Power, Envy, Shame, and Emptiness: The Dark Side of Narcissism at Work

Introduction

Workplace bullying is a persistent and damaging phenomenon, often perpetrated by individuals with Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD) or pronounced narcissistic traits (Stiefenhofer et al., 2025; Yıldırım & Yıldırım, 2022). These individuals leverage power, control, and manipulation for personal gain. Beneath their behaviors lie unconscious motivations rooted in envy, inner emptiness, and shame. A deeper psychological understanding of narcissistic structures and behavioral patterns is therefore crucial for addressing the dynamics that damage employee and organizational health.

The Link Between Narcissism and Workplace Bullying Perpetration

Workplace bullying is commonly defined as the repeated, persistent, and long-term exposure to systematic aggressive, offensive, or humiliating behaviors over time, including physical, psychological, or verbal acts, that undermine an individual’s dignity or well-being, and where the target has difficulty defending themselves (Coyne et al., 2003; Hauge et al., 2009; Matthiesen & Einarsen, 2007; Seigne et al., 2007). Notably, such behaviors may be directed by one or more individuals toward one or more targets (Nielsen, 2013). A widely used research definition similarly emphasizes repeated negative acts over time in a context of power imbalance that makes the target’s defense difficult (Einarsen et al., 2020).

Bullying is distinct from ordinary conflict in that it is characterized by a power imbalance, cruelty, viciousness, and the intent or effect of making the recipient feel threatened, humiliated, or vulnerable. Leymann’s seminal work on workplace “mobbing” (psychological terror) identified 45 recurrent hostile behaviors that cluster into domains targeting communication, social relationships, reputation, work tasks/professional standing, and intimidation/threats (Leymann, 1996). This framework helps clarify why many tactics described in abusive relationship dynamics—manipulation, humiliation, intimidation, isolation, and reality‑undermining—can look strikingly similar in organizational bullying, even though the context (work vs. intimate relationship) and diagnostic labels may differ. For example, “communication attacks” map onto chronic criticism, shouting, and public belittling; “social isolation” maps onto exclusion and deliberate silencing; “reputation attacks” map onto ridicule and rumor; and “work-task attacks” map onto obstruction or demeaning/impossible assignments used to discredit or destabilize a target (Leymann, 1996). Put simply, interpersonal abuse tactics discussed in intimate relationships often translate in workplaces into patterned communication attacks, social exclusion, reputational damage, and work-related interference—the same categories Leymann used to describe systematic workplace terror (Leymann, 1996).

Leadership plays a critical role in shaping the occurrence of workplace bullying. An inactive or laissez-faire leadership style increases the risk of bullying, as perpetrators perceive leaders as indifferent and unlikely to impose consequences, leaving targets largely unprotected (Nielsen, 2013). In severe cases, bullying can also escalate beyond day-to-day negative acts into institutional retaliation (e.g., coordinated exclusion, career obstruction, or ‘blocklisting’-like reputational damage), which may extend the harm beyond the immediate workplace context (Hecker, 2024).

A growing body of academic research has explored the psychological profiles of those who perpetrate such behaviors. Notably, studies demonstrate that workplace bullying perpetrators are far more likely than their victims to exhibit elevated levels of narcissism, including both subclinical and pathological forms, either as an isolated trait or as a component of dark personality traits (Dåderman & Ragnestål-Impola, 2019; Fernández-del-Río et al., 2021; Özer & Escartín, 2023). Empirical studies in nursing and other professions have found that pathological narcissism is the strongest predictor of workplace bullying, even after controlling for organizational culture and other factors (Stiefenhofer et al., 2025; Yıldırım & Yıldırım, 2022).

Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD) is defined in the DSM-5 as a pervasive pattern of grandiosity, need for admiration, and lack of empathy, present in a variety of contexts (APA, 2022). The DSM-5 further specifies nine diagnostic criteria for NPD: grandiosity or an inflated sense of self-importance, lack of empathy, a strong sense of entitlement, preoccupation with fantasies about power, success, ideal love, intelligence, or beauty, a belief in being so special that one can only be understood by or associate with other exceptional people or organizations, a need for excessive admiration, exploitative behavior, arrogance and haughtiness, and envy of others or the belief that others are envious of them. For a clinical diagnosis of NPD, an individual must meet at least five of these criteria.

Clinical NPD affects approximately 1.6% of the U.S. population (APA, 2022), while some community samples of NPD range up to 6.2% (Stinson et al., 2008). Prevalence estimates vary substantially by method and sample: in a large U.S. national epidemiologic survey (NESARC Wave 2), the lifetime prevalence of NPD was 6.2% overall, including 7.7% of men and 4.8% of women (Stinson et al., 2008). Systematic review evidence also suggests lower pooled rates in some nonclinical adult samples (around ~1%), with wide heterogeneity across studies and settings (Dhawan et al., 2010). Across countries, meta-analytic work suggests that “any personality disorder” occurs in roughly 7.8% of the community population globally, though estimates vary by region and methodology (Winsper et al., 2020).

It is important to note that subclinical narcissistic traits are far more widespread and, along with related personality characteristics, play a significant role in organizational dynamics. In addition to the well-known empathy deficits, some recent research suggests that individuals with narcissistic personality disorder may not merely lack empathy but can also use empathic understanding manipulatively, a phenomenon described as the “dark side of empathy” (Brusadelli et al., 2023).

The Dark Triad, a term coined by Paulus and Williams (2002), comprising subclinical narcissism, Machiavellianism, and subclinical psychopathy, provides a useful framework for understanding the interplay among these traits in toxic workplace behaviors (Dåderman & Ragnestål-Impola, 2019). This concept was later expanded to the Dark Tetrad by Buckels, Jones, and Paulhus (2013) to include everyday sadism. Among these dark personality traits, narcissism stands out as especially influential; meta-analyses and systematic reviews consistently identify it as a robust predictor of bullying behaviors, often surpassing other personality traits in explanatory power (Dåderman & Ragnestål-Impola, 2019; Fernández-del-Río et al., 2021; Özer & Escartín, 2023). While Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD) represents the clinical extreme, it is the broader constellation of narcissistic, Machiavellian, psychopathic, and sadistic tendencies captured by the Dark Triad or Tetrad that more comprehensively explains the patterns of bullying and manipulation observed in organizational life.

Individuals with elevated narcissistic traits are more likely to engage in bullying as a means of asserting dominance, maintaining control, or protecting a fragile self-image. Classic psychoanalytic theory (Kernberg, 1984; Ronningstam, 2025) suggests that narcissism, when healthy, is a normal part of early development, providing the foundation for empathy, creativity, and a positive sense of self. When this developmental process is disrupted or narcissistic traits become pronounced and maladaptive, individuals may experience chronic feelings of inadequacy, hypersensitivity to criticism, and a persistent need to devalue others in order to bolster their own self-worth. These tendencies can be present in both pathological narcissism and in individuals with high, but subclinical, narcissistic traits, yet they are typically more pervasive and impairing in the pathological form (Kernberg, 1984; Regnaud, 2014; Ronningstam, 2025).

The Psychological and Developmental Roots of Narcissistic Envy

Envy is a core feature of NPD, as recognized in the DSM-5-TR diagnostic criteria: “Is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of him or her” (APA, 2022). While most people experience envy as a fleeting emotion, for those with NPD, envy is persistent, intense, and often weaponized. Empirical research confirms that individuals with narcissistic traits, both grandiose and vulnerable, report higher levels of dispositional envy and are more likely to express their envy through aggression and devaluation of others (Krizan & Johar, 2012; Lange et al., 2016)

Narcissistic envy has been further conceptualized in psychoanalytic theory as stemming from early attachment trauma and emotional splitting, where the individual’s sense of self is fragmented and dependent on external validation (Kernberg, 1984; Ronningstam, 2025). Rather than simply desiring the achievements or qualities of others, this envy manifests as a compulsion to undermine or devalue those envied individuals as a means of evading distressing sensations of inadequacy and inner void.

Neuroscientific research reveals consistent structural and functional differences in the brains of individuals with Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD). These include reduced gray matter in the anterior insula (linked to empathy deficits), dysregulated reward processing in the ventral striatum, and disrupted self-referential processing in the medial prefrontal cortex (Czar & Dufner, 2023; Röpke et al., 2013; Schulze et al., 2021). Weakened connectivity between the prefrontal cortex and striatum (termed frontostriatal pathway dysfunction) compromises the integration of self-relevant and reward-related signals (Chester et al., 2016). This neural profile heightens sensitivity to ego threats while driving compulsive external validation-seeking. In workplace contexts, these differences fuel persistent envy, manifesting as destructive behaviors, which are maladaptive attempts to alleviate inner emptiness (Einarsen et al., 2020; Freeman, 2024).

Envy as a Defense Against Shame and Inner Emptiness

For those with narcissistic tendencies, envy serves as a psychological shield against overwhelming feelings of shame and a profound sense of internal void (McLean Hospital, 2024; Ronningstam, 2025). The accomplishments or qualities of others can trigger intense discomfort and feelings of defectiveness, prompting defensive reactions aimed at undermining or devaluing those envied figures, such as spreading rumors, stealing credit, or excluding colleagues, to restore a sense of superiority. Shame is particularly intolerable for those with NPD (McLean Hospital, 2024; Ronningstam, 2025). To protect their self-image, they may project their feelings of inadequacy onto others, accusing them of the shortcomings they fear in themselves. When faced with criticism or failure, those with narcissistic tendencies might respond with anger, contempt, or withdrawal. Despite outward displays of confidence, they often experience significant internal turmoil, including self-doubt, insecurity, and a persistent fear of being exposed as inadequate.

The Impact of Workplace Bullying on Victims and Workplaces

Workplace bullying has profound and lasting consequences for victims. Studies consistently show that exposure to systematic negative acts at work increases the risk of developing depression, anxiety, and suicidal ideation, as well as physical health problems such as cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes (Einarsen et al., 2020; Leymann, 1996; Nielsen & Einarsen, 2012). Victims are also more likely to experience sickness absence, presenteeism (being at work while unwell), intention to leave their jobs, and early retirement (Einarsen et al., 2020).

Beyond the individual, organizations also bear significant costs. Increased absenteeism and turnover rates translate directly into financial losses. Workplace bullying has been estimated to add up to 20% more in employee turnover costs and can significantly elevate healthcare expenditures and productivity losses, potentially costing organizations thousands of dollars annually per affected employee (Einarsen et al., 2020; Hoel et al., 2011). This underscores the business case for intervention. Longitudinal and meta-analytic research confirms that workplace bullying is a significant risk factor for both psychological and physiological distress (Einarsen et al., 2020; Nielsen & Einarsen, 2012).

In addition to these personal and organizational impacts, workplace bullying can result in a deeper form of harm known as moral injury. This concept, developed by Litz and colleagues in trauma psychology and further explored by Jennifer Freyd in the context of institutional betrayal, refers to the psychological harm experienced when individuals witness or are forced to participate in actions that conflict with their deeply held moral beliefs (Freyd, 2014; Litz et al., 2009). In the workplace, moral injury may arise when organizations fail to address bullying or when victims are forced to remain silent due to fear of retaliation. This betrayal can compound the trauma of bullying, leading to feelings of guilt, shame, anger, and a loss of trust in the organization (Freyd, 2014; Smith & Freyd, 2014).

Narcissistic Traits Among Leaders and Executives

Within corporate environments, narcissistic traits are often overrepresented among leaders and executives. In high‑performance, high‑pressure environments, traits that signal confidence and dominance can accelerate leadership emergence, thereby increasing the likelihood that narcissistic leaders rise in hierarchies (Härtel, 2023). Often narcissistic leaders present as exceptionally charming, generous, and ‘impressive on paper’ in public-facing settings while creating harm behind closed doors through chronic criticism, intimidation, and blame-shifting, an organizational version of the ‘dinner party effect,’ where outsiders admire the leader and insiders feel silenced and hypervigilant (Durvasula, 2025).

Research suggests that up to 18% of CEOs exhibit moderate-to-high levels of narcissism, a rate substantially higher than in the general population (Chatterjee & Hambrick, 2007, as cited in Stiefenhofer et al., 2025). Problematic leader personality patterns have been associated with destructive supervisory behavior, consistent with workplace accounts of chronic criticism, intimidation, and blame-shifting in hierarchical relationships. A core organizational risk is that narcissistic leaders often operate with double standards (“the rules don’t apply to me, but they apply to you”), which can erode procedural fairness and normalize a culture of exception from consequences at the top (Durvasula, 2024). In such climates, leadership becomes organized around “supply,” an excessive need for admiration and validation, so feedback, limits, or dissent are experienced as ego threats rather than as information, increasing anger, retaliation, and impulsive decision-making when thwarted.

Individuals with narcissistic tendencies are more likely to hire and promote others with such makeup, creating a management culture that is highly competitive and prone to conflict (Regnaud, 2014; Yıldırım & Yıldırım, 2022). Over time, employees may show a striking competence–incompetence split: functioning well with colleagues and in most roles, yet feeling uniquely confused, “wrong,” or psychologically destabilized in direct interactions with the leader, an early indicator that the problem may be relational power and manipulation rather than employee capability (Durvasula, 2024).

This phenomenon is not limited to CEOs; narcissistic tendencies can permeate entire executive teams, increasing the risk of workplace bullying, high turnover, and organizational instability (Regnaud, 2014; Stiefenhofer et al., 2025). When reality-undermining tactics are employed (e.g., denying statements made in meetings, reframing documented concerns as “overreactions,” or implying that an employee is unstable), the erosion of trust accelerates, and both disengagement and turnover tend to increase (Durvasula, 2024). These findings support a key organizational paradox: what looks like ‘strength’ or high standards in the short run can, under narcissistic leadership, translate into fear-based climates that degrade psychological safety and performance over time (Campbell et al., 2011).

Subtypes of Narcissism and Their Workplace Impact

Narcissistic Personality Disorder is not a monolithic condition. Clinical and research literature identifies several subtypes, each with distinct characteristics and workplace behaviors. The DSM-5-TR defines NPD primarily in terms of grandiosity, entitlement, exploitative behavior, lack of empathy, envy, and arrogant attitudes (American Psychiatric Association [APA], 2022). The diagnostic model has been criticized for emphasizing external, socially provocative features and neglecting internal experiences such as vulnerability, insecurity, and shame (McLean Hospital, 2024). This underscores the importance of recognizing both overt and covert forms of narcissism. In clinical descriptions, “low empathy” in narcissism is often not a total absence of empathy but can appear as variable empathy that is performative or transactional, activated when the person feels admired or “well-supplied,” and withdrawn when frustrated or ego-threatened (Durvasula, 2024).

Overt Narcissism: Grandiose, or overt, narcissism is marked by arrogance, entitlement, and a lack of empathy. Individuals with this form of NPD seek power and control, dominate conversations, and demand admiration (American Psychiatric Association, 2022; Yıldırım & Yıldırım, 2022). Their bullying tactics are often direct and overt, but they may also use indirect methods to maintain dominance (Stiefenhofer et al., 2025). Because grandiose narcissistic functioning is organized around status and admiration, public-facing charm and generosity can coexist with private devaluation and punitive reactions in closer working relationships, especially when the leader’s image is challenged (Durvasula, 2024).

Covert Narcissism: Vulnerable, or covert, narcissism, on the other hand, is characterized by hypersensitivity, insecurity, and resentment. These individuals are more likely to engage in passive-aggressive behaviors, subtle undermining, and indirect aggression (American Psychiatric Association, 2022; McLean Hospital, 2024). Individuals high in vulnerable narcissism also report notably higher levels of dispositional envy compared to other personality types (Krizan & Johar, 2012). Research indicates that covert bullying is often more damaging than overt forms, as it is less visible and can leave targets questioning whether the mistreatment occurred, particularly when there are no witnesses (Björkqvist, Österman, & Lagerspetz, 1994; Einarsen, Hoel, & Notelaers, 2009). Victims may experience profound self-doubt and a diminished sense of self-worth, as the ambiguity of covert aggression makes it harder to identify, address, and seek support for (Durvasula, 2015; Leymann, 1996; Nielsen & Einarsen, 2012). This is one reason reality‑undermining tactics (“gaslighting”) can be so destabilizing in covert abuse: it is not only denial of events, but the added suggestion that the target is irrational, “too sensitive,” or unreliable in their perception and memory.

To empower employees in spotting vulnerable narcissism early, a checklist of subtle undermining behaviors can be useful. Employees should be vigilant of patterns such as discouraging ideas with dismissive comments, feigning agreement while withholding support, giving backhanded compliments, and publicly acknowledging mistakes while ignoring successes. Awareness of these signs can aid in recognizing covert aggression, thereby maintaining a healthy work environment without pathologizing typical workplace conflicts.

A practical red flag from the employee/target perspective is the ‘competence split’: functioning well across most work relationships, yet feeling uniquely destabilized (confused, self‑doubting, ‘wrong’) after repeated contact with one specific coworker or leader whose behavior is persistently undermining (Durvasula, 2024).

Malignant Narcissism: Malignant narcissism, first described by Erich Fromm (1964) and later expanded by Otto Kernberg (1984), is a severe form of NPD marked by antisocial, paranoid, and sadistic features. Individuals with malignant narcissism lack empathy, manipulate and exploit others, and may derive pleasure from the suffering of others (Fromm, 1964; Kernberg, 1984). In the workplace, they are capable of highly destructive behaviors, including sabotage, intimidation, and criminal acts. Although not a formal DSM-5 diagnosis, malignant narcissism is recognized as a significant risk factor for extreme workplace bullying and organizational harm (Fromm, 1964; Kernberg, 1984). Empirical studies further confirm that narcissistic traits characterized by antagonism, sadism, and psychopathy, the hallmarks of malignant narcissism, are predictive of aggression, manipulation, and destructive organizational outcomes (O’Reilly et al., 2014; Miller et al., 2017). In these more severe patterns, risks may extend beyond the workplace relationship itself into retaliatory behaviors when the person is confronted or when a target attempts to exit the system (e.g., smear campaigns, legal threats, stalking-like pursuit), which is why safety planning and documentation are often crucial (Hecker, 2024).

Photo by Megan Watson @meganwatson via Unsplash.

The Interplay of Narcissism, Psychopathy, and Sociopathy

While NPD is a primary driver of workplace bullying, it is important to recognize the roles of related personality disorders, such as psychopathy and antisocial personality disorder (ASPD), commonly referred to as sociopathy. The prevalence of psychopathy in the general adult population is estimated at approximately 1%, though this rate varies with the assessment method and population studied (Neumann & Hare, 2008; Coid et al., 2009). Psychopathy is more commonly diagnosed among men and is associated with traits such as egocentricity, lack of empathy, and manipulative behavior. However, recent research indicates that psychopathy in women may be significantly underreported due to assessment biases and differences in behavioral expression (Forouzan & Cooke, 2005). Individuals with psychopathic traits are more likely to engage in relational and verbal aggression, manipulation, and social exclusion, which can make psychopathy less visible and less likely to be detected by standard diagnostic tools (Boddy, 2024; Wynn et al., 2012).

In corporate leadership, individuals with psychopathic traits are significantly overrepresented, with some studies suggesting that as many as 12% of senior leaders display psychopathic traits (Babiak & Hare, 2006). This makes psychopathy up to twelve times more common among executives than in the general population. Individuals with psychopathic traits are capable of causing immense harm to organizations, as their lack of empathy and propensity for manipulation can lead to unethical decisions, financial losses, and widespread employee suffering (Babiak & Hare, 2006).

Antisocial personality disorder (ASPD), sometimes referred to as sociopathy, is characterized by a pattern of manipulation, exploitation, and criminal behavior. The prevalence of ASPD in the general adult population is estimated at 1% to 4%, with higher rates among men (3–6%) than women (1–2%) (American Psychiatric Association, 2013). Individuals with ASPD are more likely to have legal difficulties, impulsive behaviors, and a history of childhood conduct problems. Those with ASPD may still rise to leadership positions due to their charisma and risk-taking tendencies (Babiak & Hare, 2006).

The interplay of NPD, psychopathy, and ASPD—collectively known as the Dark Triad—in the workplace creates a complex and often harmful environment. Individuals with NPD seek admiration and control, individuals with psychopathic traits manipulate and exploit, and individuals with ASPD engage in impulsive and rule-breaking behavior. All three disorders are associated with a lack of empathy and a propensity for bullying, but they differ in their motivations and manifestations. Individuals with NPD are driven by a need for validation and a fear of shame, individuals with psychopathic traits by a desire for power and personal gain, and individuals with ASPD by impulsivity and a disregard for social norms (American Psychiatric Association, 2013; Babiak & Hare, 2006; Kernberg, 1984).

Toward Healthier Organizational Cultures: Addressing Toxic Behaviors and Bullying

Effectively addressing workplace bullying and toxic dynamics requires a holistic approach that goes beyond focusing solely on narcissism. Organizations must consider the diverse roots and manifestations of bullying, including narcissistic, psychopathic, and antisocial tendencies, and implement comprehensive strategies that target culture, systems, and individual behaviors.

At the organizational level, fostering transparency, accountability, and open communication is foundational (Regnaud, 2014; Stiefenhofer et al., 2025; Yıldırım & Yıldırım, 2022). Training managers and employees to recognize and respond to toxic behavior builds a culture of respect and collaboration. Practices such as 360-degree feedback and structured mentorship can reduce incidents of bullying by creating accountability and supporting professional growth (Smith et al., 2023).

Policy and systems interventions are equally important. Transparent performance evaluations, formal anti-bullying policies, rotation of leadership roles, and anonymous peer reviews limit opportunities for toxic individuals, regardless of specific personality traits, to exploit power imbalances (Stiefenhofer et al., 2025). Team-based recognition and collaborative reward systems further shift the focus from individual dominance to collective achievement, fostering inclusion and discouraging harmful competition.

Building on this, organizations can leverage neuroscientific insights by designing reward systems that emphasize collaborative achievements over individual recognition. Timing feedback to coincide with team milestones rather than individual performance reviews may help mitigate the compulsive need for external validation, aligning personal goals with team success. Additionally, providing regular, balanced feedback can help manage the neural drive for affirmation, ensuring that individuals with narcissistic tendencies receive constructive input that frames their contributions within the context of team and organizational goals.

Addressing risks in hiring and promotion is critical, especially given evidence that individuals with narcissistic or psychopathic tendencies may seek out or promote similar individuals (Regnaud, 2014; Yıldırım & Yıldırım, 2022). Proactive selection filters, structured interviews, personality assessments, and thorough reference checks can help organizations identify and reduce the risk of hiring those prone to toxic behavior.

Cultivating awareness of subtle, covert forms of aggression is also key. Employees can benefit from education on behaviors such as dismissive feedback, feigned agreement, or public minimization of accomplishments. Recognizing these patterns early helps maintain a healthy work environment and prevents the normalization of covert aggression.

Finally, empowering bystanders is a powerful lever for cultural change. Techniques such as the 'name-it-to-tame-it' approach (Siegel, 2010) encourage employees to call out toxic behaviors, thereby diffusing tension, reducing power imbalances, and supporting targets. For instance, directly labeling rumor-spreading or shaming brings collective awareness and prompts reflection.

While workplace bullying can be addressed through a variety of strategies, the dynamics involved are inherently complex, shaped by individual personalities, group relationships, and the particulars of each situation. Even so, approaches that integrate policy, culture, hiring, training, education, and bystander engagement offer valuable starting points for reducing bullying and strengthening organizational health.

Conclusion

Workplace narcissism is deeply intertwined with the dynamics of power, envy, and inner emptiness. Narcissistic Personality Disorder, along with related disorders such as psychopathy and antisocial personality disorder, constitutes a significant source of workplace bullying and dysfunction. Because narcissistic individuals can appear highly competent, charming, and generous in public-facing organizational contexts, targets may be disbelieved, and institutions may inadvertently collude with harm, reinforcing silence and increasing the likelihood that bullying becomes normalized or protected by status. Recognizing the central role of these psychological forces, including the developmental roots of envy and the neurobiological and personality underpinnings of destructive behaviors, is crucial for developing effective interventions and fostering healthier, more supportive organizational cultures. Together, let us champion systemic change by embracing inclusive, collaborative efforts that cultivate empathy, accountability, and respect across all organizational levels. By doing so, we can create environments where dignity and well-being are prioritized, inspiring a collective movement toward a more constructive and compassionate workplace future. For affected employees, an essential first step is moving from self-blame to pattern recognition, then using practical safeguards such as documentation, consultation, and boundary-based communication to reduce exposure to escalation and reality-undermining. If you or someone you know is experiencing workplace bullying, seek support from trusted mental health professionals. Early intervention and assertive responses are key to breaking the cycle of abuse and restoring workplace well-being.

References:

APA, American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.).

APA, American Psychiatric Association. (2022). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed., text rev.).

Babiak, P., & Hare, R. D. (2006). Snakes in suits: When psychopaths go to work. HarperBusiness.

Björkqvist, K., Österman, K., & Lagerspetz, K. M. J. (1994). Sex differences in covert aggression among adults. Aggressive Behavior, 20(1), 27–33. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-2337(1994)20:1<27::AID-AB2480200105>3.0.CO;2-Q

Boddy, C. R. (2024). A Climate of Fear: Stone Cold Psychopaths at Work. 872z8. https://repository.mdx.ac.uk/item/872z7

Brusadelli, E., Benfante, A., Di Sarno, M., & Preti, E. (2023). The dark side of empathy in narcissistic personality disorder. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 14, 1074558. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1074558

Buckels, E. E., Jones, D. N., & Paulhus, D. L. (2013). Behavioral confirmation of everyday sadism. Psychological Science, 24(11), 2201-2209. https://doi.org/10.1177/095679761349074

Campbell, W. K., Hoffman, B. J., Campbell, S. M., & Marchisio, G. (2011). Narcissism in organizational contexts. Human Resource Management Review, 21(4), 268–284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2010.10.007

Chatterjee, A., & Hambrick, D. C. (2007). It’s all about me: Narcissistic chief executive officers and their effects on company strategy and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 52(3), 351–386. https://doi.org/10.2189/asqu.52.3.351

Chester, D. S., Lynam, D. R., Powell, D. K., & DeWall, C. N. (2016). Narcissism is associated with altered frontostriatal white matter microstructure. Journal of Personality Disorders, 30(6), 721–736. https://doi.org/10.1521/pedi_2016_30_252

Coid, J., Yang, M., Ullrich, S., Roberts, A., & Hare, R. D. (2009). Prevalence and correlates of psychopathic traits in the household population of Great Britain. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 32(2), 65–73.

Coyne, I., Smith-Lee Chong, P., Seigne, E., & Randall, P. (2003). Self and peer nominations of bullying: An analysis of incident rates, individual differences, and perceptions of the working environment. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 12(3), 209-228. https://doi.org/10.1080/13594320344000101

Czar, K. A., & Dufner, M. (2023). The Neural Correlates of Narcissism: Is There a Connection with the Desire for Fame? Journal of Personalized Medicine, 13(10), 1520. https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm13101520

Dåderman, A. M., & Ragnestål-Impola, C. (2019). Workplace bullies, not their victims, score high on the Dark Triad and Extraversion, and low on Agreeableness and Honesty-Humility. Heliyon, 5(10), e02609. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e02609

Dhawan, N., Kunik, M. E., Oldham, J., & Coverdale, J. (2010). Prevalence and treatment of narcissistic personality disorder in the community: A systematic review. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 51(4), 333–339.

Durvasula, R. (2024). It’s not you: Identifying and healing from narcissistic people. The Open Field.

Einarsen, S., Hoel, H., & Notelaers, G. (2009). Measuring exposure to bullying and harassment at work: Validity, factor structure and psychometric properties of the Negative Acts Questionnaire-Revised. Work & Stress, 23(1), 24–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678370902815673

Einarsen, S., Hoel, H., Zapf, D., & Cooper, C. L. (Eds.). (2020). Bullying and harassment in the workplace: Developments in theory, research and practice (3rd ed.). CRC Press.

Fernández-del-Río, E., Ramos-Villagrasa, P. J., & Escartín, J. (2021). The incremental effect of Dark personality over the Big Five in workplace bullying: Evidence from perpetrators and targets. Personality and Individual Differences, 168, 110383. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.110291

Forouzan, E., & Cooke, D. J. (2005). Figuring out la femme fatale: Conceptual and assessment issues concerning psychopathy in females. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 23(6), 765–778. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.669

Freeman, J. B. (2024). Understanding the neurobiology of narcissism: Implications for workplace behavior. Current Opinion in Psychology, 56, 101769. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2023.101769

Freyd, J. J. (2014). Institutional betrayal. American Psychologist, 69(6), 575–587. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037564

Fromm, E. (1964). The heart of man: Its genius for good and evil. Harper & Row.

Hare, R. D. (1996). Psychopathy: A clinical construct whose time has come. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 23(1), 25–54. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854896023001004

Hoel, H., Sheehan, M. J., Cooper, C. L., & Einarsen, S. (2011). Organizational effects of workplace bullying. In S. Einarsen, H. Hoel, D. Zapf, & C. L. Cooper (Eds.), Bullying and harassment in the workplace: Developments in theory, research, and practice (2nd ed., pp. 129–148). CRC Press.

Kernberg, O. F. (1984). Severe personality disorders: Psychotherapeutic strategies. Yale University Press.

Krizan, Z., & Johar, O. (2012). Envy divides the two faces of narcissism. Journal of Personality, 80(5), 1415–1451. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2011.00767.x

Lange, J., Crusius, J., & Hagemeyer, B. (2016). The evil queen’s dilemma: Linking narcissistic admiration and rivalry to benign and malicious envy. European Journal of Personality, 30(2), 168–188. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2050

Leymann, H. (1996). The content and development of mobbing at work. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 5(2), 165–184. https://doi.org/10.1080/13594329608414853

Litz, B. T., Stein, N., Delaney, E., Lebowitz, L., Nash, W. P., Silva, C., & Maguen, S. (2009). Moral injury and moral repair in war veterans: A preliminary model and intervention strategy. Clinical Psychology Review, 29(8), 695–706. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2009.07.003

Matthiesen, S. B., & Einarsen, S. (2007). Perpetrators and targets of bullying at work: Role stress and individual differences. Perspectives on bullying: Research on childhood, workplace, and cyberbullying, 22(6), 135-146.

McLean Hospital. (2024, September). Narcissistic Personality Disorder: A Basic Guide for Providers. https://www.mcleanhospital.org/essential/narcissistic-personality-disorder

Miller, J. D., Lynam, D. R., Hyatt, C. S., & Campbell, W. K. (2017). A dual-process model of narcissism: Implications for the structure, assessment, etiology, and development of narcissistic personality disorder. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 13, 291–315. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-032816-045244

Neumann, C. S., & Hare, R. D. (2008). Psychopathic traits in a large community sample: Links to violence, alcohol use, and intelligence. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 76(5), 893–899. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013588

Nielsen, M. B. (2013). Bullying in work groups: The impact of leadership. Scandinavian journal of psychology, 54(2), 127-136. ttps://doi.org/10.1111/sjop.12011

Nielsen, M. B., & Einarsen, S. (2012). Outcomes of exposure to workplace bullying: A meta-analytic review. Work & Stress, 26(4), 309–332. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678373.2012.734709

Özer, G., & Escartín, J. (2023). The making and breaking of workplace bullying perpetration: A systematic review on the antecedents, moderators, mediators, outcomes of perpetration and suggestions for organizations. Aggression and violent behavior, 69, 101823. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2023.101823

Paulhus, D. L., & Williams, K. M. (2002).The Dark Triad of personality: Narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy. Journal of Research in Personality, 36(6), 556–563. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-6566(02)00505-6

Regnaud, D. A. (2014). The relationship between top leaders' observed narcissistic behaviors and workplace bullying (Doctoral dissertation, Walden University). https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/dissertations/1147

Ronningstam, E. (2025). Narcissistic personality disorder: Progress in understanding and treatment. Harvard Review of Psychiatry, 33(1), 12–22.

Röpke, S., Dziobek, I., Schilbach, L., & Heekeren, H. R. (2013). Neuronal correlates of impaired empathy in narcissistic personality disorder. Psychiatry Research: Neuroimaging, 214(3, 390–394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pscychresns.2013.08.004

Schulze, L., Dziobek, I., & Vater, A. (2021). Can neuroscience help to understand narcissism? A systematic review of 34 neuroscience studies. Psychological Medicine, 52(15), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291721001376

Seigne, E., Coyne, I., Randall, P., & Parker, J. (2007). Personality traits of bullies as a contributory factor in workplace bullying: An exploratory study. International Journal of Organization Theory & Behavior, 10(1), 118-132. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOTB-10-01-2007-B006

Siegel, D. J. (2010). The whole-brain child: 12 revolutionary strategies to nurture your child's developing mind. Bantam Books.

Smith, C. P., & Freyd, J. J. (2014). Institutional betrayal. American Psychologist, 69(6), 575–587. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037564

Stiefenhofer, P., Deniz, C., Xie, L., & Qian, J. (2025). My boss is a narcissist bully: A game theoretic approach to stop bullies. arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.14262.

Stinson, F. S., Dawson, D. A., Goldstein, R. B., Chou, S. P., Huang, B., Smith, S. M., ... & Grant, B. F. (2008). Prevalence, correlates, disability, and comorbidity of DSM-IV narcissistic personality disorder: results from the wave 2 national epidemiologic survey on alcohol and related conditions. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 69(7), 1033-1045.

Winsper, C., Bilgin, A., Thompson, A., Marwaha, S., Chanen, A. M., Singh, S. P., & Wang, A. (2020). The prevalence of personality disorders in the community: A global systematic review and meta-analysis. British Journal of Psychiatry, 216(2), 69–78. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.2019.166

Wynn, R., Høiseth, M. H., & Pettersen, G. (2012). Psychopathy in women: Theoretical and clinical perspectives. International Journal of Women’s Health, 4, 257–263. https://doi.org/10.2147/IJWH.S25518

Yıldırım, D., & Yıldırım, A. (2022). Pathological narcissism, interpersonal cognitive distortions, and workplace bullying among nurses: A cross-sectional study. Journal of Nursing Management, 30(6), 1855–1864. https://doi.org/10.1111/jonm.13706