Narcissism: A Comparative Look at Rosenberg vs. Kohut’s Perspectives

Narcissism is a complex and multifaceted psychological construct that has fascinated psychoanalysts for decades. Two key figures who contributed significantly to our understanding of narcissism are Marty Rosenberg and Heinz Kohut, both of whom developed distinctive psychoanalytic frameworks to explain the dynamics of narcissistic behavior and pathology. While they both explored the intricacies of narcissistic personalities, their theories diverge in important ways, particularly in their views on the origins of narcissism, the role of self-esteem, and how narcissistic individuals interact with their environments.

In this blog article, we will examine Rosenberg and Kohut’s theories of narcissism, comparing their perspectives to highlight the similarities, differences, and contributions each theorist made to the field of psychoanalysis. Understanding these two approaches provides valuable insight into how we conceptualize narcissistic behaviors today, both in therapeutic settings and within broader cultural contexts.

Rosenberg’s Concept of Narcissism: A Focus on the Narcissistic Paradox
Marty Rosenberg is known for his work on the narcissistic paradox, which focuses on the internal conflicts and dynamics of self-esteem in narcissistic individuals. In his view, narcissism is not merely about self-absorption or grandiosity, but is also tied to a fundamental vulnerability. Narcissistic individuals may appear outwardly confident, self-assured, or even arrogant, but their behavior masks deep-seated feelings of inadequacy, shame, and fragility. Rosenberg conceptualized narcissism as a defense mechanism against these feelings of inadequacy.

For Rosenberg, the narcissistic paradox is grounded in the idea that narcissistic individuals seek admiration and validation from others to bolster their fragile self-esteem, yet they also deeply fear exposure and vulnerability. This paradox creates an inner conflict between the desire for external validation and the fear of being seen as flawed. In other words, they crave admiration, but also fear it, as it might expose their internal emptiness or weakness.

Kohut’s Self Psychology: Narcissism as a Developmental Failure
In contrast to Rosenberg’s focus on the paradox of narcissism, Heinz Kohut, a pioneer of self psychology, introduced a groundbreaking approach to understanding narcissism that shifted focus from the internal conflict to the developmental origins of the disorder. Kohut believed that narcissism is fundamentally tied to the formation of the self—how the individual internalizes early experiences and the development of self-object relationships (i.e., relationships with caregivers or significant others that help form a cohesive sense of self).

Kohut proposed that narcissistic disorders arise from failures in early childhood development, specifically related to the nurturing of the self. According to Kohut, children need consistent mirroring from their caregivers—positive feedback that reinforces their sense of worth, uniqueness, and identity. If a child does not receive appropriate mirroring, self-cohesion can be compromised, leading to a fragile self and a narcissistic vulnerability in adulthood. Narcissistic individuals then continue to seek out mirroring from others throughout their lives, hoping to repair this early developmental deficit and maintain a coherent sense of self.

Unlike Rosenberg, who focused more on the internal conflicts of narcissism, Kohut emphasized the relational nature of narcissism. He saw narcissistic behavior not as a defense against inner inadequacy alone but as a **response to the lack of appropriate external validation during crucial stages of self-development.

Key Differences Between Rosenberg and Kohut’s Views on Narcissism
1. Theoretical Focus: Internal Conflict vs. Developmental Failure

Rosenberg’s View: Narcissism arises from a paradoxical defense mechanism that serves to protect the individual from feelings of inadequacy and shame. Narcissistic individuals are often caught in an internal tug-of-war between seeking admiration and fearing exposure.
Kohut’s View: Narcissism is the result of early developmental failures, particularly failures in mirroring and the creation of a cohesive sense of self. Kohut emphasizes the relational and developmental aspects of narcissism, framing it as a response to early childhood deprivation.
2. Self-Esteem and Narcissism

Rosenberg’s View: Rosenberg focused on self-esteem as central to understanding narcissism. Narcissistic individuals have a fragile sense of self-esteem and seek validation from others to shore up their self-worth. Their behavior is often an attempt to maintain an inflated sense of self and protect against feelings of vulnerability and inadequacy.
Kohut’s View: Kohut viewed narcissism as a disruption of the self caused by a lack of adequate mirroring. He did not conceptualize narcissism solely in terms of self-esteem, but rather in terms of a lack of cohesion in the self—specifically, the inability to maintain a stable, integrated sense of identity. His focus was on the relational dynamics that allow the self to develop and stabilize.
3. The Role of the Narcissistic Object (Other People)

Rosenberg’s View: Rosenberg’s theory highlights the paradoxical relationship with others. Narcissistic individuals may desperately crave admiration and approval from others but at the same time fear becoming too dependent or being exposed as inadequate. Their relationships with others are often characterized by manipulation or exploitation, as they try to maintain control over how they are perceived.
Kohut’s View: Kohut emphasized the importance of self-objects—people or relationships that provide necessary mirroring and validation for the development of a healthy sense of self. Narcissistic individuals, according to Kohut, seek self-object relationships throughout their lives to restore the self and fill in the gaps left by early failures in mirroring. Their relationships are seen as necessary for self-cohesion, rather than purely self-serving.
4. The Treatment of Narcissism

Rosenberg’s View: Treatment for narcissism, according to Rosenberg, involves working through the paradox of seeking validation while also avoiding exposure. Therapists may help narcissistic individuals understand and resolve the internal contradictions in their behavior and self-concept, ultimately leading to healthier self-regulation and a more realistic self-image.
Kohut’s View: In Kohut’s framework, treatment focuses on providing the appropriate mirroring and empathic responses that were missing in childhood. Kohut believed that the therapeutic relationship itself could become a self-object that helps to restore the cohesion of the self. The therapeutic process is a relational journey that helps the narcissistic individual re-establish a sense of self by finding someone who can provide the kind of empathic and validating interactions they lacked in their early years.
Key Similarities in Rosenberg and Kohut’s Approaches
Despite their theoretical differences, both Rosenberg and Kohut agree on several points:

The centrality of self-esteem: Both theorists acknowledge that narcissistic individuals have fragile or poorly regulated self-esteem.
Narcissism as a defense: Both see narcissism as a defense mechanism, though Rosenberg focuses on internal conflict and Kohut focuses on developmental deficits.
The importance of relationships: Both theories emphasize the role of relationships—whether they be with self-objects (Kohut) or others who validate and admire (Rosenberg) in maintaining a stable sense of self.
Conclusion: Integrating Rosenberg and Kohut’s Perspectives
In comparing Rosenberg and Kohut’s perspectives on narcissism, we see two complementary but distinct frameworks that help us understand the complexities of narcissistic behavior. Rosenberg focuses on the paradoxes that arise within the narcissistic psyche, emphasizing the internal conflicts that drive individuals to seek and fear validation simultaneously. Kohut, on the other hand, stresses the developmental and relational aspects of narcissism, suggesting that narcissistic individuals are responding to early deficits in self-cohesion that hinder their ability to maintain a stable sense of self.

For clinicians, understanding both approaches can provide a more comprehensive treatment plan for narcissistic individuals. Rosenberg’s work can help therapists understand the emotional paradoxes and contradictions at play, while Kohut’s self-psychology provides a relational and developmental context that highlights the importance of empathic understanding and self-object relationships in the healing process. Both approaches contribute to a deeper understanding of narcissism, enriching our therapeutic toolkit for treating individuals struggling with narcissistic disorders.