>It must be nice to be able to just make up and use a method for identifying "narcissists" without having to test whether the people you're identifying as narci

>It must be nice to be able to just make up and use a method for identifying "narcissists" without having to test whether the people you're identifying as narcissists are, in fact, narcissists. In my opinion, if this is how you do research you can hardly call what you do science. This is rampant in socio/psycho academia and professionals. Not saying ALL of them are like this but in general, it is not a quantitative or strictly scientific field. Lot of the work done in this industry is self-fulfilling prophecies and their time is mostly spent on fabricating/bending truths and hard facts and say "here's a statistically significant outcome therefore assholes are great leaders". It's laughable and I've stopped reading the article because I felt like it's built on the same shoddy science work and poor understanding of statistics and it's significance.