Conversational Narcissism in Marital Relationship: Attachment Antecedents and Coparenting Consequences over the Transition to Parenthood

• In Event: Parents at the Transition to Parenthood

Abstract

We examined mothers’ and fathers’ attachment representations and marital interaction quality (conversational narcissism and invisibility) as predictors of competitive and cooperative coparenting over the transition to first-time parenthood. Coparenting is the ability to work together as a team in parenting. Whereas cooperative coparenting has been associated with parental warmth and optimal child outcomes, competitive coparenting and coparenting conflict are associated with couple hostility and children’s behavior problems. Thus, it is important to identify the antecedents of these coparenting dynamics. Conversational narcissism may contribute to competitive or imbalanced dynamics in the coparenting relationship. Conversational narcissism is one’s excessive need for conversational attention at the expense of others (Derber, 1979) and may elicit confrontation from the listener and increase aggression of both partners (Keller et al., 2014). Alternatively, it may create an imbalanced dynamic in the relationship by rendering the listener invisible ​​as if they bring no value to the conversation. Past literature suggests that narcissism is a defensive mechanism employed to counter threats to self-worth and attachment relationships (e.g., Pistole, 1995). Therefore, we expect that adults who are insecurely attached (e.g. preoccupied/dismissing) will engage in prenatal marital interactions marked by conversational narcissism and invisibility which, in turn, will predict negative coparenting 24 months later.
One-hundred-and-twenty-five first-time expectant couples, recruited from birthing classes, were followed over 2 years. Mothers were 20-42 years old (M=29) and fathers were 19-50 years old (M=31). Most were white, had some college education, and were from middle SES backgrounds. At the prenatal visit, couples completed the Adult Attachment Interview (George et al., 1985) and participated in a 30-minute videotaped conversation rated by two coders for conversational narcissism and invisibility. When children were 24 months old, mother, father, and child triads were videotaped interacting for 25 minutes to assess couples’ coparenting behaviors in three dimensions, cooperative coparenting, competitive coparenting, and coparenting conflict.

Compared to secure mothers, mothers with preoccupied attachment demonstrated less invisibility when interacting with their partner (β=-0.165, p=.020). Compared to secure fathers, fathers with dismissing attachment demonstrated more conversational narcissism (β=0.184, p=.038) and less invisibility (β=-0.199, p=.020). When fathers demonstrated more conversational narcissism, couples had more coparenting conflict 24 months later (β=0.332, p=.019). When fathers demonstrated less invisibility, couples were less cooperative as co-parents 24 months later (β=0.356, p<.001).
This study adds to the literature by demonstrating connections between insecure adult attachment and conversational narcissism and invisibility. Conversational narcissism and invisibility, in turn, forecast couple interactions in the coparenting context. Results indicate that fathers’ conversational narcissism predicts more coparenting conflict, which is consistent with the fathering-vulnerability hypothesis (Katz & Gottman 1996). Fathers’ invisibility, on the other hand, predicts more cooperative coparenting, which supports the idea that invisibility could serve as an effective coping strategy in facing partners’ conversational narcissism, in both the marital and coparenting context Interventions should focus on altering fathers’ dismissing attachment to reduce their conversational narcissism, as well as foster fathers’ support of mothers in the coparenting context, as these efforts may yield the most positive outcomes for the whole family.

Authors

• Shuqi Zhang, University of Texas at Austin
  Presenting Author

• Maddie Shelton, University of Texas at Austin

• Ziyu Tian, University of Texas at Austin

• Bradley Maclaine, University of Texas at Austin

• Nancy Lynn Hazen, University of Texas at Austin

• Deborah B Jacobvitz, University of Texas at Austin