influenced by the Soviet authoritarian regime. In Western cultures, authority is often neglected while stressing the importance of an individual, and that leads to narcissistic problems. Though relevance of the issue of relationship with authority is acknowledged in contemporary psychology, it has been scarcely studied so far. Thorough conceptualization of the construct of relationship with authority is necessary for both an adequate assessment of it and applicability of the knowledge about the phenomenon in psychotherapy practice. Finding the narcissistic motives in relation with authority would help to handle with narcissism in research as well as in psychotherapy. The aim of the article is to give a comprehensive conception of relationship with authority with regard to its influence on human psyche development. We seek to distinguish levels and modes of this relationship. The final task is to discern specific motives of relationship with authority which are characteristic of narcissism. Methods. Psychodynamic, mostly Analytical, literature has been reviewed and analysed to explore psychological concept of relationship with author- ity and its part in inner dynamics of narcissism. Results. Authority can be described as a power, reputation or competence attributed to a person, social group or institution. Three levels of relationship with authority can be discerned: relationship with 1) outer authority figures; 2) inner authority; 3) transpersonal authority. Analysis of literature has led to distinguishing such characteristic motives of narcissistic relationship with authority: aggrandizement or depreciating one’s own authority; fright, anger with regard to or fight against authority; abusive authoritative stance or excessive submissiveness; idealization or devaluation of authorities. Conclusions. The importance of the specific modes of relationship with authority in narcissism is inferred with recommendations to include the factor into assessment and psychotherapy of narcissism.

1 Address for correspondence: Department of Clinical and Organizational Psychology, Faculty of Philosophy, Vilnius University. Universiteto st. 9/1, LT-01513, Vilnius, Lithuania. Phone: +370 686 61894. E-mail: dovilepk@yahoo.co.uk

 

INTRODUCTION

Relationship with authority is one of the most significant social as well as psychological factors which was destructively influenced by the authoritarian regime in Lithuania and other countries (Gudaitė, 2016; Kalinenko, Slutskaya, 2014; Kuodytė, 2005). Psychological research on the consequences of the Soviet totalitarian regime reveal that people who lived under the regime tend to approach authority as dangerous, threatening and hostile. Big fright and avoidance of authorities, cheat- ing and hiding from authorities without an adequate reason, distrust of outer and inner authority are expressions of detrimental outcomes of authoritarian regimes (Gudaitė, 2013, 2014). Moreover, not only people who faced the regime directly but also their descendants of second and even third generation endure disturbed relations with outer and inner authorities, lack of personal initiative and low self-confidence being the concomitant psychosocial motives (Gailienė, 2015; Peterson, Luik, 2014). During the time of transition from authoritarian to democratic political system, reconstruction of relationship with authority is the task which the society as well as an individual have to face and undertake. According to research and theoretical psychological literature, human psyche development is highly influenced by relationship with authority. It paves the way for self-identity, feeling of self-worth, sense of direction and meaning of one’s life (Gudaitė, 2013, 2014; Jacoby, 2008; Kohut, 2009). Though relationship with authority is regarded as very significant, there are not many psychological studies targeted to understand, evaluate and treat the issue. A group of scientists of Vilnius University has done several qualitative as well as quantitative researches focusing on experience, expression and changes of relationship with authority (Bieliauskienė, Gudaitė, 2016; Grigutytė, Rukšaitė, 2016; Gudaitė, 2013, 2014). The inventory for quantitative evaluation of the construct of relationship with authority has been created and presented (Grigutytė, Gudaitė, 2016). This paper is intended to give a theoretical background for psychological conception of relationship with authority. Thorough comprehension of the construct of relationship with authority is necessary for both an adequate assessment of it and applicability of the knowledge about the phenomenon in psychotherapy practice.

Relationship with authority is the relevant topic not only in post- Soviet countries but in Western culture as well. Stressing the importance of an individual often goes together with neglect of any superior author- ities and is connected to narcissism with its various expressions. Cultural historian C. Lasch (1979) in his book on narcissism states that the decline of parental authority is one of the main narcissistic problems of Western society. Superego structure is deformed, and instead of giving moral val- ues and direction to life, it enacts harsh requirements fused with grandiose self-images which is impossible to attain. That leads to a big anxiety and insecurity which are being managed by even higher standards and efforts to acquire and to consume. A relation with oneself, with others and with what is acquired is being lost (Pulcini, 2012).

In psychological literature, narcissism is often referred to as feeling superior to others, egocentricity, exploitation and seeking admiration instead of close intimate relations. These attributes of narcissism be- long to narcissistic grandiosity which is often focused on by empirical approaches of quantitative psychological research (Campbell, Milller, 2011). Nevertheless, the phenomenon of narcissism shows to be more complex than only grandiosity. Clinical approaches as well as an increasing number of empirical studies additionally take into account a vulner- able dimension of narcissism which embraces feeling of deep inferiority, experience of emptiness, loneliness and meaninglessness often leading to depression (Jacoby, 2008; Miller, Campbell, & Widiger, 2010; Miller, Lynam, & Campbell, 2016). A widely held view in clinically oriented psychological literature claims that narcissistic vulnerability can be de- fended or compensated for by narcissistic grandiosity. Therefore, vulnerability and grandiosity represent two distinct although tightly related states of narcissism (Kohut, 2009; Miller, 1986, 2011; Miller et al., 2016).

Being a complicated phenomenon with diverse inner and outer manifestations, narcissism becomes a challenge for scientists and clinicians to manage. There is a lack of a reliable research instrument capable of assessing both dimensions of narcissism – grandiosity and vulnerability – with their multiple aspects. A big variety of measures have been incorporated in various questionnaires. It has appeared that they are too different to be compared and that they do not have clear underlying conceptualizations (Campbell, Miller, 2011; Miller et al., 2016).

One of the components of the Narcissistic Personality  Inventory  (NPI), which is  the  most  widely  used  instrument  to  assess  narcissism, is defined as“Authority”. Statements of Authority scale refer to a person’s leadership skills and wish to be in charge and gain power (Raskin, Terry, 1988). Other instruments measuring narcissism do not include the Authority factor (Miller et al., 2016; Pincus et al., 2009).

Relationship with authority plays a role in both grandiose and vulnerable dimensions of narcissism. In grandiose state, a person neglects superiority of any other and feels himself the ultimate authority. In vulnerable state, a person is dependent on outer superior figures – he needs their evaluation and confirmation to feel valuable. Therefore, sensitivity to authority’s validation is characteristic for both grandiosity and vulnerability because neglect of authority is another side of a big fright of his devaluation (Kernberg, 2004; Kohut, 2009).

Psychodynamic literature indicates that relations with authorities play a significant role in etiology, inner dynamics, expression as well   as treatment and transformation of narcissism. When there is no trust in parents – the first authority figures in human life, there appears no trust in other outer authorities and no adequate inner authority is formed (Jacoby, 2008; Kohut, 2009).

Two psychological factors which are often mentioned in psychological literature as underlying narcissistic problems are fragile self-esteem and self-efficacy. These factors are troubled and they create inter as well as intra-personal problems (Brookes, 2015; Kohut, 2009; Zeigler-Hill, Clark, Pickard, 2008). Self-esteem and self-efficacy are linked to a sense of personal strength and validity and therefore to relationship with authority, which acknowledges or rejects, gives or takes away power. Authority can value or devalue and enable or disable.

Therefore, theoretical as well as empirical psychological studies note the importance of relationship with authority in narcissism dynamics. Unfortunately, exhaustive studies focusing on investigation of narcis- sism with respect to relationship with authority are absent.

To sum up, the issue of relationship with authority is relevant in nowadays society: post-authoritarian as well as democratic. It is important to conceptualize the construct to enable its adequate understanding, measurement and treatment. Specificity of relationship with authority in narcissism is an urgent and not studied issue at all. With our paper, we try to show that it is necessary to include the factor of relationship with authority as a consistent part of narcissism assessment instruments and to pay a proper attention to it in psychotherapy with narcissistic clients. The task of our theoretical study is to give a coherent and structured psychological understanding of the concept of relationship with authority, to explore its role in human psyche development, to describe modes of making contact with authority and to distinguish its various levels. The final goal is to find out characteristic motives of narcissistic relation-ship with authority.

 

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Relationship with authority concerns outer as well as inner reality of a person’s psyche. To reach our aim to explore the factor of relationship with authority and its importance to psyche development, we chose the psychodynamic paradigm to rest upon. The psychodynamic psychology focuses on inner dynamics of a person’s psyche, addressing intra-personal relations which are interconnected with interpersonal relations. After having sought for the psychodynamic literature on relationship with authority, we found out that Analytical authors are among a few who focused directly on this psychological factor and its role in inner psychic dynamics.

The relevant psychological articles and books were searched in the following databases: EBSCO, GoogleScholar and the Journal of Analytical Psychology website. The keywords Authority, Relationship with Authority, Authority Complex, Ego-Self axis were used while searching for the necessary literature. The analysis, synthesis and interpretation of the information were made.

We did not find any psychological literature addressing narcissism with regard to relationship with authority in particular. For the purpose to distinguish characteristic motives of narcissistic relationship with authority, we analysed, compared and combined the knowledge about the phenomenon of relationship with authority together with the thoughts of different psychodynamic authors studying narcissism and noting the authority factor.

 

RESULTS

Conception of authority and multiplicity of relationship with authority

In Psychology dictionaries, authority is defined as a power or agency attributed to a person, social group or institution. Formal and informal – personal – authorities are distinguished. Formal authority is resting upon laws, rules and social status. Informal authority is related with personal knowledge, experience, moral and other human characteristics (Corsini, 2002; Psichologijos žodynas, 1993; Reber, 1987). Author of Analytical psychology H. Dieckmann (1977) discerns three aspects of authority:

1) violence and power, 2) reputation and prestige, and 3) knowledge and wisdom. One of these aspects is usually expressed more than others in a concrete authority figure. Power often dominates in formal author- ity, and reputation and/or wisdom take the biggest part in personal authority, although there might be various combinations of authority characteristics.

Authority presupposes a relation. Relation is intrinsic in authority because authority depends on those who acknowledge it (Bohenski, 2004). To cite Dieckmann (1977), authority“never exists as a mere object like a mountain which is always there even if nobody is around” (p. 231). Experience of relation with authority is important to human psyche development and functioning. There are three levels on which relation- ship with authority expresses: outer, inner and transcendent relations. Parents, influential elder relatives and teachers usually take a role of outer authority figures. Relations with outer authority figures in child- hood have a crucial impact on inner authority’s formation. Beside per- sonal authorities, formal outer authorities can also have a big influence on a psyche. When destructive consequences of political authoritarian regimes are studied in contemporary psychology, destructive relations with authorities are being found to be one of them (Gailienė, 2015; Gudaitė, 2013, 2014).

Inner authority refers to trust in oneself, ability to accept one’s thoughts, beliefs and actions as good and right (Young-Eisendrath, Wiedmann, 1987). It is related to self-esteem, capability to create and feel joy for one’s life. Inner authority enables a person to feel meaning and having direction of his life. It is subjectively experienced as inner center, as being grounded and having a back to rest upon (Jacoby, 2008; Samuels, 1985). In psychological sense, outer and inner authorities are interconnected and influence each other. Outer authority figures vali- dating ideas and actions of a person can foster and strengthen trust in oneself. On the contrary, devaluation of a person coming from outside can weaken one’s sense of inner center and self-esteem. Good relation- ship with inner authority presuppose constructive relations with outer authorities. Treating oneself with respect at the same time allows to relate with outer authorities and to recognize their superiority (Gudaitė, 2013).

In Analytical psychology, transpersonal nature of authority is recognized. As Dieckmann (1977) points out, authority is an inborn natural principle to human being. It is an instinctual force of structure and order grounded in collective consciousness. While a person is always related to other people and often belongs to some social group, he inevitably encounters with authorities. What is natural and instinctive, is also connected to spiritual realm in Analytical psychology. Therefore, authority is often seen as related to a higher, divine formative power.

To elaborate a transpersonal level of relationship with authority, which serves as a background for relations with inner and outer authority, we have to define some of the main terms of Analytical psychology.

1. Jung has said that human psyche is more than a result of personal experience. It also has got a transpersonal dimension which expresses itself in universal images and modes of experience, labelled as archetypes in Analytical psychology and found in religions and mythologies all over the world (Jung, 1978). The concept of The Self is widely used in Analytical psychology to refer  to the unity and multidimensionality of human psyche. In various Analytical sources, the Self is defined as

1) the wholeness of personality which embraces consciousness and unconsciousness, personal and transpersonal collective psyche; 2) the central archetype, the organizing center of personality which directs development of a person’s psyche. Therefore, the Self is the center of both consciousness and unconsciousness. Another structure of the psyche –the Ego – is considered to be the center of a person’s consciousness. The Ego directs conscious actions, makes conscious decisions (Jacoby, 2008; Jung, 1978). The Ego is related to subjective psychic identity while the Self is connected to objective psychic identity. The Self can be seen as “the supreme psychic authority” which the Ego is subordinate to (Edinger, 1992, p. 3).

In Jung’s (1978) words, the task of a person’s consciousness is to rec- ognize its descent from a higher unity, to pay due and careful regard to this source and to execute its commands responsibly (par. 253). “Higher unity”, sometimes referred by Jung (2010) as “higher will,” is one possible attribute of the Self which is related to transpersonal dimension. It concerns the focus of our work – relationship with authority. How can a person execute the program of a “higher unity”, “higher will” or “supreme authority”? In other terms, what anticipates the bond between the Ego and the Self, how this bond is experienced? In Analytical psychology, a construct of Ego-Self axis is used to describe relationship between the two psychic structures. Significance of Ego-Self axis for the mental health is indicated. Stages of Ego-Self axis formation, important factors influencing its strength are distinguished (Asper, 1993; Edinger, 1992; Jacoby, 2008).

According to Edinger (1992), when the Ego is healthy, mature, and differentiated enough, it can have a good and trustful relationship with the Self – “the supreme psychic authority”. In the first half of a human life, the task of the Ego is to separate itself from the Self, to form personal boundaries, to define itself and to develop. In this process, the Ego undergoes a lot of cycles of connection and disconnection from the Self. Strong, solid Ego means responsibility for one’s life, good reflection and differentiation of one’s emotions and needs. Only the Ego which is mature enough can recognize its subordination to the Self and to create   a conscious relation with the Self.

Specific psychological expressions of healthy Ego-Self axis, which indicates good and trustful relationship with transcendent authority, can be distinguished. That is humility concerning higher transpersonal forces and acknowledgment of one’s limits (Jung, 1978, 2010). A proper connection between the Ego and the Self fosters feeling of security, trust in oneself and the world. It gives vitality, stimulates life interests and activity, it leads to a sense of meaning and purpose. It enables to connect to one’s inner authority, to be in touch with one’s true nature, to create and to feel the owner of one’s life (Edinger, 1992; Gudaitė, 2013; Jacoby, 2008).

 

Relationship with authority in developmental process

In the process of creation of the bond between a person’s Ego and the Self – “supreme authority” – personal authorities and first of all parents play a crucial role. In early years, a child’s relation with the Self may be identical with the relationship between a child and his parents (Edinger, 1992). The Self is experienced through the projection onto personal caregivers. Parents can be seen as mediators in Ego-Self axis formation. At the beginning unconditionally accepting and mirroring and af- terwards setting adequate requirements for a child, parents can significantly contribute to healthy Ego-Self axis development of their off- spring. On the contrary, when a child relations with his parents are faulty, Ego-Self axis can be broken. A child’s relationship with his nature and transpersonal authority can be disturbed (Asper, 1993; Edinger, 1992).

When parents do not validate and properly accept their child, he feels to be rejected by the very center of his life and world. The connection between the Ego and the Self is prevented. That leads to psychic states of alienation, inferiority and feeling of having no right to live. Another harmful mode of rearing a child is his overprotection and prolonged unconditional acceptance with no behaviour limits, no frustrations and requirements. In such a case, the Ego development is arrested, no boundaries of the Ego are formed, and relation with the Self is impeded (Edinger, 1992; Jacoby, 2008).

In psychic development, fatherly and motherly authorities can be distinguished. Some authors talking about authority emphasize its ex- clusively fatherly characteristics: force, activity, courage, structure, order, moral values and ideas, etc. When father is too powerful or even abusive, he can inhibit child’s energy and strength. If father is weak, he doesn’t stimulate and doesn’t convey security feeling to a child. As a result, such a child may lack will and motivation to act and realize his potential. Father who is overprotective and/or allowing everything blocks formation of  a child’s inner authority, ideals, structure and direction of life (Dieckmann, 1977; Jacoby, 2008; Samuels, 1985). Other authors indicate that mothers usually are the very first authorities in human life showing such char- acteristics as accepting, caring, reacting, fostering life and creating access to basic needs and emotions (Young-Eisendrath, Wiedmann, 1987). Unsuccessful relationship with mother can express itself through feeling of rejection, destructive impulses, poor connection with one’s natural needs. Wilke (1977) states that authority is of an androgenic nature having in itself all: motherly, fatherly, female and male characteristics.

Wilke (1977) writes about authority complex with its main attribute – power. Complex in Analytical psychology is understood as a set of ideas and images carrying a big emotional charge with it. Complexes are influenced and formed through personal experience although they are connected to some archetypal center. Complexes reside in personal un- consciousness otherwise than archetypes of collective unconsciousness. Complexes are quite autonomic, transgressing boundaries of conscious control. When they are triggered, they bring intense affects with them (Jung, 1977). Authority complex can be formed and influenced by emotionally intense negative experience in relationship with both father and mother. Some of possible expressions of authority complex is uncontrollable rage, hate, destructive impulses, omnipotence ideas and authoritarian behaviour. Contrariwise, authority complex can express as help- lessness, impotence feeling and excessive submissiveness (Wilke, 1977).

Although parental role can be the most significant in  development of Ego-Self axis and formation of authority complex, it is not the only one which counts. The impact of teachers, institutions, political regimes and other authority figures and structures which a person has got a relation with are not to undervalue (Dieckmann, 1977; Kohut, 2009). If the relation with political authority figures is of a distrustful, deceptive, fearful, passive nature, a damaging relationship with authority can develop. Destructive aggression and/or auto-aggression is often the psychic response. Relationship with all levels of authority: inner, outer and transcendent, can be detrimentally influenced (Dieckmann, 1977; Gudaitė, 2014; Kalinenko, Slutskaya, 2014).

 

Experience and expression of relationship with authority in narcissism

Grandiosity and inferiority are the two main interconnected expres- sions of narcissism (Jacoby, 2008; Miller, 1986, 2011). These states can be better understood in the light of Ego-Self axis model. During develop- ment of relations with the Self, the Ego undergoes many inflation and alienation episodes. Ego inflation is the Ego’s state of identification with the Self. This state is necessary and unavoidable in infancy when the Ego is not formed yet. An infant experiences unity with the world, he feels the center of the universe while all his needs are met. Parent’s, usu- ally mother’s, mirroring, containing and empathic attitude towards an offspring at the start of his life plays a significant role. The state of om- nipotence and perfection is requisite for healthy psychic development. It enables conscious relationship with the Self in subsequent stages of development (Edinger, 1992; Kohut, 2009; Winnicott, 1990).

Episodes of inflation can appear not only in infancy but also in later life. They may bring new ideas, creative impulses and may stimulate sig- nificant changes. On the other hand, Ego inflation can be precarious. Outstaying in the state of inflation hinders development of the Ego. That can happen because of mistreatment of a child idolizing and praising him. Too much frustration can also lead to Ego inflation. In this case the world seems too dangerous for Ego to separate and leave the paradise of union with the Self. Ego inflation in an inappropriate age can express itself as arrogance, treating oneself as the ultimate authority, feeling and demonstrating one’s excessive glamour, entitlement and power (Edinger, 1992; Jacoby, 2008). Thus, inflation has the same expression as narcissistic grandiosity. In grandiose, or inflated, state, a person identifies himself with the ultimate authority instead of having a proper relation- ship with it.

Edinger (1992) states that inflation always associates with power. As it was mentioned above, authority complex also concerns unhandled power. Striving to powerfully control others, to subordinate other peo- ple to one’s will are often mentioned as characteristic narcissistic ten- dencies (Kernberg, 2004; Schwartz-Salant, 1982). Therefore, unconscious authority complex of narcissistic persons can express itself in “sadistic” authoritative behavior towards people of a lower position (Wilke, 1977). Power aspect is also evident in a struggle for one’s worth which is often active in narcissistic relations. It is more important for narcissistic person to win the fight than to have a true authentic relation (McWilliams, 2014; Schwartz-Salant, 1982). Therefore, fighting against authorities and/or neglecting them is a possible expression of authority complex.

Contrary to inflation is an Ego alienation state. Ego alienation means absence of connection with the Self. Some level of alienation is inescapable because the Ego develops by means of separation from the Self.

Encountering the world’s frustrations, experiencing one’s potentials and limits is the way to form distinct personal identity. Sense of subjective identity, autonomy, and increase of awareness bring satisfaction as well as pain concerning distinction, loneliness and imperfection. Ego aliena- tion of unbearable level, experienced too early or too long can damage Ego-Self axis. That can lead to feelings of abandonment, unworthiness, inappropriateness, extreme guilt (Edinger, 1992). Thus alienation is re- lated to narcissistic vulnerability, inferiority and depression being fre- quent concomitants. A person in alienation or depression lacks energy and connection to his instinctive and transpersonal nature. His relation- ship with inner as well as supreme authority – the Self – is broken. A per- son feels of no worth, having no orientation and purpose in life. In such a state, validation and support of outer authorities is of vital importance. Any signs of criticism or disfavour from authority figures equal annihila- tion of self-worth. That can induce an intense fright of authorities in narcissistic persons (Asper, 1993; Kohut, 2009; Miller, 2011). Besides, people in a higher position can provoke an excessively submissive behaviour of narcissistic people (Wilke, 1977).

Ego alienation state is often coloured with intense anger which sometimes turns into violent behaviour (Edinger, 1992). That resembles narcissistic rage which is indicated in studies on narcissism. Narcissistic rage is explained as stemming out from experience of rejection and unbearable frustrations in early relations with parents (Jacoby, 2008; Kohut, 2009; Schwartz-Salant, 1982). So unsuccessful relationship with first authorities in human life can lead to hate and aggression towards authorities.

1. Lasch (1979), in his cultural monography on narcissism, stresses the importance of parental involvement in children rearing. He regrets that diminishing authority of parents is one of the main factors leading to Parents are gone to work or to other activities and are diffi- cult for a child to reach in order to form a proper relationship. Lasch rests upon the thoughts of psychoanalytic author H. Kohut who describes development of narcissism in terms of a child’s relations with mother and father. The originality of Kohut’s theory is in his statement that narcissism development goes along two lines. First line regards the needs of being mirrored, accepted and unconditionally valued. Usually this is a function of mother. When these needs are successfully met, self-es- teem is formed. Second line concerns relation with an “idealized object” who is usually represented by father or by both parents. “Idealized ob- ject” has to play a role of a strong, wise, competent figure who is suitable for idealization. Relationship with idealized figure is important in for- mation of values, ideals, direction and purpose of life. It also influences development of inner authority, self-efficacy and capability of being authority for others. When the relation with “idealized object” is lacking or unsuccessful, a person can constantly seek for authorities to lean on and to idealize later in his life. By idealizing authorities, a narcissistic per- son compensates for the lack of self-worth and inner authority. Another way of protecting self-worth is to devaluate authorities in order to pre- vent devaluation coming from them (Jacoby, 2008; Kohut, 2009).

Kohut (2009) states that restoring natural idealization process con- tributes to effective psychotherapy of narcissistic disturbances. For this purpose, psychotherapist is often given a projection of an “idealized object”. Analytical authors indicate that in successful cases, accepting, supporting and ideals representing authority is projected onto psychotherapist as well as on the whole psychotherapy situation. The very Self together with the meaning, center, order and structure of life can be transferred to psychotherapist and psychotherapy (Edinger, 1992; Jacoby, 2008). In length of time, an “idealized object” is being internalized. Positive experience in relationship with psychotherapist’s authority can be integrated as an inner reality. That enables formation of internal value system, feeling of self-esteem and self-efficacy to purposefully act in life. Acquirement of inner authority which directs and values creative participation in one’s life diminishes narcissism (Jacoby, 2008; Kohut, 2009).

 

CONCLUSIONS

Authority means power, reputation or competence which is attrib- uted to formal structures or personal figures. Authority always rests upon those who acknowledge it, therefore, authority always comprises a relation. Relationship with authority is an important agent of human psyche development and functioning and it manifests in different levels.

Relationship with inner authority, outer authority figures and transcend- ent authority can be distinguished though all three levels of relationship are interconnected and influence each other.

Parents play a significant role in creation of inner authority as well   as predispositions for relations with outer as well as transcendent authorities. Acceptance, mirroring and meeting of a child’s needs together with setting adequate limits pave the way for self-esteem and a proper relationship with authority. Validation and supporting of a child’s activity and self-realization together with promoting a value system formation contribute to mature relationship with authority and a sense of self-effi- cacy. In our article, we notice that the first care givers are not the only ones who influence a person’s relationship with authority. A role which other personal and formal authoritative figures take in development of this rela- tionship can also be significant.

A review and analysis of psychodynamic and Analytical in particu- lar literature has indicated that relationship with authority is a signifi- cant factor of inner dynamics of narcissism. Relationship between the Ego and the Self –“the supreme psychic authority”– has a crucial impact on a person’s  self-esteem and self-efficacy which are essential items  of narcissism problem. Ego inflation and Ego alienation states, pointing poor connection with the Self, parallel grandiose and vulnerable narcis- sistic expressions.

Analysis of literature has led to distinguishing possible modes of experience and expression of narcissistic relationship with authority. Heightening or depreciating one’s own authority, fright and anger with regard to authorities, idealization or devaluation of authorities, abusive authoritative stance or excessive submissiveness are the motives inher- ent to narcissism. Importance of power instead of being connected is an attribute of both authority complex and narcissistic relations. That presupposes fight against authorities as one more characteristic motive of narcissistic relations.

Relationship with authority is an important factor in assessment   as well as in psychotherapy of narcissism. As authority is being projected onto psychotherapist and psychotherapy situation, disturbed relation- ship can be recognized, lived through and worked through in psycho- therapy to diminish narcissism.

To proceed with the topic, quantitative as well as qualitative research needs to be done in order to verify and/or to elucidate new themes of narcissistic relationship with authority which could serve as indicator of narcissism in quantitative measurements.

 

 

References

Asper, K. (1993). The Abandoned Child Within. On Losing and Regaining Self-Worth. New York: Fromm International Publishing Corporation.

Bieliauskienė, I., Gudaitė, G. (2016). Lyties veiksnys asmens santykyje su autoritetais: kokybinė subjektyvaus patyrimo analizė [Gender issues in an individual’s relationship with authority: qualitative analysis of subjective experience]. Psichologija, 53, 101-113.

Bochenski, J. M. (2004). Kas yra autoritetas? Įvadas į autoriteto logiką [What does authority mean? Introduction to logics of authority]. Vilnius: Mintis.

Brookes, J. (2015). The effect of overt and covert narcissism on self-esteem and self-efficacy beyond self-esteem. Personality and Individual Differences, 85, 172-175.

Campbell, W. K., Miller, J. D. (2011). Introduction. In W. K. Campbell, J. D. Miller (Eds.), The handbook of Narcissism and Narcissistic Personality Disorder: Theoretical Approaches, Empirical Findings, and Treatments. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Corsini, R. (2002). The Dictionary of Psychology. New York: Brunner-Routledge: Dieckmann, H. (1977). Some Aspects of the Development of Authority. Journal of

Analytical Psychology, 22 (3), 230-242.

Edinger, F. E. (1992). Ego and Archetype: Individuation and the Religious Function of the Psyche. Boston and London: Shambala.

Gailienė, D. (2015). Trauma and Culture. In D. Gailienė (Ed.), Lithuanian Faces After Transition: Psychological Consecuences of Cultural Trauma. Vilnius: Eugrimas.

Gailienė, D., Kazlauskas, E. (2004). Po penkiasdešimties metų: sovietinių represijų Lietuvojepsichologiniaipadariniaiirįveikosbūdai[Fiftyyearson: Psychological consequences and handling possibilities of Soviet repressions in Lithuania].    In D. Gailienė (Ed.), Sunkių traumų psichologija: politinių represijų padariniai [Psychology of severe traumatization: Consequences of political repressions]. Vilnius: Lietuvos gyventojų genocido ir rezistencijos tyrimų centras.

Grigutytė, N., Gudaitė, G. (2016). Santykių su autoritetu vertinimo klausimyno kūrimas ir psichometriniai  rodikliai  [Creation  and  psychometric  indicators  of Relationship with authority measurement inventory]. A poster in Lithuanian Psychology Congress, May 6-7, 2016.

Grigutytė, N., Rukšaitė, G. (2016). Lithuanian Historical Heritage: Relation with Authority and Psychological  Well-being.  The European Proceedings of Social & Behavioural Sciences, eISSN: 2357-1330: 274-284. Retrieved from: http://dx. doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2016.07.02.27. Retrieved on 10.01.2017.

Gudaitė, G. (2016). Santykis su autoritetu ir asmeninės galios pajauta [Relationship with authority and the sense of personal strength]. Vilnius: Vilniaus universiteto leidykla.

Gudaitė, G.(2013).The Dynamicof Authority Imagesinthe Contextof Consequences of Collective Trauma. In E. Kiehl (Ed.), Copenhagen 2013 – 100 Years On: Origins, Innovations and Controversies. Proceedings of the 19th Congress of International Association for Analytical Psychology. Einsiedeln: Daimon Verlag. pp. 345-350. Gudaitė, G. (2014). Restoration of Continuity: Desperation or Hope in Facing the Consequences of Cultural Trauma. In G. Gudaitė, M. Stein (Eds.), Confronting Cultural Trauma: Jungian Approaches to Understanding and Healing. New

Orleans, Louisiana: Spring Journal Books.

Jacoby, M. (2008). Individuation and Narcissism. The Psychology of the Self in Jung and Kohut. New York: Routledge.

Jung, C. G. (1977). A Review of the Complex Theory. C.W.8. USA: Princeton University Press.

Jung, C. G. (1978). Aion: Researches into the Phenomenology of the Self. C.W.9, II. USA: Princeton University Press.

Jung, C. G. (2010). Atsiminimai, vizijos, apmąstymai [Dreams, momories, reflections].

Vilnius: Margi Raštai.

Kalinenko, V., Slutskaya, M. (2014). “Father of the People” versus “Enemies of the People”: a Split-Father Complex as the Foundation for Collective Trauma in Russia. In G. Gudaitė, M. Stein (Eds.), Confronting Cultural Trauma: Jungian Approaches to Understanding and Healing. New Orleans, Louisiana: Spring Journal Books.

Kernberg, O. F. (2004). Pathological narcissism and narcissistic  personality disorder: Theoretical background and diagnostic classification. In Aggressivity, narcissism, and self-destructiveness in the therapeutic relationship. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. pp. 44-59.

Kohut, H. (2009). The Restoration of the Self. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Kuodytė, V.  (2005). Traumatising  History.  In  D.  Gailienė  (ed.),  The Psychology of

Extreme Traumatization. The Aftermath of Political Repression. Vilnius: Genocide

and Resistance Research Center of Lithuania.

Lasch, C. (1979). The Culture of Narcissism: American Life in an Age of Diminishing Expectations. New York: W.W. Norton & Company.

McWilliams, N. (2014). Psichoanalitinė diagnostika. Asmenybės struktūros samprata klinikiniame procese [Psychoanalytic Diagnosis. Understanding Personality Structure in the Clinical Process]. Vilnius: Vaistų žinios.

Miller, A. (1986). Depression and Grandiosity as Related Forms of Narcissistic Disturbances. In A. P. Morisson (Ed.), Essential Papers on Narcissism. New York: New York University Press.

Miller, A. (2011). Gabaus vaiko drama ir tikrosios savasties paieška [The Drama of the Gifted Child: The Search for the True Self]. Vilnius: VAGA.

Miller, J. D., Lynam, D. R., Campbell W. K. (2016). Measures of Narcissism and Their Relation to DSM-5 Pathological Traits:  A  Critical  Reappraisal.  Assessment,  23 (1), 3-9.

Peterson, U., Luik, M. (2014). Expressions of Transgenerational Trauma in the Estonian Context. In G. Gudaitė, M. Stein (Eds.), Confronting Cultural Trauma: Jungian Approaches to Understanding and Healing. Spring Journal Books.

Pincus, A. L., Ansell, E. B., Pimentel, C. A., Cain, N. M., Wright, A., & Levy, K. N. (2009). Initial Construction and Validation of the Pathological Narcissism Inventory. Psychological Assessment, 21, 365-379.

Psichologijos žodynas [Dictionary of Psychology] (1993). Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklo- pedijų leidykla.

Pulcini, E. (2012). The Individual Without Passions: Modern Individualism and the Loss of the Social Bond. Plymouth, UK: Lexington Books.

Reber, A. S. (1987). The Penguin Dictionary of Psychology. London: Penguin Books. Raskin, R. N., & Terry, H. (1988). A Principal-Components Analysis of the Narcissistic

Personality Inventory and Further Evidence of Its Construct Validity. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 54(5), 890-902.

Samuels, A. (1985). Introduction. In A. Samuels (Ed.), The Father: Contemporary Jungian Perspectives. London: Free Association Books.

Schwarz-Salant, N. (1982). Narcissism and Character Transformation. The Psychology of Narcissistic Character Disorders. Toronto: Inner City Books.

Wilke, H. J. (1977). The Authority Complex and the Authoritarian Personality.

Journal of Analytical Psychology, 22 (3), 243-249.

Winnicott, D. W. (1990). Ego Distortion in terms of True and False Self. In

1. Winnicott (Ed.) The Maturational Processes and the Facilitating Environment. London: Karnac Books.

Zeigler-Hill, V., Clark C. B., Pickard, J. D. (2008). Narcissistic Subtypes and Contingent Self-Esteem: Do All Narcissists Base Their Self-Esteem on the Same Domains? Journal of Personality, 76:4, 753-774.

Young-Eisendrth, P., Wiedmann, F. L. (1987). Female Authority: Empowering Women trough Psychotherapy. New York: The Guilford Press.

 

 

 

SANTYKIS SU AUTORITETU IR NARCISIZMAS

 

Dovilė Petronytė-Kvedarauskienė, Gražina Gudaitė

Vilniaus universiteteas, Lietuva

 

Santrauka. Problema. Santykis su autoritetu yra svarbus psichologinis ir socialinis veiksnys, kuriam Rytų Europos šalyse žalingą įtaką padarė sovietinė autoritarinė santvarka. Vakarų kultūrose, pabrėžiant individo svarbą, autoritetas dažnai neigiamas, ir tai skatina narcisistinius sunkumus. Nors santykio su autoritetu tema pripažįstama kaip labai aktuali šiuolaikinėje psichologijoje, kol kas ji yra mažai tyrinėta. Visapusis santykio su autoritetu konstrukto apibrėžimas reikalingas, siekiant adekvačiai konstruktą įvertinti, panaudoti gautas žinias apie reiškinį psichoterapinėje praktikoje. Santykio su autoritetu motyvų, būdingų narcisizmui, išskyrimas gali būti naudingas tiek narcisizmo tyrimams, tiek psichoterapijai. Tikslai. Straipsnio tikslas – pateikti išsamią santykio su autoritetu koncepciją, atsižvelgiant į šio santykio įtaką žmogaus psichikos formavimuisi. Siekiama išskirti santykio su autoritetu lygius ir modelius. Galutinė užduotis – atskleisti narcisizmui būdingus specifinius santykio su autoritetu motyvus. Metodas. Atlikta teorinė psichodinaminės (daugiausiai analitinės) krypties literatūros apžvalga ir analizė. Rezultatai. Autoritetas gali būti apibrėžtas kaip galia, reputacija ar kompetencija, priskiriama tam tikram asmeniui, socialinei grupei ar institucijai. Išskiriami trys santykio su autoritetu lygiai: santykis su 1) išorinėmis auto- riteto figūromis; 2) vidiniu autoritetu; 3) viršasmeniniu autoritetu. Atlikus literatūros analizę, atskleisti tokie narcisizmui būdingi santykio su autoritetu motyvai: savo autoriteto aukštinimas ar žeminimas; baimė, pyktis santykyje su autoritetais arba kova prieš autoritetus; autoritariška pozicija arba perdėtas nuolankumas; autoritetų idealizavimas arba nuvertinimas. Išvada. Išskirti specifiniai narcisizmui būdingi santykio su autoritetu motyvai rodo, kad santykio su autoritetu veiksnį svarbu įtraukti tiek į narcisizmo tyrimus, tiek į narcisizmo psichoterapiją.

Pagrindiniai žodžiai: autoritetas, santykis su autoritetu, autoriteto kompleksas, Ego-Sa- vasties ašis, narcisizmas.

Received:  2016-10-27

Accepted:  2017-02-25