Grandiose narcissism, leadership, and workplace deviance: does self-interest always breed toxicity in leadership roles?

Abstract

Background

Existing literature on leader narcissism reveals conflicting evidence due to the paradoxical nature of narcissistic traits- narcissistic admiration and rivalry. Additionally, a bipolar view of self-interest, rooted in the concept of dual behavior may help in clarifying this paradox. Therefore, the study examines how narcissistic admiration and rivalry affect leader narcissism and workplace deviance, with self-interested behavior acting as a mediating factor.

Methods

A cross-sectional analysis was conducted using a sample of 313 responses from Prolific, an online academic platform. Grounded in self-determination theory and trait activation theory, the framework is tested through the PLS-SEM approach in the U.S. population sample.

Results

Both narcissistic traits-admiration and rivalry shape leadership narcissism, further shaping deviant behavior. Further, self-interested behavior as a mediator refines the narcissistic tendencies of individuals in leadership roles and shapes deviant behavior. sequential mediation also confirms a strong interplay between grandiose narcissistic traits and deviant outcomes through self-interesting behavior and leader narcissism.

Conclusion

The study emphasizes that narcissistic traits and extrinsic factors shape self-centered behavior. It further concludes that narcissistic admiration and rivalry both lead individuals to embrace dark aspects of leadership characteristics that spill detrimental effects on the workplace. This contradicts the optimistic perspective of narcissism literature, especially in the case of narcissistic admiration.

Introduction

Narcissism has garnered the attention of scholars as literature inflates the idea that narcissistic individuals often look upon leadership positions and are inclined to surface as leaders [1]. The desire for admiration and power are two compelling states that drive individuals to pursue their leadership roles as they tend to engage more in self-promotion and seek recognition than less narcissistic individuals. Scholarly discourse at the intersection of narcissism and leadership also pigmented the literature by displaying a mixed palette of their nexus [2]. While the optimistic view holds the ideology that narcissistic traits are rooted in confidence and exuberance, navigating the complexities of leadership roles [3]. The pessimist viewpoint associates narcissism with overconfidence, where individuals repeatedly failed to learn from grievous mistakes [4]. While many studies provide substantial fragments linking narcissism to leader emergence, the inconclusive and incomplete outcomes fail to clarify what occurs when narcissists ascend to leadership roles [5].

At first glance, the journey of narcissism toward leadership appears straightforward. However, its paradoxical attributes complicate the trajectory due to two disparate facets recognized in personality psychology: narcissistic rivalry and narcissistic admiration [6]. These traits collectively describe narcissist’s conflicting tendencies, where rivalry emerges when self-esteem is threatened. In addition to this, narcissists consider themselves a superior species based on agentic orientation. However, the inflated view is shifted regarding communal traits such as morality and agreeableness. This illustrates that self-enhancement is lifted only in those areas that boost the status and self-esteem [7]. However, the distinction is quite visible when one relates the debate with a broader picture where grandiosity is linked to vulnerable narcissism. While grandiose narcissism centers on extraversion, aggression, and self-assurance, the vulnerable variant of narcissism is based on defensiveness and anxiety. This implies that a high level of grandiosity is marked by interpersonal antagonism, which is the core feature of dark triad traits. Hence, it is arguable that intensified grandiose narcissistic traits shape individuals as strong yet negatively impactful leaders. On the contrary, narcissistic admiration and rivalry, sub-dimensions of grandiosity, predict the dark or bright effect of leader narcissism as evident in literature, thereby highlighting a gap in the literature.

To connect the debate with counterproductive behavior, it is imperative to discuss that the adaptive facet of narcissism in the form of leadership generates adverse outcomes. In contrast, socially toxic facets such as exploitation tend to affect counterproductive work behavior positively [8]. Thus, recognizing the adverse consequences of leader narcissism in the workplace needs to be surfaced, as expounded by Ofei et al. [9]. Toxic leadership, specifically in the form of grandiose narcissism, showcases pernicious attributes such as no empathy or abusive interaction. Thus, it can be argued that the genesis of a toxic work environment is rooted in destructive leadership. When leaders exemplify intemperate behavior through anger, aggression, and hostility, they give birth to a disruptive atmosphere where negativity becomes the dominant force of driving actions. Given this, workplace deviance has surfaced as a nuanced concept, a condensed form of counterproductive workplace behavior, which is pivotal to be explored as a consequential construct as it undermines the functionality of the workplace [10].

Further debate can also be fueled by considering self-interesting behavior because a narcissistic personality is hugely circled around self-interested nature [11]. As declared in recent literature, self-interested behavior not only encourages unethical considerations such as stealing resources or recognition but also normalizes heightened self-care where others’ interests are harmed or compromised to achieve personal gains. However, a plethora of literature offers various insights by emphasizing why leaders engage in self-interested behavior [12]. Thus, concentrating on the NARC model, we build our theoretical premise through the induced lens of self-determination and trait activation theories. The study argues that narcissistic rivalry and admiration majorly operate on an autonomous continuum, given the grandiose variant of narcissism. However, unforeseen situational cues play a crucial role in triggering the expression of a given trait [13]. These dual characteristics transform narcissistic personality by shaping self-interested behavior, due to which individuals are likely to exhibit abusive tendencies in leadership roles, consequently optimizing the occurrence of workplace deviance. In addition to the above-stated reasons, the present study emphasizes grandiose expression because the stated personality trait is continuous and typically distributed in the general population [14].

The focus is exclusively centered on the U.S. population for multiple reasons. First, 1–2% of the U.S. population has a narcissistic personality disorder, according to Weinberg & Ronningstam’s [15] estimations. Beyond mere statistics, several articles endorse the idea that American exceptionalism is the belief that better complements the grandiose variant of narcissism. The imaginary high moral ground promotes a sense of entitlement within the U.S. population, which is deeply rooted in the core feature of narcissistic traits [16]. Researchers often ponder why narcissism is particularly considered an American trait. Is it due to individualism or their self-focus, which appears to be higher than other nations? The debate can be extended based on the notion that a desire to stand out from a crowd makes the United States a breeding ground for narcissism [17].

Thus, the infused need for the study stems from the inconclusive and complex mechanism of narcissism, where literature witnesses organizational unrest due to notable deceptive outcomes. Given the scenario, a framework (see Fig. 1) is needed that captures the effect of narcissistic rivalry and admiration on leader narcissism in the presence of self-interested behavior as a mediator. Secondly, the addition of workplace deviance in the framework is another obligation to be tested empirically because grandiose narcissism falls in the realm of dark triad personality. Hence, the disruptive outcomes are apparent, which negates the optimistic view of narcissism. As an argument, the behavioral effect of narcissism in a leadership role lies in the femininity of narcissistic traits, raising the question of whether these traits alone are sufficient to shape leader narcissism, or if additional behavioral actions are needed to enable a smoother transition. Lastly, the addition of sequential mediation provides another interesting pathway that the study has investigated to offer meaningful insights into the leadership and narcissism literature.

Fig. 1.

Conceptual model

Literature review

Theoretical framework

The present study adopts a broader approach to explain the conceptual framework by reviewing self-determination theory (SDT) and trait activation theory (TAT). The integrated perspective of motivation and personality theory offers a unified framework that subdues the challenges of explaining SDT and TAT in a similar narrative. The proposed theoretical lens expands the scope by describing the intellectual roots of both theories and coordinates them to recount the integrated perspective. Since the SDT’s principles are rooted in humanistic psychology, it majorly emphasizes the inherent tendency of individuals toward self-actualization [18]. Over time, behaviorism dominated experimental psychology, which sparked the ideology that external and situational parameters trigger human behavior [19]. However, humanistic psychology surfaced as a critique to counter the behaviorist paradigm. The core of STD was driven by socio-psychological experiments, which reveal that human motivation relies on external conditions and intrinsic factors given birth by individuals [20]. The autonomous motivation is further explained by Deci & Ryan [20], explaining that within the SDT realm, interpretations arising from individual’s experiences shape their behavioral regulation. Linking the debate with concepts such as narcissism and deviant behavior, the proposition of the study sheds light on the paradoxical behavior of narcissists, concentrating the focus on grandiose self-presentation while answering this burning question of either this artificial display of self-destructive tendencies turns individual into abusive leader, leading to deviant behavior [21]. The organismic view emphasizes the two ends: controlled motivation influenced by external factors and autonomous motivation driven by personal interest. Given the scenario, the present framework conceptualizes that characteristics of narcissistic behavior fluctuate between these two-continuum given their grandiose self-perception and external validation [22].

The proposed framework involving personality traits of grandiose narcissism looks upon two of its dimensions: narcissistic rivalry and narcissistic admiration. By employing self-determination theory, it can be argued that narcissistic rivalry (a defensive form of narcissism) and narcissistic admiration (a charming form) are two motivational states that feed on ego, hostility, manipulation, self-validation, etc. Since the STD theoretical lens reflects the motivation behind a choice, individuals in the persuasion of such traits long for validation or external reward. This deeply rooted form of narcissistic motivation intensifies individual’s characteristics, turning them into narcissistic leaders. Additionally, the self-interesting behavior of an individual is another reflection of narcissistic motivations that are ideally linked to both controlled motivation and autonomous motivation. Thus, such behavior can act like a bridge that channels such motivations into actions by focusing on personal gains only. The SDT perspective is also well-suited in the case of workplace deviance because leaders with self-centered motivations highly engage in deviant behaviors that are against organizational ethics since the focus is on personal goals rather than shared benefits.

Further support is given by the trait activation theory of Tett & Guteman [23], which proclaims that the influence of personality traits on individuals’ behavior is not consistent, building an argument that behavioral effect not only depends on inherent traits but also specific context and situational cues [24]. The traditional belief of NARC postulates that, specifically, high narcissistic rivalry leads to more aggressive behavior due to a threat to an individual’s superiority. Hence, the assumption is well-aligned with trait activation theory, which emphasizes that the disposition of personality traits is contextual-based [25]. These situational cues activate the narcissistic traits to delve into the pool of self-interested behavior, which is further responsible for deviant behavior. Thus, the study induces a trait activation perspective into the self-determination theoretical lens and explains that the core of grandiose narcissism (especially an assertive facet) is strongly tied to autonomous motivation.

Grandiose narcissism (narcissistic admiration and rivalry model)

Narcissism, a complex psychological phenomenon, emerges in two distinct forms: narcissistic personality disorder (a clinical pathology) and narcissistic personality trait (a pervasive pattern with less severity) [26]. Since narcissistic individuals are fully consumed by fantasies of boundless power, love, and success, their fixated sense of self-importance is reflected in their exaggerated accomplishments. Following this view, an individual is either classified into a dichotomous category of narcissistic personality disorder or not. Based on the established classification, scholars view it as a heterogeneous construct delineated into two distinct dimensions: grandiose and vulnerable narcissism. While vulnerable narcissism is a kind of psychological dysfunction that feeds on emotional volatility and fragile self-esteem [27] grandiose narcissism, on the other hand, concentrates on self-promotion and enhancement, which aligns with low agreeableness and high extraversion [15]. Thus, individuals exhibiting traits show arrogance and immodest behavior and demand social privileges. In addition to this, the lack of psychological distress in individuals with grandiose narcissism advocates a resilient self-image perception, suggesting that the individuals with stated personality traits experience less discomfort and emotional disturbance. Hence, it is justifiable to assert that the grandiose form of narcissism aligns more closely with sub-clinical narcissism (a personality trait) compared to pathological expression (a personality disorder). Interestingly, in an organizational setting, specifically in a leadership context, the focus is preliminarily dedicated to grandiose narcissism as it is more suitable to the stereotypical perspective of the classic narcissist at the workplace.

Further evidence divides narcissism into two perspectives: grandiose narcissism as either a unitary or multidimensional construct. However, the dominant side of the literature prefers a heterogenous view linked to divergent outcomes [27, 28]. Among others, the NARC (Narcissistic Admiration and Rivalry Concept) model is one of the models that address the stated paradoxes as it offers a more pronounced mechanism of grandiose narcissism by explaining the agentic and antagonistic form of narcissism, namely narcissistic admiration and narcissistic rivalry. According to Back et al. [29], narcissistic admiration thrives upon a foundation of assertive self-enhancement and promotion), while narcissistic rivalry is strongly intertwined with self-protection and defensive posturing.

On the other hand, narcissistic rivalry, an antagonistic trait, is activated when the feeling of grandiosity and supremacy is challenged or questioned. Resulting in aggressive and hostile behavior [30]. From a theoretical standpoint, the default mode of grandiose narcissistic behavior is filled with narcissistic admiration. In contrast, narcissistic rivalry is considered a reactive mode, which activates in response to perceived threats. The origin of the rivalry mode can also be connected to the history of failures, as mentioned in the literature. The argument becomes more compelling as scholars proclaim that the connection between these two dimensions strengthens with age. Compared to narcissistic rivalry, individuals appear to score higher on narcissistic admiration. This prompts scholars to infer that narcissistic admiration may act as a necessary precursor for the development of narcissistic rivalry. However, it alone is not sufficient to fully shape narcissistic rivalry. Therefore, the two-dimensional model is pertinent to the discourse of leadership context.

Self-interested behavior

Self-interest is regarded as one of the foundational constructs frequently used in organizational, behavioral, and social science theories [31]. It is assumed that discarding the uniformity concept and viewing self-interest as a variable trait, tending to be influenced by individual differences. Hence, various studies build on the notion, revealing a blurred boundary existing between the fundamental assumption of universal, wealth-maximizing self-interest and greed [32]. Thus, the argument shifts from uniform-variable debate to the nature of self-interest by identifying its intensity through unipolar and bipolar spectrum levels [33].

The diverse course of literature advanced the alternative propositions to define self-interest behavior. For example, Kish-Gephart et al. [32] posited it as a deliberate action performed with an intent to achieve either tangible, intangible, or personal benefit. Nevertheless, the behavior of this particular nature does have consequences. On the other hand, the neoclassical economic paradigm idealized self-interest as a dominant behavior, compelling individuals to act in ways that augment their gains with minimum cost. Despite the primary criticism, evidence from various arguments acknowledges that self-interest affects individuals’ perceptions and behaviors. The stated effect is so strong that its power is often overestimated [34]. Thus, the study capitalizes on bipolar momentum and argues that self-interested behavior is a set of actions that benefit oneself while harming or restricting others.

Workplace deviance

The concept of deviance has long been a subject of psychological, sociological, and criminological discourse. Workplace deviance falls under counterproductive work behavior in an organizational setting, hindering businesses for centuries [35]. Counterwork behavior is a broader term encompassing a range of behaviors predisposed to inflict harm on organizations and their members. The research on counterwork behaviour has broadened, encompassing a wide range of yet unique sub-sets of behavior, including workplace deviance, retaliation, social undermining, or bullying [36]. Bowles & Gelfand [37] categorized workplace deviance as a voluntary action infringing on organizational rules and harming individuals’ well-being.

The seminal work of Robinson & Bennett [38] identified three distinct research trends on workplace deviance. Firstly, specific literature characterized deviant behavior as a reactive response to environmental stimuli. Secondly, a strand of literature posits that deviant behavior reflects intrinsic personality traits. Lastly, a perspective considers deviant behavior a contextual adaptation shaped by social dynamics [38]. Bennett et al. [35] also argued that personnel and resource exploitation can be a form of deviant behavior to fulfill personal or communal benefits. Advancing the discourse of the concept, the predominant side of the literature bifurcates the terminology into two broader categories: organizational deviance and interpersonal deviance [39]. This well-acknowledged differentiation is predicated upon Robinson & Bennett’s [38] framework of workplace deviance based on principal dimensions and severities levels: interpersonal and organizational and minor and severe. The minor severity level of interpersonal deviance concentrates on political notions, including gossip or favoritism. On the other hand, a serious instance is associated with an act of personal aggression.

In contrast, minor instances of organizational deviance are linked to production deviance, such as wasting resources, whereas severe forms are associated with property deviance, such as theft or equipment sabotage. Thus, scholars endeavor to be of paramount significance in preventing workplace deviance by focusing on various factors, among which personality traits emerge as the strongest predictor. Hence, the study builds its premise on Robin & Bennett’s [38] framework and views workplace deviance as a voluntary set of actions that violate organizational norms and conduct.

Leader narcissism

Research on narcissism dates back to its origin, where it has been inquired psychologically [40]. Havelock Ellis first introduced the concept in 1989 about the ancient tale of Narcissus, “the person who was so vain that he deeply loved his reflection in the pool of water and slowly wasted away rather than cease gazing at himself” [41]. By that time, Freud integrated the concept with a psychoanalytic theory, where it was used to identify those individuals who portray an excessive amount of self-determination due to the malign relationship between their libido and ego [42].

The predominant theoretical view, both in social and personality psychology and organizational psychology, peeked into narcissism from a trait perspective [43]. The lens describes narcissism as a “relatively stable individual difference factor” that labels the concept as a sub-clinical trait rather than a pathological condition. Thus, it appears to be a part of every human being, but the intensity varies. With the conjunction of Machiavellianism and psychopathy, narcissism devises this dubious dark triad of personality. This dark-side trait has a more negative impression in the organizational setting. In this context, leader emergence fascinates narcissists because of prestigious leadership characteristics. Scholars proclaim that narcissists are seemingly famous because they spill cues of attractiveness, humor, and competence. Thus, their outward appearance makes them charismatic leaders-like figures [44].

Rosenthal & Pittinsky [45] explained narcissistic leadership from a behavioral perspective with an argument that when the actions of leaders surface because of their own ego-maniacal needs and beliefs, the interests of institutions and constituents get neglected. The other view on narcissistic leadership echoes that “exercise of power for strictly personal or selfish ends.” [46]. Ingrained in this lens is the distinction between leaders’ traits of narcissism and narcissistic leadership. Although leaders’ trait narcissism is likely to navigate the journey toward narcissistic leadership, it is neither considered a pre-requisite nor is narcissistic leadership necessarily a consequence of leaders’ trait narcissism. It can be implied that non-narcissistic individuals might engage in narcissistic leadership, or individuals with high-trait narcissism might refrain from narcissistic leadership.

Hypothesis development

Narcissistic admiration and rivalry and leader narcissism

The scholarly discourse displays the core aspects of narcissistic personality traits (narcissistic admiration and narcissistic rivalry) that palpably shape leader narcissism. Since narcissistic admiration is called an assertive facet and narcissistic rivalry an antagonistic facet, social cues engraved in narcissistic admiration elicit more favorable responses from others. Narcissistic admiration in leadership literature is viewed as a positive influence, as such leaders are usually driven by strong ambitions that inspire followers. In addition, leaders with higher narcissistic admiration tendencies generally exude charm and confidence that enhance their social influence [47]. However, extremism may promote self-interested behavior that defies the rules of ethical leadership. From a theoretical perspective, it can also be argued in the light of self-determination theory that leaders with a high tendency of narcissistic admiration may look for ways to fulfill their psychological needs, idealizing their charisma and self-confidence as motivational factors ideally linked to their intrinsic desires [48].

On the other hand, the TAT perspective highlights that situational cues have a more significant role in activating narcissistic traits and shaping self-enhancement behaviors. Meanwhile, leaders with high narcissistic rivalry may experience unfulfilled psychological needs, resulting in compensatory behavior. Under the TAT perspective, it can further be explained that high-pressure situations can activate leaders’ antagonistic tendencies, reinforcing behaviors that may promote self-preservation [49]. Empirical studies also emphasize that individuals who scored high in competency and social relations in narcissistic admiration promote charismatic and dominant leadership traits. In addition, such individuals have a particular impression and charm that lures others to follow them [29]. Henceforth, the stated arguments may posit that both dimensions of grandiose narcissism center on egocentric inclinations and status-seeking behaviors that sculpt the narcissistic tendencies of individuals in leadership roles. In conjunction, the feedback cycle engendered by narcissistic rivalry and admiration also amplifies the narcissistic disposition of leader by magnifying their never-ending thirst for external validation to assert dominance. Thus, it can be hypothesized that:

H1

Narcissistic rivalry has a significant and positive impact on leader narcissism, such that when narcissistic rivalry is high, it intensifies a leader’s narcissistic trait.

H2

Narcissistic admiration has a significant and positive impact on leader narcissism, such that when narcissistic admiration is high, it intensifies a leader’s narcissistic trait.

Self-interested behavior, narcissistic admiration and rivalry, and leader narcissism

The association of the NARC model with leader narcissism can effectively be understood in the presence of self-interested behavior since narcissistic individuals have a stronger inclination toward self-promotion and enhancement. It implies that such individuals are prone to engage in behavior that purely concentrates on personal gains and interests [50]. Literature also speculates that self-interested behavior is driven by underlying motivations that are chipped to narcissistic admiration and rivalry, as individuals carrying these traits either tend to maintain a positive self-view or focus on a competitive spirit to humiliate others [51]. Given this explanation, the integrated version of SDT and TAT emphasize that narcissistic admiration and rivalry can be motivational tendencies that promote self-interested behavior, especially in a competitive environment. This behavioral mechanism further provides an opportunity for individuals to manifest their narcissistic traits into leadership roles. It is also suggested that self-interested behavior may act as a bridge to transform narcissistic admiration and rivalry into the expression of leader narcissism. When highly engaged in self-interested behavior, a leader may activate their narcissistic traits, often neglecting organizational and individual well-being. This also establishes a feedback loop where narcissistic tendencies are fueled by self-interested behavior, further embedding narcissism attributes in leadership roles [52]. In this context, individuals with high narcissistic admiration may dive into the pool of self-interested actions to garner recognition and elevate their status in social hierarchies. However, this behavior can shape competitive dynamics, reinforcing narcissistic rivalry in leadership roles. The existing frameworks also reveal that self-interested behavior is helpful for narcissistic individuals to shape them into formidable figures where their personal gains can be achieved at the expense of others.

H3

Self-interested behavior of individuals mediates the relationship between narcissistic rivalry and leader narcissism as self-interested behavior channelizes narcissistic rivalry motivation into narcissism trait.

H4

Self-interested behavior of individuals mediates the relationship between narcissistic admiration and leader narcissism as self-interested behavior channelizes the motivational state of narcissistic admiration into narcissism trait.

Self-interested behavior, narcissistic admiration and rivalry, and workplace deviance

The grounded work of Back et al. [29] highlights two distinct characteristics of narcissism trait: narcissism admiration and narcissistic rivalry, which shed light on the assertive and antagonistic sides of narcissism. Scholars, in this regard, exhibit that when such individuals navigate workplace dynamics through self-interested behavior, they form deviant actions that diverge from established norms and ethical considerations [53]. From SDT perspective, self-interested behavior can be viewed as a motivational state fueled by unfulfilled psychological needs which encourage individuals to perform deviant actions. Similarly, the TAT perspective highlights the significance of environmental triggers that intensify deviant actions associated with narcissistic traits. Particularly in the case of rivalry, the threatened self-esteem of individuals empowers them to channel their hostility into deviant behavior.

On the other hand, admiration-driven deviance allows individuals to improve their image by exploiting situations, giving them the edge to maintain their superiority while neglecting ethical considerations. It is also argued that individuals tend to exhibit antisocial tendencies when aware of the situation threatening their self-interests [54]. This competitive nature intensifies their rivalry, leading them to sabotage or exploit others in order to achieve personal goals. However, in some cases, they may adopt subtle manipulation techniques to preserve their image while simultaneously achieving their goals at the expense of others. Such behavior is filled with manipulation and serves as a pathway to channel narcissistic tendencies into harmful actions [55]. Hence, the conclusion can be drawn from this proposition that self-interested behavior as a mediator offers a pathway through which narcissistic traits such as admiration and rivalry pollute personal agendas and corrupt workplace culture by creating deviant behavior where unethical conduct can flourish.

H5

Self-interested behavior of an individual mediates the relationship between Narcissistic rivalry and workplace deviance as self-interested behavior channelizes motivational state of Narcissistic rivalry to highly engage in deviant behavior.

H6

Self-interested behavior of an individual mediates the relationship between Narcissistic admiration and workplace deviance as self-interested behavior channelizes motivational state of Narcissistic admiration to highly engage in deviant behavior.

Leader narcissism and workplace deviance

Organizations encounter multiple changes that impede their performance and growth. These perturbations affect leader and employee behavior [56]. The situation particularly intensifies when a leader exhibits narcissistic traits as their behavior creates a toxic environment, leading to increased aggression and deviant behavior. The self-determination perspective can support the prevailing argument as the theoretical lens centers on three core psychological needs, including competence, autonomy, and relatedness [57]. However, when these needs by any means are challenged or derailed, the likelihood of counterproductive work behavior increases. The argument can further be discussed in the light of trait activation theory, as it explains that narcissistic traits can be activated in response to environmental triggers. The manifestation of such behaviors creates a hostile environment where employees replicate deviant actions or react to maladaptive outcomes. Thus, the combined version justifies the argument that motivational deficits and situational factors nurture leader narcissism, eventually setting the tone for deviant culture.

Scholars also argued that the narcissistic traits of leaders are often characterized by entitlement, grandiosity, and exploitation that may infuse toxicity in organizational culture. Pieces of evidence also echo that leaders exhibiting extreme levels of narcissistic traits show aggressiveness, which tends to affect their social relationships [58]. Since narcissistic leaders prioritize personal gains over collective well-being, creating an environment that promotes deviant behavior in the form of theft, low productivity, and absenteeism. This deviant behavior also emerges from organizational aggression displayed by leaders, which is then reciprocated by followers devoted to such leaders [59]. In conjunction with this, the absence of harmony among employees fosters ostracism as some of them create alliances with the leader while some oppose them. Besides, exhibiting narcissistic traits often display aggression in response to destructive criticism, which provokes deviant behavior in the workplace. This is because when individuals perceive narcissistic tendencies in their leaders, they are more inclined to engage in immoral and unethical behavior, emulating the leader’s action [60]. The significant reflection can be seen in low productivity, lack of commitment, lack of organizational loyalty, etc., which contribute to workplace deviance as a reaction to negative behavior.

H7

Leader narcissism has a positive and significant impact on workplace deviance.

The argument above also highlights the complex chain that exists between narcissistic traits, self-interested behavior, leader narcissism, and workplace deviance. Hence, we also hypothesize that:

H8

The relationship of narcissistic rivalry with workplace deviance is sequentially mediated by self-interested behavior and leader narcissism, such that intensified rivalry of individuals leads them to engage in self-serving actions that promote deviant behavior in the workplace, influenced by high narcissistic tendencies within the leadership context.

H9

The relationship of narcissistic rivalry with workplace deviance is sequentially mediated by self-interested behavior and leader narcissism, such that heightened admiration of individuals allows them to engage in self-serving actions that promote deviant behavior in the workplace, influenced by high narcissistic tendencies within the leadership context.

Methodology

In pursuit of conducting an empirical inquiry, the study used a survey method to validate the study’s conceptual model at an individual level. A systematic sampling method is employed to gather the data from an online yet trusted platform, Prolific, known for its diverse pool of individuals and high response rate. Since the stated relationship is assessed in the context of the U.S., the study emphasized either working individuals or having past working experience domiciled within the geographical boundary of the United States. The survey includes a brief explanation of the terminologies used in the study to ensure a uniform understanding of concepts, allowing individuals to express accurate versions of their perceptions of Narcissism and Workplace deviance. Based on the criteria, 325 responses were received at the initial level. However, a few responses were omitted as they did not pass the attention checks. A total of 313 responses were considered the final sample size of the study.

From 313 valid responses, Table 1 indicates a nearly balanced gender distribution, with 48.9% of respondents identified as male and 51.1% as female. It is also revealed that most respondents belong to the 31–40 age group. Interestingly, most participants in terms of ethnicity were identified as white, 82.7% of the total sample. As far as marital status was concerned, 55.3% of the total sample were married, and 44.7% of the total were single. Most of the respondents have completed their tertiary education, as can be seen in Table 1.

Table 1.

Demographic profile

	Frequency	Percentage
Gender
Male	153	48.9
Female	160	51.1
Age
21–30 years	64	20.5
31–40 years	104	33.2
41–50 years	89	28.4
51–60 years	46	14.7
Above 61 years	10	3.2
Ethnicity
White	259	82.7
Hispanic/Latino	2	0.6
Black	15	4.8
Asian	19	6.1
Multiracial	13	4.2
African	4	1.3
Arab	1	0.3
Marital Status
Single	140	44.7
Married	173	55.3
Education
Below secondary	4	1.3
Secondary	89	28.4
Tertiary	220	70.3
Occupation
Employed full-time	300	95.8
Employed part-time	3	1.0
Self-employed	9	2.9
Retired	1	0.3
Work experience
1–9 years	62	19.8
10–19 years	98	31.3
20–29 years	96	30.7
30 years and above	57	18.2

The study adopted validated scales from prior literature to measure narcissistic admiration, narcissistic rivalry, self-interested behavior, leader narcissism, and workplace deviance. All the adopted scales were structured on a five-point Likert scale, ranging from strongly disagree to agree strongly. The study measured Narcissistic admiration and Narcissistic rivalry by using Back et al.‘s [29] scale. Each of the constructs was measured with nine items. On the other hand, leader narcissism was measured through the NPI-16 scale adapted from Liu et al. [61]. An eight-item measure was used for self-interested behavior, previously used by Liu et al. [61]. Lastly, workplace deviance was measured through Bennett & Robinson’s [62] scale. The measure consists of two sub-dimensions: interpersonal deviance and organizational deviance. The interpersonal deviance measure consists of 7 items, whereas nine are recorded to measure organizational deviance.

Data analysis

Common method bias

Survey-based studies must be vigilant against common method bias as it can alter the estimated relationship among constructs. Generally, it occurs when variables are measured through the same method, hence leaving the possibility of misrepresenting the stated relationship. CBM can mislead researchers by altering the direction or intensity of the relationship between variables [63]. Hence, the present study employs an MLMV statistical test to detect CBM. As argued by Chin et al. [64], MLMV, known as the measured latent marker variable method, offers an exception by adding an embedded inspection layer, allowing researchers to identify biases immediately. A separate variable irrelevant to the main variables of the study was added to the conceptual model and introduced as a marker variable. The analysis, thus, was performed with and without a marker variable, and a comparison of beta coefficients was made to detect the error. It is revealed that the changes in beta values were minimal after the inclusion of the marker variable. Hence, it is confirmed that the dataset and conceptual model of the study are not tainted by CBM, laying solid ground for subsequent findings.

Structural equation modelling

The study used Structural equation modeling to assess the model of the study. Extant literature claims that SEM has multiple benefits compared to other methods. SEM is a suitable method to evaluate the reliability and validity of the model from different angles [65]. The study mainly employed the PLS method to test the model’s reliability, validity, and proposed hypotheses.

Measurement model

The measurement model in this study is assessed by examining internal consistency and convergent and discriminant validity [66]. Workplace deviance is measured through two dimensions. Therefore, the measurement model has been evaluated at two stages to scrutinize first-order and second-order constructs. At stage 1 of the measurement model, the reflective formative approach is used to assess the model’s reliability, discriminant validity, and convergent validity [67]. Table 2 yields CA, CR, AVE values of all constructs that meet acceptable rates, surpassing the threshold value 0.7 and 0.5 [68]. The HTMT criterion assesses the correlation between constructs, as highly correlated constructs can be problematic for discriminant validity [69]. Table 3 confirms that the HTMT values of each construct have not surpassed the critical threshold of 0.85. Hence, the concerns related to discriminant validity are suppressed.

Table 2.

Measurement model (stage 1)

Construct	Item	Loading	CA	CR	AVE
Narcissistic Rivalry	NR1	0.651	0.880	0.903	0.510
	NR2	0.711
	NR3	0.726
	NR4	0.705
	NR5	0.723
	NR6	0.760
	NR7	0.743
	NR8	0.685
	NR9	0.716
Narcissistic Admiration	NA1	0.772	0.897	0.917	0.553
	NA2	0.713
	NA3	0.808
	NA4	0.797
	NA5	0.686
	NA6	0.794
	NA7	0.757
	NA8	0.800
	NA9	0.522
Self-interested behaviour	SIB1	0.690	0.866	0.895	0.516
	SIB2	0.761
	SIB3	0.737
	SIB4	0.646
	SIB5	0.726
	SIB6	0.760
	SIB7	0.751
	SIB8	0.668
Leader narcissism	LN1	0.680	0.938	0.945	0.520
	LN2	0.726
	LN3	0.632
	LN4	0.635
	LN5	0.694
	LN6	0.716
	LN7	0.749
	LN8	0.729
	LN9	0.749
	LN10	0.762
	LN11	0.751
	LN12	0.743
	LN13	0.730
	LN14	0.736
	LN15	0.765
	LN16	0.722
Interpersonal Deviance	ID1	0.715	0.884	0.909	0.590
	ID2	0.806
	ID3	0.795
	ID4	0.705
	ID5	0.724
	ID6	0.805
	ID7	0.819
Organizational Deviance	OD1	0.745	0.890	0.910	0.502
	OD2	0.642
	OD3	0.678
	OD4	0.655
	OD5	0.755
	OD6	0.751
	OD7	0.734
	OD8	0.718
	OD9	0.725
	OD10	0.672

Table 3.

HTMT criterion (stage 1)

Construct	1	2	3	4	5
1. Interpersonal Deviance
2. Leader Narcissism	0.585
3. Narcissistic Admiration	0.654	0.680
4. Narcissistic Rivalry	0.613	0.847	0.669
5. Organizational Deviance	0.489	0.691	0.630	0.566
6. Self-interest behaviour	0.809	0.686	0.677	0.686	0.554

To develop a higher-order measurement model, the study considered a two-stage approach. At this stage, the scores derived from lower-order constructs were retracted. The extraction of the scores helped in developing a new model where the higher-order construct represents the grouped lower-order constructs. Hence, the more recent construct is now considered a formative measure that must be evaluated in terms of outweight and t-statistics to estimate statistical significance. There is also a need to assess the VIF of this newly constructed formative measure to identify the potential multicollinearity challenges associated with the model [70]. It is apparent in Table 3 that outer loading surpassed the threshold criterion of 0.5, and t-statistics appear to be significant. The methodological rigor is further sharpened by a thorough assessment of multicollinearity through the VIF method. Table 4 reveals VIF values lower than 5, thus dismissing multicollinearity concerns. Given the scenario, the integrity of hierarchal modeling is still maintained. Further, the HTMT criterion was employed at this stage to differentiate one construct from another.

Table 4.

Measurement model assessment (stage 2)

Construct	Items	Weight	Loadings	AVE/ T values	VIF	CR
Workplace Deviance	ID	0.094	0.952	6.229	2.444
	OD	0.093	0.927	5.144	2.444
Narcissistic Rivalry	NR1		0.651	0.510	1.647	0.903
	NR2		0.712		1.827
	NR3		0.726		1.991
	NR4		0.705		2.962
	NR5		0.723		3.106
	NR6		0.760		1.890
	NR7		0.743		1.964
	NR8		0.685		1.628
	NR9		0.716		1.746
Narcissistic Admiration	NA1		0.772	0.553	2.181	0.917
	NA2		0.712		1.920
	NA3		0.808		2.493
	NA4		0.797		2.321
	NA5		0.686		1.783
	NA6		0.794		2.179
	NA7		0.757		2.305
	NA8		0.800		2.611
	NA9		0.522		1.457
Self-interested behaviour	SIB1		0.695	0.516	1.683	0.895
	SIB2		0.764		2.032
	SIB3		0.740		1.805
	SIB4		0.650		1.490
	SIB5		0.723		1.770
	SIB6		0.758		2.011
	SIB7		0.746		1.895
	SIB8		0.665		1.547
Leader narcissism	LN1		0.681	0.520	2.149	0.945
	LN2		0.726		2.346
	LN3		0.633		2.099
	LN4		0.635		2.133
	LN5		0.694		2.234
	LN6		0.716		2.544
	LN7		0.749		2.668
	LN8		0.729		2.565
	LN9		0.748		2.572
	LN10		0.762		2.956
	LN11		0.751		3.143
	LN12		0.743		3.583
	LN13		0.729		2.897
	LN14		0.736		3.113
	LN15		0.765		3.651
	LN16		0.721		3.269

Table 5 demonstrates that all the values are less than 0.85; hence, discriminant validity is established. The brief assessment of the measurement model confirms its reliability and validity, displaying the resilience of chosen variables against their respective measures. The subsequent findings lay a solid ground for structural model assessment.

Table 5.

HTMT criterion (stage 2)

Construct	1	2	3
1. Narcissistic Admiration	0.441
2. Narcissistic Rivalry	0.570	0.481
3. Self-interested behaviour	0.610	0.542	0.795

Structural model

Structural model analysis is generally performed to disclose critical layers of relationship among constructs, including direct effects, indirect effects, moderation effects, and sequential moderation or moderation. The model’s explanatory power was evaluated using the R² values for endogenous variables. The results reveal that Leader Narcissism has an R² of 0.360, indicating that 36% of its variance is explained by predictors such as narcissistic rivalry, narcissistic admiration, and self-interest behavior. For self-interest behavior, the R² value is 0.532, suggesting that the model accounts for 53.2% of its variance. Similarly, the R² value for Workplace Deviance is 0.482, indicating that the relevant predictors explain 48.2% of its variance. These R² values reflect a moderate to strong level of explanatory power, underscoring the model’s ability to capture the variance in the key endogenous constructs effectively.

Main effect

Table 6 displays a direct interplay between narcissistic admiration and leader narcissism, narcissistic rivalry and leader narcissism, and leader narcissism and workplace deviance. Narcissistic rivalry, narcissistic admiration, and leader narcissism (H1 & H2). Consistent with widely accepted views found in literature, findings reveal that narcissistic rivalry and admiration positively and significantly impact leader narcissism (β = 0.232, 0.153, p = 0.004, 0.003, f² = 0.042, 0.027). Leader narcissism and workplace deviance (H7): The substantial effect of leader narcissism on workplace deviance is quite revealing, as can be seen in Table 5 (β = 0.203, p = 0.000, f² = 0.055).

Table 6.

Structural model

Relationship	Beta	STDEV	t value	p-value	LL	UL	Decision
Direct effect
H1: NR→ LN	0.232	0.080	2.920	0.004	0.076	0.387	Supported
H2: NA→ LN	0.153	0.051	3.009	0.003	0.060	0.259	Supported
H7: LN→ WD	0.203	0.056	3.616	0.000	0.094	0.313	Supported
Mediation effect
H3: NR→SIB→LN	0.193	0.049	3.903	0.000	0.101	0.293	Supported
H4: NA→SIB→LN	0.074	0.026	2.883	0.004	0.033	0.136	Supported
H5: NR→SIB→WD	0.339	0.048	7.041	0.000	0.247	0.433	Supported
H6: NA→SIB→WD	0.125	0.029	4.366	0.000	0.076	0.190	Supported
Sequential mediation effect
H8: NR→SIB→LN→WD	0.039	0.039	2.467	0.016	0.014	0.015	Supported
H9: NA→SIB→LN→WD	0.014	0.015	1.989	0.007	0.047	0.005	Supported

Note: NR = Narcissistic rivalry; NA = Narcissistic admiration; SIB = Self-interested behaviour; LN = Leader narcissism ; WD = Workplace deviance

Mediation effect

The present study also investigates the mediation effect of the self-interested behavior of individuals as it yields deeper insights by revealing how the influence of narcissistic rivalry and admiration on leader narcissism and workplace deviance is influenced by self-interested behavior. The mediation effect, as illustrated in Table 6, reveals that the indirect impact of narcissistic admiration and narcissistic rivalry on leader narcissism through self-interested behavior (H3 and H4) is statistically significant (β = 0.193, 0.074, p = 0.000, 0.033), confirming the mediating role of self-interested behavior. Interestingly, the indirect effect of narcissistic rivalry and admiration on workplace deviance through self-interested behavior is statistically significant (β = 0.339, 0.125, p = 0.000, 0.000). The path coefficient of self-interested behavior for narcissistic rivalry and workplace deviance exhibits a strong influence of narcissistic rivalry on mediators that may result in workplace deviance, whereas, in the case of narcissistic admiration, the effect is weaker but notable.

Sequential mediation effect

The study also offers a nuanced explanation of the sequential mediation effect, exposing a complex interplay that occurs between narcissistic admiration, narcissistic rivalry, self-interested behavior, leader narcissism, and workplace deviance. A sequential mediation effect emerges when two or more indirect paths exist between independent and dependent variables. In this study, narcissistic rivalry and narcissistic admiration influence workplace deviance through self-interested behavior and leader narcissism. Table 6 illustrates that findings support H8 and H9 as sequential mediation occurs in both cases (β = 0.039, 0.014, p = 0.016, 0.007). Overall, results confirm a real sequential influence by revealing that the whole chain of influence is reliable.

Discussion

The prime purpose of the study was to present a framework where self-interested behavior mediated the relationship between narcissistic rivalry and admiration and leader narcissism and, along with leader narcissism, sequentially mediated the relationship between narcissistic rivalry and admiration and workplace deviance in the context of the U.S. population. On the association between narcissistic rivalry and admiration and leader narcissism, findings support the theoretical argument of the NARC model encapsulated in self-determination theory and trait activation theory. The higher path coefficient of narcissistic rivalry affirms the induced assumption that even though narcissistic individuals have a strong inclination to regulate their emotions based on intrinsic stimuli, unknown situational cues trigger the antagonistic trait, which leads to aggressive behavior and social conflict [71]. It can be implied that leaders with a higher tendency toward narcissistic rivalry prefer personal success. Therefore, they exhibit aggressive behavior and use abusive supervision to safeguard their grandiose self-view, especially when they are challenged.

However, findings linked to narcissistic admiration appear to be inconsistent. As argued by Gauglitz & Schyns [71], narcissistic admiration reflects the idea of self-confidence and bold vision; hence, such individuals exhibit charming behavior and produce positive work outcomes. On contrary, the sharpen emphasis on self-image undermines overall team cohesion [72]. The positive and significant association between leader narcissism and workplace deviance further unfolds two underlying pieces, suggesting external factors and intrinsic motivations both act as a stimulator to shape narcissistic tendencies. The strong and positive relationship between leader narcissism and workplace deviance confirms that narcissistic leaders prioritize personal gains over ethical considerations and potentially foster a toxic environment. In return, employees tend to engage in deviant behavior. The normalization of such behavior through unhealthy competition diminishes morale and trust. This further crunch embedded in employees may push them to adopt deviant behavior as they start assuming it is an appropriate coping strategy to sustain the toxicity. However, fair working environment are able to influence employees’ satisfaction adding value to the organization [73].

Consistent with prior findings, results also display the significant role of self-interested behavior as a mediator in both cases. This implies that self-interested behavior reflects self-serving actions, which can easily be found in individuals with higher narcissistic traits (admiration and rivalry). Together, it makes it easier for individuals to prioritize their personal agendas over organizational matters, thus offering a crucial pathway to becoming strong narcissistic leaders. Interestingly, the pattern is well-aligned with extant literature, implying that narcissistic individuals thrive when self-serving behavior is not monitored. In reality, the existence of an ethical crisis re-surfaces, normalizing corrupt behaviors such as manipulation, gossiping, aggression, rivalry, harassment, assault, etc.

Conclusion

Theoretical implications

The study offers a novel theoretical lens by introducing an integrated perspective of TAT and SDT to shed light on employees’ behavior in the presence of leader narcissism. Unlike existing frameworks that view leadership behavior and motivations separately, the induced perspective provides a balanced approach by explaining how leader narcissism arises from unmet psychological needs and can be triggered by certain situational factors. The study expands the scope of TAT and SDT by introducing a broader organizational context that narcissistic traits within leadership context affect employees’ behaviors through situational cues and motivational processes at the same time. By recognizing self-interested behavior as unethical behavior, the study reveals that it amplifies narcissistic traits, potentially transforming individuals into narcissistic leaders. The study expands the literature by disclosing that intrinsic factors play a significant role in shaping self-centered behavior. The study also reveals that narcissistic admiration and rivalry both drive individuals to embrace dark aspects of leadership characteristics that spill detrimental effects on workplace outcomes such as workplace deviance. This nuanced understanding further highlights how contextual and motivational aspects together strongly predict maladaptive organizational outcomes. By explicitly focusing on negative trait activation and toxic leadership context, the study fills in the gap in fragmented approaches that generally fail to associate personality trait activation with motivational processes.

The study also raises significant concerns by challenging widely accepted evidence on narcissistic admiration and positive work outcomes, acknowledging the findings of Jauk & Kaufman (2018), which claim that the higher the score of grandiose narcissism, the darker the link with the dark triad. Thus, in order to confront narcissistic tendencies in an organizational setting, there is a need to be vocal about substantial interventions. Upon sensing narcissistic traits in occupied roles, specifically in leadership roles, organizations must strategize meticulously. Diverse tactics should be considered and employed strategically, ranging from appeasement retaliatory approaches to defensive tactics. Further, introducing professional development programs is also pivotal to channeling narcissistic proclivities into constructive organizational outcomes.

Practical implications

The present study proffers substantive functional implications about the destructive aftermath of narcissistic leadership. Given the defined organizational structure, managerial or leadership members regularly interact with employees. Therefore, their adverse behavior may affect employee outcomes directly or indirectly. Thus, organizations must address the obstructive environment carefully crafted by narcissistic leaders. The toxic workplace atmosphere not only amplifies the deviant behavior of leaders but can also encourage such behavior among individuals. The study suggests firms remain vigilant about the presence of narcissistic tendencies in leadership roles because such individuals holding leadership positions could foster a toxic and poisonous environment. This environment creates agony, frustration, and distress among employees, potentially encouraging harmful behavior. Thus, organizations are incumbent to implement effective monitoring systems where individuals occupying leadership roles and manifesting self-interesting behavior can be monitored systematically.

Since management’s role in the entire process is critical to halt narcissistic tendencies, well-timed and proactive measures should be implemented to identify, eliminate, or, in some cases, discipline such leaders. Employees either remain silent or vocal when they recognize the negative characteristics of leaders, such as being cocky, corrupt, manipulative, and self-absorbed specie. Therefore, considerable attention should be diverted to social and psychological factors in the recruitment process, particularly in leadership positions. This is possible by employing personality and psychometric assessment tests, where positive personality traits such as openness to criticism, loyalty, and humbleness should be prioritized while hiring individuals. These assessments would also help individuals to identify individuals with strong narcissistic tendencies.

Institutions are also suggested to counsel and persuade leaders to partake in training sessions and programs that focus on the altruistic nature of behavior and shape the mindset by explaining how important it is to prioritize others’ interests over self-interest, especially in the context of leadership roles. Leadership training will also help leaders/managers recognize their narcissistic tendencies, further encouraging them to prioritize ethical behavior over self-serving behavior. Introducing cognitive behavioral strategies into leadership training would also help managers regulate their emotions, especially when they are sure their narcissistic traits can be activated. These training and development programs build their perspective to an extent where they may create a pleasant environment characterized by integrity and harmony.

Limitations and future directions

Despite offering meaningful contributions, there are certain methodological and contextual limitations in the study that should be addressed in future studies. Firstly, the study used a combined lens of self-determination theory and trait activation theory. However, the study did not look into specific situational cures that may result in the activation of narcissistic traits. Generally, trait activation theory explains that personality traits itself are the response of situational stimuli. Therefore, future studies are suggested to consider context specific cues such as performance pressure to gain better understanding of trait activation mechanisms.

Secondly, the study exclusively emphasized grandiose narcissism, hence, the vulnerable narcissism aspect is missing in the study which may equip scholars to understand how different form of narcissism expressions work in toxic environment. From a contextual point of view, the missing element of culturally specific context limits the generalizability of study. It is believed that such context not only shapes personality expressions but also plays key role in deviant behavior at workplace. Contrasting cultural comparisons such as collectivist society vs. individualist society is recommended to be studied in future within same framework.

Furthermore, the consideration of broader scope of workplace deviance also dilutes the specificity of findings. It is recommended to explore the factors in isolation to yield more targeted outcomes. Lastly, utilizing PLS-SEM methodology within cross-sectional setting also limits the causal interpretation of present findings. Future studies should focus on longitudinal or experimental designs to not only observe sequential events but also offer strong foundation for causal inference.

Abbreviations

AVE

Average Variance Extract

CA

Cronbach Alpha

CMB

Common Method Bias

CR

Composite Reliability

HTMT

Heterotrait-Monotrait ratio

ID

Interpersonal Deviance

LN

Leader Narcissism

MLMV

Measured Latent Marker Variable

NA

Narcissistic Admiration

NARC

Narcissistic Admiration and Rivalry Model

NR

Narcissistic Rivalry

OD

Organizational Deviance

SDT

Self-determination theory

SEM

Structural Equation Modelling

SIB

Self-interested Behavior

TAT

Trait Activation Theory

VIF

Variance Inflation Factor

WD

Workplace Deviance

Author contributions

All authors contributed to the preparation of the manuscript. Prof. Khalid and Ms. Kehkashan developed the research framework, supervised the research team, and provided critical feedback to enhance the quality of work. Prof. Khalid and Dr. Maggie handled the formal analysis, processed the data, carried out data collection, performed data analysis, were responsible for visual data presentation, and contributed to the manuscript drafting. Prof. Khalid, Ms. Kehkashan, Dr. Maggie, Mr. Haris and Dr. Sadiq did an extensive literature review, identified the literature gap, and prepared the whole write-up. All authors have read and agreed to the final manuscript version.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research. No funding.

Data availability

The dataset used and analysed during the current study is available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Ethics approval was obtained from the ethics committee of Fuzhou University of International Studies and Trade. The study was conducted with the participants’ informed consent.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.