Life History and Narcissism Study Notes
Table of Contents
Data to Analyze for Life History and Perceived Status Question
Graphs Depicting Results for Life History and Perceived Status Question
Data Cut for Life History and Perceived Status Question
Data to Analyze for Life History and Narcissism Question
Graphs Depicting Results for Life History and Narcissism Question
Data Cut for Life History and Narcissism Question
Demographics
Data to Analyze for Life History and Perceived Status Question
Graphical Representation
Graphs provide visual interpretation of the relationship between life history strategies and perceived social status.
Interpretation of Data
Analysis involved understanding how individuals' life histories correlate with their self-reported perceived status.
Graphs Depicting Results for Life History and Perceived Status Question
Data Cut for Life History and Perceived Status Question
Process involves filtering out participants based on specific criteria to ensure quality data for analysis.
Participants with incomplete responses or extreme outliers removed to maintain data integrity.
Data to Analyze for Life History and Narcissism Question
Graphical Representation
Similar to the previous analysis, graphs illustrate the connection between life history strategies and levels of narcissism.
Graphs Depicting Results for Life History and Narcissism Question
Data Cut for Life History and Narcissism Question
Criteria used to remove participants is likely based on the same standards as those applied in the perceived status analysis.
Demographics
Participant Analysis
Breakdown of each participant’s identity based on various characteristics:
Participant identifiers: MK1, MK2, etc.
PStatus: Indicates perceived status in multiple assessments per participant.
Grouped data for analysis based on 40 participants showing variance in responses related to narcissism and life history.
Participant Data Table
Each participant’s responses collected across various measures:
PStatus1-PStatus10: Numerical values indicate responses on perceived status questions (the range varies from -3 to 5).
Reasons for Cutting: Indicates participant data retained or eliminated due to specific reasons:
Kept
No Variance
Impossible Numbers
Did Not Complete
Data Table Example
Participant | PStatus1 | PStatus2 | PStatus3 | … |
|---|---|---|---|---|
MK1 | 2 | 2 | 3 | … |
MK2 | 2 | 1 | 3 | … |
… | … | … | … | … |
Overview of Analysis Outcomes
Applicable outcomes of the analyses on participant responses indicating:
General patterns in perceived social status relative to life history strategies (e.g., Faster Life Strategists vs. Slower Life Strategists).
Evaluative measures for narcissism which suggest correlations with social behavior and historical life patterns.
Life Strategy Analysis
Results Summary
Life Strategy Findings drawn from analyses of mean values and variations:
Faster life strategies showing correlations with different outcomes compared to slower life strategies.
Statistical Insights
Key statistics presented include constants and averages for life strategies and their connection to perceived status and narcissism.
Life Strategies Mean and Variance: Details
Faster Life Strategies: Higher mean scores suggest a more favorable perception in social contexts.
Slower Life Strategies: Variance presents differing narratives in participants’ life approaches.
Narcissism Analysis
Constant and Average Measures
Key averages in narcistic traits relevant to life history patterns examined with statistical depth.
Example calculations given for the relationship between variables:
Narcissism Constant:
Ave_MiniK:
Derivative analytical insights into responses across the participant groups.
Detailed Statistical Insights
Variations and statistical constants visually represented in graphs which show relational metrics between life strategy approaches and levels of narcissism.
Participant Responses on Narcissism Metrics
Participants’ responses rated on a scale, with significant cut-offs for calculations demonstrating consistency or inconsistency across responses:
NPI16_1 to NPI16_16 denotes participant narcissism response items.
Consistent measures maintain data integrity for further statistical analysis across varying sample sets.
Table of Contents
Data to Analyze for Life History and Perceived Status Question
Graphs Depicting Results for Life History and Perceived Status Question
Data Cut for Life History and Perceived Status Question
Data to Analyze for Life History and Narcissism Question
Graphs Depicting Results for Life History and Narcissism Question
Data Cut for Life History and Narcissism Question
Demographics
Data to Analyze for Life History and Perceived Status Question
Graphical Representation
Graphs provide visual interpretation of the relationship between life history strategies and perceived social status.
Interpretation of Data
Analysis involved understanding how individuals' life histories correlate with their self-reported perceived status.
Graphs Depicting Results for Life History and Perceived Status Question
Data Cut for Life History and Perceived Status Question
Process involves filtering out participants based on specific criteria to ensure quality data for analysis.
Participants with incomplete responses or extreme outliers removed to maintain data integrity.
Data to Analyze for Life History and Narcissism Question
Graphical Representation
Similar to the previous analysis, graphs illustrate the connection between life history strategies and levels of narcissism.
Graphs Depicting Results for Life History and Narcissism Question
Data Cut for Life History and Narcissism Question
Criteria used to remove participants is likely based on the same standards as those applied in the perceived status analysis.
Demographics
Participant Analysis
Breakdown of each participant’s identity based on various characteristics:
Participant identifiers: MK1, MK2, etc.
PStatus: Indicates perceived status in multiple assessments per participant.
Grouped data for analysis based on 40 participants showing variance in responses related to narcissism and life history.
Participant Data Table
Each participant’s responses collected across various measures:
PStatus1-PStatus10: Numerical values indicate responses on perceived status questions (the range varies from -3 to 5).
Reasons for Cutting: Indicates participant data retained or eliminated due to specific reasons:
Kept
No Variance
Impossible Numbers
Did Not Complete
Data Table Example
Overview of Analysis Outcomes
Applicable outcomes of the analyses on participant responses indicating:
General patterns in perceived social status relative to life history strategies (e.g., Faster Life Strategists vs. Slower Life Strategists).
Evaluative measures for narcissism which suggest correlations with social behavior and historical life patterns.
Life Strategy Analysis
Results Summary
Life Strategy Findings drawn from analyses of mean values and variations:
Faster life strategies showing correlations with different outcomes compared to slower life strategies.
Statistical Insights
Key statistics presented include constants and averages for life strategies and their connection to perceived status and narcissism.
Life Strategies Mean and Variance: Details
Faster Life Strategies: Higher mean scores suggest a more favorable perception in social contexts.
Slower Life Strategies: Variance presents differing narratives in participants’ life approaches.
Narcissism Analysis
Constant and Average Measures
Key averages in narcistic traits relevant to life history patterns examined with statistical depth.
Example calculations given for the relationship between variables:
Narcissism Constant:
Ave_MiniK:
Derivative analytical insights into responses across the participant groups.
Detailed Statistical Insights
Variations and statistical constants visually represented in graphs which show relational metrics between life strategy approaches and levels of narcissism.
Participant Responses on Narcissism Metrics
Participants’ responses rated on a scale, with significant cut-offs for calculations demonstrating consistency or inconsistency across responses:
NPI16_1 to NPI16_16 denotes participant narcissism response items.
Consistent measures maintain data integrity for further statistical analysis across varying sample sets.
Correlational Lab Assignment Instructions
Overview
Each report will be very brief and should complete all necessary tasks.
Reports should be written in a narrative/essay format with complete sentences and correct grammar.
Students are strongly encouraged to structure their reports with specific headings and sub-headings.
Required Structure of the Report
Title Page
Include a descriptive title.
Follow the professional APA paper style guidelines (not student style).
Introduction
Identify the research question(s) being addressed.
Options include:
a. Does life history strategy predict narcissism?
b. Does life history strategy predict status?
Introduce the chosen question.
Identify broad characteristics of the study:
a. Discuss whether correlational or experimental methods were used.
b. Define the measured variables.
If experimental methods were used, identify the variable that was manipulated.
Method Section
Include subsections for:
Participants:
a. Recruitment process.
b. Number of participants recruited.
c. Any data cutting reasons and numbers (if applicable).
d. Final number of participants.
e. Demographic description of participants based on data.
Materials:
a. Variables that were collected (excluding demographics).
b. Brief descriptions of each variable and examples of survey items if applicable.
c. Operationalization details for each variable:
i. Description of measurement type (e.g., survey, behavioral).
ii. Responses for questionnaire items.
iii. Calculation of index/aggregate if applicable.
1. Include inter-item reliability (e.g., Cronbach’s Alpha).
2. Interpretation of the index.
iv. Coding for categorical variables.
v. Appropriate units of measure for different types of data.
Procedure:
Write a detailed paragraph describing what participants were asked to do, including the order of measures and demographics.
Results Section
Identify appropriate analyses to answer the research questions.
Write a narrative report based on data analysis outcomes.
Include a table with descriptive statistics organized according to APA guidelines.
Represent analysis results visually with a figure, following APA guidelines if placed at the end of the document.
Conclusion Section
Answer the research question in non-statistical language.
Explain how the lab data supports this answer.
Additional Information on Measurement Tools
1. Life History Strategies Measure (Mini-K)
Definition: Mini-K is utilized to measure life history strategies based on developmental environments.
Key Claims:
Life strategies vary depending on harshness/unpredictability of early environments.
Harsh environments lead to faster life strategies; safer environments lead to slower life strategies.
Fast Life Strategies Include:
Impulsivity
Short-term mating strategies
Present temporal focus
Lower social commitment
Slower Life Strategies Include:
Self-control
Long-term mating strategies
Future temporal focus
Higher social commitment
Continuum: Individuals range from fast to slow strategies, determined by their upbringing.
Index Creation: Average scores from all 20 items are computed. Higher scores indicate slower life strategies.
2. Narcissism Measure (NPI-16)
Definition: Modified NPI-16 assesses sub-clinical narcissism, a common personality trait known as part of the Dark Triad.
Coding:
1 indicates greater narcissism; 0 indicates lesser narcissism.
Respondents select statements indicating their narcissism level.
Index Interpretation: Higher totals represent greater sub-clinical narcissism.
3. Perceived Status Measure
Background: The measure, developed by Griskevicius and others, assesses participants' perceptions of their own status.
Measurement: Average responses from 10 items.
Interpretation: Higher scores indicate beliefs of greater status.
Data Handling Guidelines
Outliers should remain in the dataset.
Replace missing responses (if applicable) with means from a participant’s other responses on the scale.
Data from participants responding to less than 70% of items should be removed, reporting the number excluded for this reason.
Reliability Notes Output
Date Created: 01-APR-2026 13:27:22
Active Dataset: DataSet3
Filter:
Weight:
Split File:
Number of Rows in Working Data File: 37
Missing Value Handling
Definition of Missing: User-defined missing values are treated as missing.
Cases Used: Statistics are based on all cases with valid data for all variables in the procedure.
Syntax for Reliability Analysis
Command: RELIABILITY /VARIABLES=MK1 MK2 MK3 MK4 MK5 MK6 MK7 MK8 MK9 MK10 MK11 MK12 MK13 MK14 MK15 MK16 MK17 MK18 MK19 MK20 /SCALE('ALL VARIABLES') ALL /MODEL=ALPHA.
Resources Used
Processor Time: 00:00:00.00
Elapsed Time: 00:00:00.00
Case Processing Summary for Reliability Analysis
Scale: ALL VARIABLES
Valid Cases: 35 (94.6%)
Excluded Cases: 2 (5.4%)
Total Cases: 37 (100.0%)
Note: Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure.
Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's Alpha: 0.574
Number of Items: 20
Reliability Notes Output (continued)
Date Created: 01-APR-2026 13:27:33
Active Dataset: DataSet3
Filter:
Weight:
Split File:
Number of Rows in Working Data File: 37
Missing Value Handling
Definition of Missing: User-defined missing values are treated as missing.
Cases Used: Statistics are based on all cases with valid data for all variables in the procedure.
Syntax for Second Reliability Analysis
Command: RELIABILITY /VARIABLES=NPI16_1 NPI16_2 NPI16_3 NPI16_4 NPI16_5 NPI16_6 NPI16_7 NPI16_8 NPI16_9 NPI16_10 NPI16_11 NPI16_12 NPI16_13 NPI16_14 NPI16_15 NPI16_16 /SCALE('ALL VARIABLES') ALL /MODEL=ALPHA.
Resources Used
Processor Time: 00:00:00.00
Elapsed Time: 00:00:00.00
Case Processing Summary for Second Reliability Analysis
Scale: ALL VARIABLES
Valid Cases: 37 (100.0%)
Excluded Cases: 0 (0.0%)
Total Cases: 37 (100.0%)
Note: Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure.
Reliability Statistics for Second Analysis
Cronbach's Alpha: 0.690
Number of Items: 16
Regression Notes Output
Date Created: 01-APR-2026 13:28:42
Active Dataset: DataSet3
Filter:
Weight:
Split File:
Number of Rows in Working Data File: 37
Missing Value Handling
Definition of Missing: User-defined missing values are treated as missing.
Cases Used: Statistics are based on cases with no missing values for any variable used.
Syntax for Regression Analysis
Command: REGRESSION /MISSING LISTWISE /STATISTICS COEFF OUTS R ANOVA /CRITERIA=PIN(.05) POUT(.10) /NOORIGIN /DEPENDENT Ave_Narc /METHOD=ENTER Ave_MiniK.
Resources Used
Processor Time: 00:00:00.00
Elapsed Time: 00:00:00.01
Memory Required: 3888 bytes
Additional Memory Required for Residual Plots: 0 bytes
Variables Entered/Removed
Model Variables Entered: Ave_MiniK
Method: Enter
Note: Dependent Variable: Ave_Narc
Model Summary
Model: 1
R: 0.144
R Square: 0.021
Adjusted R Square: -0.007
Std. Error of the Estimate: 0.16960
Note: Predictors include Constant and Ave_MiniK.
ANOVA Results
Model Sum of Squares:
Regression: 0.021 (df = 1, Mean Square = 0.021, F = 0.742, Sig. = 0.395)
Residual: 1.007 (df = 35, Mean Square = 0.029)
Total: 1.028 (df = 36)
Coefficients Table
Model: 1
Dependent Variable: Ave_Narc
Coefficients:
Unstandardized Coefficients:
Constant: B = 0.142, Std. Error = 0.090
Ave_MiniK: B = 0.051, Std. Error = 0.059
Standardized Coefficients:
Ave_MiniK: Beta = 0.144
t-value:
Constant: t = 1.578, Sig. = 0.124
Ave_MiniK: t = 0.861, Sig. = 0.395
Descriptives Notes Output
Date Created: 01-APR-2026 13:29:50
Active Dataset: DataSet3
Filter:
Weight:
Split File:
Number of Rows in Working Data File: 37
Missing Value Handling
Definition of Missing: User-defined missing values are treated as missing.
Cases Used: All non-missing data are used.
Syntax for Descriptive Statistics
Command: DESCRIPTIVES VARIABLES=Ave_MiniK /STATISTICS=MEAN STDDEV MIN MAX.
Resources Used
Processor Time: 00:00:00.00
Elapsed Time: 00:00:00.00
Descriptive Statistics
Number of Valid Cases (N): 37
Minimum: 0.05
Maximum: 2.26
Mean: 1.4491
Standard Deviation: 0.47741
Valid N (listwise): 37
Title Page
Include a descriptive title.
Follow the professional APA paper style guidelines (not student style).
Introduction
Identify the research question(s) being addressed.
Options include:
a. Does life history strategy predict narcissism?
b. Does life history strategy predict status?
Introduce the chosen question.
Identify broad characteristics of the study:
a. Discuss whether correlational or experimental methods were used.
b. Define the measured variables.
If experimental methods were used, identify the variable that was manipulated.
Method Section
Include subsections for:
Participants:
a. Recruitment process.
b. Number of participants recruited.
c. Any data cutting reasons and numbers (if applicable).
d. Final number of participants.
e. Demographic description of participants based on data.
Materials:
a. Variables that were collected (excluding demographics).
b. Brief descriptions of each variable and examples of survey items if applicable.
c. Operationalization details for each variable:
i. Description of measurement type (e.g., survey, behavioral).
ii. Responses for questionnaire items.
iii. Calculation of index/aggregate if applicable.
1. Include inter-item reliability (e.g., Cronbach’s Alpha).
2. Interpretation of the index.
iv. Coding for categorical variables.
v. Appropriate units of measure for different types of data.
Procedure:
Write a detailed paragraph describing what participants were asked to do, including the order of measures and demographics.
Results Section
Identify appropriate analyses to answer the research questions.
Write a narrative report based on data analysis outcomes.
Include a table with descriptive statistics organized according to APA guidelines.
Represent analysis results visually with a figure, following APA guidelines if placed at the end of the document.
Conclusion Section
Answer the research question in non-statistical language.
Explain how the lab data supports this answer.
The analyses conducted aimed to investigate the relationship between life history strategies and levels of narcissism. The regression analysis results indicated that the model included the variable 'Ave_MiniK' (representing life history strategies) as a predictor for 'Ave_Narc' (average narcissism level).
Model Summary
R: 0.144
R Square: 0.021
Adjusted R Square: -0.007
Standard Error of the Estimate: 0.16960
ANOVA Results
Model Sum of Squares:
Regression: 0.021 (df = 1, Mean Square = 0.021, F = 0.742, Sig. = 0.395)
Residual: 1.007 (df = 35, Mean Square = 0.029)
Total: 1.028 (df = 36)
Coefficients Table
Unstandardized Coefficients:
Constant: B = 0.142, Std. Error = 0.090
Ave_MiniK: B = 0.051, Std. Error = 0.059
Standardized Coefficient:
Ave_MiniK: Beta = 0.144
t-value Results
Constant: t = 1.578, Sig. = 0.124
Ave_MiniK: t = 0.861, Sig. = 0.395
Conclusion
The results indicated that life history strategies, as measured by 'Ave_MiniK,' did not significantly predict levels of narcissism, as reflected in the statistical insignificance (p = 0.395) of the F-test and t-tests. Thus, while there may exist some correlation between the two, it was not statistically significant in this sample.
The analysis conducted explored the relationship between life history strategies and narcissism, revealing intriguing insights despite the statistical insignificance of the findings. The regression analysis indicated that life history strategies, measured by the 'Ave_MiniK' variable, did not significantly predict average levels of narcissism ('Ave_Narc') in the current sample. With an R-Square value of 0.021 and a p-value of 0.395, the results suggest that while there might be some correlation, it is not strong enough to confirm a reliable predictive relationship.
These findings prompt further reflection on the nuances of how life history strategies manifest in different contexts and influences on personality traits. Although the hypothesis that life history strategies significantly predict narcissism was not supported, future studies with larger sample sizes or different methodologies might yield more definitive insights. Additionally, understanding the complexities of individual development and social behavior could offer a richer perspective on the dynamics between life history, personality traits, and perceived social status. Overall, the results underscore the necessity for continued exploration in this psychological domain, highlighting opportunities for growth in research design and theoretical frameworks.