To your odds of kissing into target, there was a critical correspondence anywhere between grandiose narcissism and you may participant gender, ? = .161, t = dos.819, p = .005. It interaction are showed into the Fig dos. The simple slopes for males (effortless hill = 0.051., t = .007, p = .995) and you will ladies (simple hill = -0.011., t = -0.002, p = .999) just weren’t high. Grandiose narcissists didn’t share an increased odds of making out with an attached address more just one (? = .068, t = step 1.127, p = .261), suggesting you to grandiose narcissism wasn’t from the mate poaching having a short-name affair.
Grandiose narcissists commonly declaration lover poaching -specifically for the quick-label . But not, a question remains regarding whether or not they select members of relationship a lot more really worth desire than simply folks who are unmarried. Widman and McNulty reason why grandiose narcissistic tendencies was triggered across factors normally (including the self-declaration from lives prevalence off sexual choices), although not be activated when placed in a particular problem. For this reason, you will be able that grandiose narcissists reveal a history of entertaining during the spouse poaching, but don’t necessarily select those who work in relationship becoming best friends. I tested so it opportunity from inside the five education.
Lover poaching index.
For very long-name lover poaching, grandiose narcissism try a critical predictor for ladies (? = .306, t = 2.623, p = .010) and you will a somewhat tall predictor for males (? = .218, t = 1.725, p = .088). Nothing of your Huge Five parameters was in fact tall. Grandiose narcissism wasn’t a life threatening predictor out-of achievements in the poaching to your much time-label for men (? = .120, t = 0.718, p = .476), however it are for ladies (? = .340, t = dos.369, p = .021). Not one of your additional factors were significant apart from ladies’ neuroticism; whenever women were a whole lot more neurotic, they said so much more achievement at poaching for some time-title intimate relationship.
Overall performance
Interesting, grandiose narcissism was not of the lover poaching among men. So it result is in line with performance claimed by the Kardum and you may acquaintances . Therefore, it will be easy you to definitely grandiose narcissistic women can be more often guilty out-of partner poaching.
Product want Muslim Sites dating app and you can techniques
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.