“We would probably leave if we didn’t have kids.”
“I don’t want our children to grow up in a broken family.”
“But I’m worried about what our conflict is doing to them.”
“Would they be better off if we stayed together?”

These are some of the most difficult questions a couple can face.

When a relationship is struggling, parents can feel torn between wanting to preserve their family and wanting to protect their children from ongoing conflict. But what does the research tell us about how children experience these decisions?

It is not simply about staying together or separating

It is understandable for parents to focus on the potential impact of separation. Separation can bring significant changes to children’s lives, including changes to living arrangements, routines, schooling and relationships with parents, extended family and peers (AIFS, 2025).

However, the research suggests that the question is more complex than simply asking whether children are better off if their parents stay together or separate.

A more helpful question may be:

“What are our children experiencing within our family right now, and how might their well-being be affected by either remaining together or separating?”

Children’s experiences of separation vary considerably. Their adjustment can be influenced by the circumstances surrounding the separation, the quality of their relationships with their parents, and the level of conflict before, during and after separation (AIFS, 2025).

This means that the quality of the family environment matters, not simply whether parents live together or apart.

What happens when children experience ongoing parental conflict?

Children do not necessarily need to understand the details of their parents’ relationship to be affected by it.

They may notice tension at the dinner table, hear arguments from their bedroom, sense when one parent withdraws from the other, or become anxious when conflict begins. Some children may even begin to feel responsible for keeping the peace.

Australian research provides important evidence about the relationship between inter-
parental conflict and children’s wellbeing. Drawing on data from Growing Up in Australia: The Longitudinal Study of Australian Children, the Australian Institute of Family Studies found that inter-parental conflict was associated with poorer health and wellbeing for mothers and children. Importantly, the research also identified differences between families who experienced conflict at some point and those experiencing persistent conflict. This suggests that reducing or escaping persistent conflict may be associated with recovery in some aspects of maternal and child functioning (AIFS, 2017).

This does not mean that separation is necessarily better for children.

Rather, it reminds us that the important question is not simply:
“Are the parents together?”
but also:
“What is the family environment like for the children?”

A couple may remain together and work towards reducing destructive conflict, improving communication and rebuilding their emotional connection. For another family, separation may eventually become the pathway they choose. The circumstances of each family are different.

An important distinction: conflict and domestic and family violence

It is important to distinguish between relationship conflict and domestic and family violence, abuse or coercive control.

The discussion in this article is primarily about couples experiencing relationship difficulties such as ongoing disagreement, emotional disconnection, repeated conflict, loss of friendship or intimacy, or uncertainty about whether they remain in love with one another.

It should not be interpreted as suggesting that couples experiencing domestic or family violence, abuse, coercive control or significant safety concerns should remain together for the sake of their children.

Where there are concerns about violence or safety, the situation needs to be considered within the context of safety and the individual needs of both children and adults. The appropriate response may be very different from the discernment process described here.

What about what the children want?

Children’s voices matter.

A child may say:

“I just want Mum and Dad to stop fighting.”

Another may say:

“I don’t want to have to move between two houses.”

Or:

“I want to see both Mum and Dad.”

These statements can provide valuable insight into what family life feels like for a child. Recent AIFS research highlights the importance of understanding children’s experiences following parental separation and considering their views in age-appropriate ways (AIFS, 2026).

However, there is an important difference between listening to children and asking children to decide whether their parents should stay together.

That decision belongs to the adults.

Parents can listen carefully to their children’s experiences without placing the responsibility for the future of the relationship on them.

What do children and young people want after separation?

Research also gives us an important insight into what children and young people themselves want when their parents separate. Lodge and Alexander (2010) highlighted that adolescent wellbeing is supported when parents are sensitive and responsive to their children’s needs, involve them appropriately in decision-making, and work to minimise parental conflict.

This was reinforced by research conducted by the Australian Institute of Family Studies . Carson, Dunstan, Dunstan and Roopani (2018) spoke with 61 children and young people aged between 10 and 17 whose parents had separated. Their experiences highlighted several things that children and young people wanted from their parents and the family law system.

They wanted their views to be listened to when parents were making decisions about parenting arrangements. They also wanted opportunities to have a voice in decisions about their care and living arrangements, rather than feeling that decisions were simply being made for them. Importantly, children wanted their concerns about safety and abuse to be taken seriously and acted upon.

The young people also expressed a desire for more information about the family law process, as well as access to counsellors, psychologists and support groups to help them navigate the emotional and practical challenges associated with family separation (Carson et al., 2018).

These findings remind us that separation is not simply a matter between two adults. Children and young people have their own experiences, concerns and needs, and their voices can be an important part of understanding what arrangements will best support their wellbeing. At the same time, involving children in decision-making does not mean placing the responsibility for adult decisions on them. Rather, it means creating opportunities for their views to be heard, considered and responded to in an age-appropriate way.

So, what questions might parents consider?

Rather than asking only, “Should we stay together or separate?”, parents might consider:

• What are our children experiencing in our relationship at the moment?
• How much conflict are they exposed to?
• Do they feel caught between us?
• What would need to change if we remained together?
• Are we both willing to make those changes?
• If we separated, how could we support our children’s relationships with both parents?
• How could we protect them from being placed in the middle?
• What would provide them with stability and security during a period of change?

These questions shift the focus from simply preserving the relationship or ending it to considering what kind of family environment the children are experiencing and what each possible pathway might mean for them.

Where does discernment counselling fit?

This is where discernment counselling can offer a different kind of support.

Discernment counselling was developed for couples who are uncertain about the future of their relationship, particularly where one partner is leaning towards separation while the other wants to preserve the relationship and pursue couples therapy.

Unlike traditional couples counselling, the immediate goal of discernment counselling is not to repair the relationship. The goal is clarity and confidence about the next step (Doherty, Harris, & Wilde, 2016).

For parents, this can provide an opportunity to slow down and consider the bigger picture:

• If we stay together, what will need to change?
• Are we both willing to work towards those changes?
• What would our children experience if we remained together?
• If we separated, how could we support our children through that transition?
• What kind of family environment do we want to create for our children, whatever happens to our relationship?

These questions do not necessarily require immediate answers.

Sometimes couples need time and professional support to move beyond the urgency of “Do we stay or do we go?” and begin to understand what each possible pathway might mean for themselves and their children.

Considering the future of your relationship?

The family environment you create — whether together or following separation — matters.

Discernment counselling provides a structured and respectful space for couples to slow down, listen, reflect and consider the possible pathways forward. The aim is not to persuade a couple to stay together or to separate, but to help each person develop greater clarity about the relationship and the direction they wish to take (Doherty et al., 2016).

If you and your partner are uncertain about whether to work towards rebuilding your relationship or consider separation, discernment counselling may provide a helpful place to begin.

References

ANROWS, 2017. Inter-Parental Conflict, Parenting, and Child Development in Australian Families, Australia’s National Research Organisation for Women’s Safety. Australia. 

Australian Institute of Family Studies. (2017). Inter-parental conflict, parenting, and child development in Australian families. Australian Institute of Family Studies.

Australian Institute of Family Studies. (2026). Children’s support needs following parental separation. Australian Institute of Family Studies.

Carson, R., Dunstan, E., Dunstan, J., & Roopani, D. (2018). Children and young people in separated families: Family law system experiences and needs. Melbourne: Australian Institute of Family Studies.

Doherty, W. J., Harris, S. M., & Wilde, J. L. (2016). Discernment counselling for “mixed-agenda” couples. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 42(2), 246–255.

Lodge, J., & Alexander, M. (2010). Views of adolescents in separated families: A study of adolescents’ experiences after the 2006 reforms to the family law system. Melbourne: Australian Institute of Family Studies

You might love each other deeply but still find yourselves having the same argument over and over again. You may struggle to communicate, feel emotionally disconnected, or wonder how you can rebuild trust after hurt or disappointment.

The Gottman Method uses a helpful metaphor called the Sound Relationship House to describe what helps couples build a healthy, lasting relationship.

A relationship is more than the absence of conflict

One of the important ideas behind the Sound Relationship House is that a strong relationship isn’t simply one where couples don’t argue.

Conflict is a normal part of relationships. In fact, research shows that 69% of disagreements are unsolvable (Gottman & Silver, 2015). Two people will inevitably have different personalities, histories, expectations, needs and ways of seeing the world.

The question is not, “How do we never disagree?”

The more important question is: “How do we stay connected when we do?”

The Sound Relationship House provides a framework for understanding how couples can develop that connection.

The foundations: friendship and knowing one another

At the heart of a healthy relationship is friendship.

This means more than simply enjoying each other’s company. It involves knowing your partner’s inner world—their worries, hopes, dreams, stresses, preferences and experiences.

In the Gottman Method, this is sometimes described as building love maps.

Think about it:

• Do you know what is currently stressing your partner?
• Do you know what they are looking forward to?
• Do you know what they are worried about?
• Do you know what helps them feel loved and supported?

Our partners continue to change throughout a relationship. Building a strong friendship means continuing to be curious about the person you married or committed to—not assuming you already know everything about them.

Small questions, meaningful conversations and genuine interest can make a significant difference.

Turning towards one another

Another important part of the Sound Relationship House is turning towards your partner. Throughout an ordinary day, couples make many small “bids” for connection.

A partner might say:
“Look at this!”
“You’ll never believe what happened today.”
“I’m really tired.”
“Can I tell you something?”
These moments can seem insignificant, but they provide opportunities to communicate, “I’m
here with you.”

We can respond by turning towards, turning away, or sometimes turning against.

Over time, these small interactions contribute to whether a couple experiences their relationship as a safe and connected place.

Building a strong relationship, therefore doesn’t always require grand romantic gestures.
Sometimes it looks like putting your phone down and listening.
Sometimes it is a hug at the end of a difficult day.
Sometimes it is simply saying, “Tell me more.”

Managing conflict rather than eliminating it

The Sound Relationship House also recognises that couples need skills for managing conflict.

Healthy couples are not couples who never disagree. They are couples who learn how to approach difficult conversations without allowing conflict to destroy their connection.

This includes learning to communicate more gently, listen to one another, understand the emotions underneath the disagreement, and repair when things go wrong.

Often, the argument we are having is not really about the thing we are arguing about.

A disagreement about money, housework, parenting, sex or time together can sometimes be connected to much deeper questions:
“Do I matter to you?”
“Can I depend on you?”
“Do you understand me?”
“Are we a team?”
“Am I safe with you?”

When couples begin to understand what is happening beneath the surface of their conflict, they can start responding to the deeper needs rather than simply fighting about the presenting issue.

Dreams, needs and the future

Another level of the Sound Relationship House involves making life dreams come true.

Every person brings hopes and dreams into a relationship. These might relate to family, career, faith, finances, lifestyle, personal growth or the kind of life they want to build together.

Sometimes couples become so focused on managing everyday responsibilities that they stop talking about the future.

A healthy relationship creates space for both partners to share their dreams and feel that those dreams matter.

This is part of becoming a team—not necessarily agreeing on everything but learning to understand and support one another.

Trust and Commitment

At the upper levels of the Sound Relationship House are trust and commitment.

Trust grows when partners experience one another as dependable, responsive and there for each other.

Commitment involves choosing the relationship and developing a shared perspective that allows you to see the good in your partner and the relationship, even when things are difficult.

Neither trust nor commitment means ignoring hurt or pretending everything is okay. In fact, rebuilding trust often requires honest conversations about what has happened, taking responsibility, making changes and demonstrating through actions that the relationship matters.

Building your relationship one level at a time

The Sound Relationship House reminds us that strong relationships are built rather than simply found.

You don’t have to have a perfect relationship to have a healthy relationship.
You don’t have to agree on everything.
And you don’t have to stop having conflict.

What matters is learning how to build the foundations of friendship, emotional connection, trust, commitment and effective ways of managing the inevitable challenges that come with sharing life together.

Sometimes couples come to counselling because they are struggling with a particular problem. But as we explore what is happening, we often discover that the issue is connected to something deeper in the relationship.

The Sound Relationship House offers couples a framework for doing just that—helping them move from simply trying to solve problems to developing a relationship where both partners can feel understood, valued, connected and part of the same team.

Because a strong relationship isn’t built in one conversation.

It is built in the small moments, the difficult conversations, the repairs, the laughter, the friendship—and the decision to keep turning towards one another.

If you’re ready to take the next step towards a stronger, more connected relationship, we’d love to help. Contact Living Vine Psychology & Counselling to arrange an appointment.

Reference:
Gottman, J. M., & Silver, N. (2015). The seven principles for making marriage work: A practical guide from the country’s foremost relationship expert (Revised ed.). Harmony.

Can our marriage be repaired? Should we separate? Is it too late to rebuild our relationship?

Sometimes both partners want to work on their relationship. But what happens when one person wants to save the marriage while the other is unsure, ambivalent, or considering divorce?

What is Discernment Counselling?

Discernment Counselling is a short-term process designed to help couples gain clarity and confidence about the future of their relationship.

It is different from traditional couples counselling. The immediate goal is not to resolve the couple’s problems or teach communication skills. Instead, the focus is on understanding the relationship, exploring each person’s perspective and considering what direction to take next.

Doherty describes this as a “pre-couples therapy” approach. Before beginning the work of repairing a relationship, a couple may first need to answer a more fundamental question:

Are we both willing to try to rebuild this relationship?

Discernment Counselling provides a structured environment in which both partners can explore that question without being pressured towards either staying together or separating.

Why was Discernment Counselling developed?

Doherty developed the model after recognising a gap in traditional couples therapy.

Many couples therapy approaches assume that both partners have at least some commitment to preserving and improving their relationship. But couples on the brink of divorce may not share the same goal.

One partner may be saying, “I want to save our marriage. I am willing to work on it.”

The other may be saying, “I’m not sure I want to stay. I’m not sure counselling can change how I feel.”

Doherty identified these couples as “mixed-agenda” couples and argued that they require a different approach from couples who arrive at therapy with a shared commitment to working on the relationship.

Who is Discernment Counselling for?

Discernment Counselling may be appropriate when:

• one partner is considering separation or divorce while the other wants to work on the relationship
• the couple is experiencing significant relationship distress and feels stuck between staying and leaving
• traditional couples counselling has been attempted, but one partner is uncertain about continuing
• both partners recognise that they need greater clarity before deciding what to do next.

It is particularly suited to couples where there is ambivalence—where the future of the relationship has not yet been decided.

It is not designed to persuade someone to remain in a relationship when they have made a firm and final decision to leave. It is also not appropriate where there are circumstances such as domestic violence or coercive control that make joint participation unsafe.

How does Discernment Counselling work?

Discernment Counselling is intentionally brief. The model developed by Doherty involves one to five sessions, with couples initially committing only to the first session before deciding whether they wish to continue.

The first session is generally longer, allowing time to understand the history and current crisis in the relationship. Subsequent sessions provide opportunities to explore the situation in greater depth.

An important feature of the model is that the counsellor spends time individually with each partner as well as together with the couple. This gives each person an opportunity to speak openly about their experience, hopes, fears and uncertainties.

The counsellor helps each partner explore questions such as:

What has happened to our relationship?
What has brought us to this point? What patterns, hurts, disappointments or decisions have contributed to the current crisis?

What have we already tried?
Have we attempted counselling, changed our behaviour, taken time apart or tried other ways of improving the relationship?

What would need to change?
If we were to try to rebuild the relationship, what would each of us need to do differently?

Am I willing to try?
Is there enough willingness to put divorce aside for a period of time and genuinely explore reconciliation?

This process encourages each person to look not only at their partner’s contribution to the difficulties, but also at their own contribution to the relationship’s problems. This can be an important part of gaining clarity, regardless of which direction the couple ultimately chooses.

What are the possible pathways?

Doherty’s model identifies three possible directions.

1. Continue the relationship without making significant changes

The couple may decide that they are not ready to make a major decision or change at that time.

2. Move towards separation or divorce

The couple may conclude that ending the relationship is the direction they wish to pursue.

3. Commit to reconciliation

The couple may decide to put divorce aside for a defined period and commit to intensive couples therapy and personal change to explore whether the relationship can be rebuilt.

Importantly, Discernment Counselling itself is not couples therapy. If a couple chooses the reconciliation pathway, they would then transition into appropriate couples counselling.

What does the research tell us?

Doherty et al, 2016 examined 100 consecutive couples experiencing significant relationship distress, and all were considering the possibility of divorce. Approximately half had already contacted a divorce professional, and m)any had previously attempted some form of couples counselling.

The researchers found that about half of the couples chose to move into couples therapy with the intention of reconciliation, while most of the remaining couples chose the divorce pathway. The study therefore demonstrated that Discernment Counselling could provide a structured process through which couples could make decisions about their next steps.

When you’re standing at a crossroads

Being uncertain about the future of your marriage can be an incredibly difficult place to be. You may feel caught between hope and disappointment, love and hurt, or the desire to repair the relationship and the fear that it may no longer be possible.

You don’t necessarily have to make one of the biggest decisions of your life while feeling overwhelmed by the crisis.

Discernment Counselling provides an opportunity to slow down, understand what has happened, listen to each person’s perspective and carefully consider the possible pathways forward.

Sometimes the next step is to work towards rebuilding the relationship. Sometimes it is to move towards separation. And sometimes the first step is simply gaining enough clarity to know what you need to do next.

If you and your partner are unsure whether to stay together, separate, or give your relationship another opportunity, Discernment Counselling can provide a space to pause, reflect and explore the way forward. Book a 15 minute introduction session with us today.

Reference:

Doherty, W. J., Harris, S. M., & Wilde, J. L. (2016). Discernment Counselling for “Mixed-Agenda” Couples. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 42(2), 246–255.

When someone uses the term “narcissist,” they’re usually describing a person who seems cold, callous, or lacking in empathy, who expects special treatment or disregards the needs of others; who constantly highlights their achievements while ignoring achievements of others; and who makes people feel dismissed or unimportant?

Whether it’s the self-promotion, cold callousness, or the sense of superiority—these patterns can deeply affect partners, children, employees, and friends.

The Experience Behind the Term “Narcissist”

If you ask someone about the narcissist in their life, they will often describe what it feels like to be on the receiving end of difficult behaviours such as: 

• Coldness or lack of warmth that leaves you feeling unseen or dismissed
• A sense of entitlement that disregards your needs
• Dominance or control that makes you feel powerless
• Exploitativeness or taking advantage of your efforts
• Self-promotion or constant focus on their achievements at your expense
• A lack of empathy that makes it hard to have a balanced, reciprocal relationship

Experiencing these behaviours repeatedly can feel harmful, confusing, and even destabilizing. Many people describe feeling emotionally drained, self-doubting, or anxious after repeated interactions. This is often referred to as narcissistic abuse—a term that captures the lasting impact of these behaviours on partners, children, employees, and friends.

Narcissistic abuse can follow a cycle which can exacerbate the emotional and psychological difficulty of these experiences. Understanding the pattern gives you language to validate your experience and start thinking about healing and protective strategies.

Traits vs. Disorder

Narcissism can be understood as existing along a continuum — from everyday traits such as entitlement or self-focus, through to the diagnosable condition of Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD).

• People may display narcissistic traits without meeting the threshold for a disorder. These include patterns of entitlement and grandiosity, exploitativeness or manipulativeness, dominance or control, lack of empathy or warmth, and attention-seeking or self-promotion.
• Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD) is a Cluster B personality disorder in the DSM-5, where pervasive patterns of grandiosity, need for admiration, and lack of empathy cause significant impairment across life domains.

Not every person with narcissistic traits has NPD. But whether traits or disorder, the impact on others can still be significant. There’s also some overlap across Cluster B personality traits (narcissistic, antisocial, borderline, histrionic), which means people sometimes reach for the word “narcissist” when what they’re really experiencing is a cluster of difficult behaviours.

The Takeaway: From Confusion to Clarity and Healing

If you’ve found yourself using the word narcissist to describe someone in your life, you’re not alone. Many people reach for this term because it captures something important about how that person’s behaviour makes them feel. What truly matters is not the label itself, but the understanding it gives you about the patterns at play.

Once you can see those patterns, you can begin to:
• Notice the impact on your own wellbeing
• Step back from taking responsibility for someone else’s hurtful behaviour
• Learn strategies to set clear boundaries and protect yourself

With the right insight and support, it becomes easier to break free from the cycle, restore your confidence, and move toward healthier, more balanced relationships.

If you’re struggling with the effects of narcissistic behaviour, contact us today to discuss your support options. Together, we can help you make sense of what you’ve experienced and start moving toward healing.

References

• American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing.
• Cain, N. M., Pincus, A. L., & Ansell, E. B. (2008). Narcissism at the crossroads: Phenotypic description of pathological narcissism across clinical theory, social/personality psychology, and psychiatric diagnosis. Clinical Psychology Review, 28(4), 638–656. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2007.09.006
• Campbell, W. K., & Foster, C. A. (2007). The narcissistic self: Background, an extended agency model, and ongoing controversies. In C. Sedikides & S. J. Spencer (Eds.), The self (pp. 115–138). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
• Campbell, W. K., & Miller, J. D. (Eds.). (2011). The handbook of narcissism and narcissistic personality disorder: Theoretical approaches, empirical findings, and treatments. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
• Miller, J. D., Lynam, D. R., Hyatt, C. S., & Campbell, W. K. (2017). Controversies in narcissism. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 13, 291–315. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-032816-045244
• Ronningstam, E. (2016). Pathological narcissism and narcissistic personality disorder: Recent research and clinical implications. Current Behavioral Neuroscience Reports, 3(1), 34–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40473-016-0060-y

What Is Spiritual Abuse?

Spiritual abuse happens when someone in a position of religious authority misuses scripture, doctrine, or their spiritual influence to manipulate or harm others. It can look like excessive control, fear-based teachings, public shaming or silencing honest questions. You may have been told that ” we can’t touch the lords anointed” and that obedience is the same as holiness—or that doubt equals rebellion. But control is not love, and fear is not faith.

The Bible warns us about those who misuse power:

“Woe to the shepherds who destroy and scatter the sheep of my pasture!” declares the Lord. – Jeremiah 23:1
God sees and grieves abuse done in His name. You were never meant to be used or diminished under the weight of spiritual authority.

You Are Not Alone

Many who have experienced spiritual abuse feel isolated, ashamed, or spiritually “lost” after leaving an abusive church or leader. You may be wrestling with fear: Was I the problem? Can I trust again? These questions are normal.

Spiritual abuse often creates a false image of God—harsh, distant, always disappointed. But scripture paints a very different picture of God’s heart:

“The Lord is close to the broken hearted and saves those who are crushed in spirit.” – Psalm 34:18
“Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest.” – Matthew 11:28

God does not shun you for walking away from harm. He meets you there—with compassion and healing.

The Journey of Healing

Healing from spiritual abuse takes time. It’s okay if you need space from church. God is not afraid of your anger, grief, or silence. He already knows—and He still stays.

For some, therapy with someone who understands religious trauma can be life changing. Others find comfort in support from friends, journaling, or simply reconnecting with God outside of institutional religion. There is no one “right” way to heal.

What matters is this: you are not beyond grace. Abuse may have tried to write shame into your story, but God offers a different narrative. One of restoration. One where you are seen, known, and deeply loved.

You Are Not the Abuse You Endured

Your worth was never based on your performance, submission, or silence. You are not the accusations, labels, or fears that were put on you. You are beloved. Full stop.

If you’re still trying to untangle what happened, or who you are now, that’s okay. Just keep going. Keep breathing. Healing is not linear, but it is possible. And you are never walking it alone.

 You don’t have to stay silent 

If this resonates with you, you are not alone—and you don’t have to process it in isolation. Reach out. Talk to a trusted friend. Start journaling your story. Spend time rediscovering who God is—apart from the voices that hurt you. And when you’re ready, we’re here to walk with you.

If you’ve experienced spiritual abuse and need a safe, supportive space to begin healing, we invite you to book an appointment with us today. Our counselling services are trauma-informed and faith-sensitive, created specifically to support people like you—those navigating the deep wounds left by spiritual betrayal.

A

Abuse Cycle

In narcissistic abuse, the abuse cycle typically follows three recurrent phases: idealisation, devaluation, and discard (Walker, 1979; Dutton & Painter, 1981). In the idealisation phase, the individual with narcissistic traits presents as highly attentive, affirming, and affectionate, often employing strategies such as love-bombing to rapidly foster emotional dependency. The devaluation phase involves an escalation of criticism, emotional invalidation, and other forms of psychological abuse, resulting in progressive erosion of the victim’s self-esteem and autonomy. The discard phase may involve abrupt withdrawal, abandonment, or replacement with an alternative source of narcissistic supply. Some cycles include a “hoovering” phase, wherein the perpetrator attempts to re-establish the relationship. While certain behaviours may be deliberately employed for control, others may reflect ingrained maladaptive interpersonal patterns. Regardless of conscious intent, the cycle is harmful and destabilising for the victim.

________________________________________

B

BIFF Method

An acronym for Brief, Informative, Friendly, Firm, developed by Bill Eddy for responding to hostile or manipulative communications, particularly in high-conflict situations (Eddy, 2014). In the context of narcissistic abuse, BIFF limits emotional engagement and reduces opportunities for escalation while maintaining clarity and professionalism. It is frequently used in co-parenting, legal, or workplace communication.

Blame Shifting

A defensive process in which responsibility for harmful behaviour is deflected from the perpetrator onto another party, often the victim. In narcissistic abuse, blame shifting serves to protect the perpetrator’s fragile self-concept and avoid accountability. While it can be consciously manipulative, it may also occur automatically as part of habitual defence mechanisms (Baumeister et al., 1998).

Boundaries

In interpersonal psychology, boundaries refer to the psychological, emotional, and physical limits that protect an individual’s autonomy and well-being. Individuals with high narcissistic traits often disregard or violate others’ boundaries, perceiving them as obstacles to their own gratification. Persistent boundary violations contribute to the erosion of the victim’s sense of agency and safety (American Psychiatric Association, 2013).

Bounded Choice

A communication approach in which the victim presents only pre-determined, safe options to the narcissistic individual, limiting opportunities for manipulation or derailment. This method supports boundary enforcement and decision-making control in high-conflict contexts (Lipsky, 2009).

Breadcrumbing 

A pattern in which the perpetrator provides sporadic and minimal positive reinforcement—such as occasional praise, affection, or attention—insufficient for a secure relational bond, but enough to maintain the victim’s emotional investment. In narcissistic abuse, breadcrumbing prolongs the victim’s hope for relational improvement, despite the absence of genuine commitment. The mechanism resembles intermittent reinforcement schedules in behavioural psychology (Ferster & Skinner, 1957).

Broken Record Technique

An assertiveness strategy in which the individual calmly and consistently repeats a set boundary or message despite attempts at diversion or escalation. This method is rooted in behavioural and assertiveness training and is particularly effective when the narcissistic individual attempts to derail or wear down resistance (Smith, 1975).

________________________________________

C

Cluster B Personality Disorders

A diagnostic grouping in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) comprising antisocial personality disorder, borderline personality disorder, histrionic personality disorder, and narcissistic personality disorder (APA, 2013). These disorders share core features of dramatic, emotional, or erratic thinking and behaviour. In the context of narcissistic abuse, individuals with narcissistic personality disorder—or with prominent narcissistic traits—may also exhibit traits from other Cluster B disorders, influencing the nature and severity of abusive patterns.

Co-dependency

A maladaptive relational pattern characterised by an excessive focus on meeting another person’s emotional needs—often at the expense of one’s own—accompanied by an over-reliance on external validation for self-worth. In the context of narcissistic abuse, the victim’s identity, emotional stability, and decision-making become disproportionately tied to the approval of the narcissistic partner. This dynamic frequently includes over-accommodation, avoidance of conflict, fear of abandonment, rationalisation of abusive behaviour, and emotional enmeshment. While the term is not a formal DSM diagnosis, its features overlap with dependent personality traits and are well documented in clinical literature (Beattie, 1987; Cermak, 1986).

Coercive Control

A strategic pattern of behaviours designed to dominate, intimidate, and restrict the victim’s autonomy. Common tactics include monitoring, isolation, gaslighting, threats, control over bodily autonomy, and the erosion of social connections. Coercive control is increasingly recognised in legal and policy contexts as a form of domestic abuse, and may be enacted with or without concurrent physical violence (Stark, 2007).

Covert Narcissism

A presentation of narcissistic pathology characterised by introversion, hypersensitivity to criticism, and passive-aggressive hostility, often concealed beneath a socially acceptable or even altruistic façade. In contrast to overt narcissists, covert narcissists may present as vulnerable or self-effacing in public, reserving manipulative and abusive behaviours for private interactions (Pincus & Lukowitsky, 2010).

Criticism (Sensitivity to)

An exaggerated reactivity to perceived negative evaluation. In individuals with narcissistic traits, even mild or constructive feedback can be experienced as a significant threat to self-esteem, potentially triggering defensive hostility or narcissistic rage. This hypersensitivity may stem from underlying narcissistic injury and fragile self-concept (Ronningstam, 2005).

________________________________________

D

Destabilisation

A process in which the perpetrator deliberately or inadvertently induces psychological disorientation in the victim, often through inconsistent communication, contradiction, or sudden behavioural changes. In narcissistic abuse, destabilisation undermines the victim’s ability to trust their own perceptions and decisions. While some destabilising acts are consciously manipulative, others may reflect entrenched interpersonal dysfunction (Herman, 1992).

Devaluation

The phase in the narcissistic abuse cycle in which the perpetrator shifts from idealising the victim to belittling, criticising, or emotionally withdrawing from them. This process erodes self-esteem and creates dependency by destabilising the victim’s sense of worth. Devaluation may be intentional or may occur reflexively when the victim no longer provides the level of narcissistic supply the perpetrator requires (Dutton & Painter, 1981).

Discard

A phase in which the perpetrator abruptly ends the relationship, emotionally withdraws, or replaces the victim with another source of supply. This can be enacted with cruelty or indifference, often after a prolonged period of devaluation. Although sometimes calculated to maximise distress or control, it can also reflect the narcissist’s inability to sustain attachment without continual gratification (Campbell & Foster, 2007).

Don’t JADE

An acronym for Don’t Justify, Argue, Defend, or Explain. This technique limits over-engagement and prevents providing the narcissistic individual with emotional “hooks” for further manipulation or invalidation. In narcissistic abuse recovery, avoiding JADE behaviours preserves emotional energy and reinforces boundaries (Stosny, 2013).

Double Bind

A no-win situation where a person is presented with two or more contradictory demands or expectations, each carrying negative consequences. In narcissistic dynamics, this fosters helplessness, shame, and dependency, as whatever choice the victim makes is wrong.

________________________________________

E

Ego

In psychology, the ego refers to the part of the self that mediates between internal needs, external reality, and social expectations. Healthy ego development relies on caregivers meeting a child’s needs for soothing, affirmation, and guidance, which are gradually internalised.

In narcissism, ego development is often incomplete or fragile. Instead of having an internal, stable sense of worth, the narcissist depends on others (“self-objects”) to regulate self-esteem. This creates a constant need for admiration, validation, or control, and leaves the ego vulnerable to shame, criticism, or perceived abandonment.

Emotional Abuse

A form of non-physical abuse characterised by persistent verbal aggression, humiliation, manipulation, gaslighting, and other tactics that undermine the victim’s emotional well-being. In narcissistic abuse, emotional abuse is a core feature and often precedes or accompanies other forms of control. Its impact can include complex post-traumatic stress disorder (C-PTSD) and long-term psychological harm (American Psychiatric Association, 2013; Herman, 1992).

Empathy (Deficit in)

In clinical terms, narcissistic personality disorder involves a marked impairment in empathic capacity—specifically, difficulty recognising or caring about the feelings and needs of others (APA, 2013). In narcissistic abuse, this deficit manifests as disregard for the victim’s suffering and an inability or unwillingness to respond compassionately.

Enabler

An individual who, knowingly or unknowingly, facilitates or sustains the abusive behaviour of the perpetrator. Enablers may minimise the abuse, defend the perpetrator, or discourage the victim from seeking help. While some act with deliberate intent to protect the perpetrator, others may be manipulated into supporting the abuse (Lamb & Keon, 1995).

Entitlement

A pervasive belief in one’s right to special treatment or unearned privileges, often at the expense of others. In narcissistic abuse, entitlement underpins many exploitative behaviours, leading the perpetrator to disregard the victim’s boundaries, autonomy, and rights (APA, 2013).

Exploitation

The act of using another person for one’s own advantage, whether for emotional gratification, status, financial gain, or other benefits. In narcissistic abuse, exploitation is often rationalised by the perpetrator’s sense of entitlement and lack of empathy. This may be deliberate or occur as an ingrained relational pattern (Campbell & Foster, 2007).

________________________________________

F

Fantasy (Grandiose)

A persistent preoccupation with visions of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love. In narcissistic abuse, such fantasies support the perpetrator’s inflated self-image and may serve as justification for exploitative or dismissive treatment of others (APA, 2013).

Flying Monkeys

Third parties recruited—wittingly or unwittingly—by the perpetrator to monitor, harass, pressure, or discredit the victim. These individuals may be manipulated into believing the perpetrator’s version of events, acting out of loyalty or misinformation. While some knowingly participate in abuse, others are unaware of their role (Freeman, 2017).

Future Faking

A manipulation tactic in which someone makes promises or commitments about the future to secure trust, gain compliance, or delay consequences, with little or no genuine intention of following through. It exploits hope and optimism to control or pacify others.

________________________________________

G

Gaslighting

A form of psychological manipulation in which the perpetrator persistently denies, distorts, or fabricates information to cause the victim to doubt their perception, memory, or sanity. Clinically recognised as a form of emotional abuse, gaslighting can be both a deliberate control tactic and an entrenched relational behaviour. Its effects include erosion of cognitive confidence and reality testing (Stern, 2018).

Gaslighting by Proxy

A form of gaslighting where the manipulator enlists a third party to deliver misleading, minimising, or discrediting messages. This creates the impression that the distorted perspective is objective or widely shared, amplifying confusion and self-doubt in the target.

Grandiosity

An inflated self-image characterised by exaggerated claims of abilities, achievements, or importance. In narcissistic abuse, grandiosity may manifest as dismissiveness toward the victim’s perspective, monopolisation of attention, and an assumption of superiority in all contexts (APA, 2013).

Grey Rock Method

A harm-reduction strategy used by victims to minimise engagement with an abusive person. The victim presents as emotionally unresponsive and uninteresting—limiting information sharing and emotional reactions—to reduce the perpetrator’s incentive for interaction. The approach derives from behavioural extinction principles (Skinner, 1953) and is most effective when combined with broader safety planning.

________________________________________

H

Haughtiness

A presentation of arrogance and superiority marked by disdain for others perceived as inferior. In narcissistic abuse, haughtiness is used to assert dominance and invalidate the victim’s perspectives or contributions. It may be overtly displayed or subtly embedded in tone and behaviour (APA, 2013).

Hoovering

A post-separation tactic in which the perpetrator attempts to re-engage the victim in the relationship, often after a period of distance or termination. Strategies may include professing love, offering apologies, promising change, or feigning vulnerability. While hoovering can be calculated to regain control or narcissistic supply, it may also arise from attachment insecurity and fear of abandonment (Carnes, 1997; Dutton & Painter, 1993).

________________________________________

I

Idealisation

The phase in the abuse cycle during which the perpetrator elevates the victim to an exaggeratedly positive status, offering intense praise, attention, and affection. This fosters emotional dependency and masks underlying instability in the relationship. Idealisation is often followed by devaluation when the victim fails to meet unrealistic expectations (Walker, 1979).

Image Management

The strategic cultivation of a socially favourable persona to conceal abusive behaviours and maintain credibility with outsiders. Image management may be deliberate—through charm, philanthropy, or public kindness—or habitual, reflecting deep-seated concern with status and reputation (Goffman, 1959).

Intermittent Reinforcement

A behavioural conditioning pattern in which rewards or positive responses are delivered unpredictably rather than consistently (Ferster & Skinner, 1957). In narcissistic abuse, intermittent reinforcement may not always be consciously applied but nonetheless strengthens the victim’s emotional bond to the perpetrator, making separation more difficult.

Isolation

The reduction or severance of the victim’s access to supportive social networks, resources, and opportunities for autonomy. Isolation can be intentional—used to increase dependency—or emerge from possessive or controlling tendencies. Regardless of intent, it heightens the victim’s vulnerability and diminishes their ability to seek help (Stark, 2007).

________________________________________

L

Limited Contact

A boundary-setting strategy involving minimisation of interaction with the abusive individual to essential matters only, often used when full No Contact is not possible (e.g., shared parenting). Communication is typically structured, brief, and unemotional (Eddy, 2014).

Love-bombing

An early-stage relational tactic involving excessive displays of affection, attention, and generosity aimed at rapidly creating emotional intimacy and dependency. In narcissistic abuse, love-bombing is often followed by devaluation. While sometimes consciously manipulative, it can also reflect unstable attachment and idealisation tendencies (Campbell & Foster, 2007).

Lying

The intentional communication of falsehoods to manipulate perceptions, protect self-image, or conceal behaviour. In narcissistic abuse, lying is used to evade accountability, distort reality, and maintain control. While often deliberate, habitual dishonesty may also reflect entrenched defensive functioning (Vrij, 2008).

________________________________________

M

Malignant Narcissism

A severe form of narcissistic pathology characterised by features of narcissistic personality disorder co-occurring with antisocial behaviour, paranoia, and aggression (Kernberg, 1984). In narcissistic abuse, malignant narcissists may exhibit extreme vindictiveness, cruelty, and a willingness to use violence.

Manipulation

The use of influence to control or exploit another person, often through deception, emotional coercion, or strategic omission of information. In narcissistic abuse, manipulation can be intentional or automatic, but its function remains to advance the perpetrator’s needs over the victim’s welfare (Braiker, 2004).

Mirroring

The imitation of another person’s behaviours, attitudes, or values to build rapport and trust.  In narcissistic abuse, mirroring is used to create a sense of deep compatibility in the early stages, making subsequent manipulation more effective. While sometimes calculated, it may also stem from a deficient core identity (Ritter et al., 2014). Inadequate mirroring in childhood is believed to contribute to the narcissist’s need for constant admiration, as they seek external confirmation of their worth.

________________________________________

N

Narcissistic Collapse

A state of emotional disorganisation and vulnerability that occurs when a narcissist’s usual defences—such as denial, grandiosity, or rage—fail to protect them from shame, criticism, or loss of control. It can involve withdrawal, depression, or volatile outbursts.

Narcissistic Mask

A metaphor for the socially constructed persona used by individuals with narcissistic traits to present as more functional, moral, or emotionally healthy than they are privately. The mask is adjusted depending on the audience and the needs of the moment (Goffman, 1959).

Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD)

A Cluster B personality disorder in the DSM-5, characterised by impairments in self and interpersonal functioning, including grandiosity, entitlement, lack of empathy, and a need for excessive admiration. In narcissistic abuse, these traits underpin patterns of exploitation, boundary violation, and control (APA, 2013).

Narcissistic Rage

An extreme, disproportionate anger response to perceived threats to self-esteem or self-image. In narcissistic abuse, rage can manifest as verbal attacks, threats, or physical aggression. While often triggered by criticism, the intensity may reflect underlying shame and insecurity (Kohut, 1971; Ronningstam, 2005).

Narcissistic Supply

The attention, admiration, or affirmation required to sustain the self-esteem of individuals with narcissistic traits. Sources of supply may be idealised, devalued, and replaced depending on their perceived value to the perpetrator. The need for supply drives many abusive behaviours (APA, 2013).

No Contact

A complete cessation of all forms of communication and interaction with the abusive individual. In narcissistic abuse recovery, No Contact is considered one of the most effective strategies for breaking the abuse cycle and preventing re-engagement, though it may be difficult in situations involving shared responsibilities or legal constraints (Stosny, 2013).

________________________________________ 

O

Overt Narcissism

A presentation of narcissistic pathology characterised by grandiosity, arrogance, and overtly exploitative behaviour. In narcissistic abuse, overt narcissists often display aggression, dominance, and a blatant disregard for others’ needs or boundaries (APA, 2013).

Object Permanence

In narcissism, this refers to the inability to hold a stable sense that others still care or exist in the relationship when they are not giving attention or validation. Without emotional object permanence, the narcissist may swing between idealising and devaluing others, creating unstable and exhausting relationship dynamics.

________________________________________

P

Parallel Parenting

A structured co-parenting arrangement in which contact between parents is minimised, with each managing their own parenting time independently. This approach reduces opportunities for conflict, manipulation, and control by the narcissistic parent (Saini et al., 2012).

Projection

A psychological defence mechanism in which an individual attributes their own unacceptable thoughts, feelings, or behaviours to another person (Freud, 1894/1964). In narcissistic abuse, projection shifts blame and deflects accountability, fostering confusion and self-doubt in the victim. This may occur consciously or as an ingrained defensive process.

________________________________________

R

Radical Acceptance

A dialectical behaviour therapy (DBT) skill involving acceptance of reality without judgment, even when the situation is distressing or unjust (Linehan, 1993). In narcissistic abuse contexts, radical acceptance can help survivors disengage from attempts to change the abuser and focus on their own recovery.

Rage (Narcissistic)

An extreme anger reaction to perceived threats to self-image, often disproportionate to the triggering event. Narcissistic rage may include verbal abuse, threats, or physical violence. Although frequently precipitated by criticism or perceived disrespect, it is rooted in underlying shame and vulnerability (Kohut, 1971; Ronningstam, 2005).

Reactive Abuse

A situation in which the victim, after prolonged exposure to abuse, responds with aggression or hostility, which the perpetrator then uses to portray the victim as the abuser. While the reaction is understandable as a stress response, it can have legal and relational consequences (Herman, 1992).

Red Flags

Behavioural warning signs that may indicate the presence of narcissistic abuse. These can include boundary violations, excessive flattery early in the relationship, inconsistent behaviour, dishonesty, and controlling tendencies. While not diagnostic, red flags can aid early recognition and prevention (Campbell & Foster, 2007).

________________________________________

S

Scapegoat

An individual—often a child in a narcissistic family system—who is unfairly blamed for family problems and subjected to disproportionate criticism or punishment. Scapegoating serves to protect the perpetrator’s self-image and deflect responsibility (Miller, 1981).

Self-Object

A concept from Heinz Kohut’s self-psychology, referring to how individuals experience others as extensions of themselves that serve vital functions for self-esteem regulation. Narcissists often treat people as self-objects, relying on them for admiration, validation, or a sense of identity, rather than engaging with them as separate, autonomous beings.

Separation–Individuation (Mahler’s theory)

The process where a child forms a separate identity while maintaining a secure attachment to the caregiver. In the development of narcissism, problems in this stage are thought to contribute to fragile self-identity and dependence on external validation. Narcissistic individuals may fear abandonment yet also resist closeness, replaying unresolved individuation struggles.

Smear Campaign

The deliberate or habitual dissemination of false, exaggerated, or misleading information to damage the victim’s credibility and reputation. Smear campaigns can be preemptive—designed to undermine potential disclosures—or retaliatory following separation (Freeman, 2017).

Splitting

Splitting is a defense mechanism where people or situations are seen as “all good” or “all bad,” with no middle ground. It is normal in early development, but in narcissism it persists into adulthood.

Narcissists often idealise someone when their needs are being met, then abruptly devalue them when disappointed or criticised. This black-and-white thinking prevents stable, balanced relationships and leaves survivors feeling alternately adored and discarded.

Stonewalling

The refusal to engage in communication, problem-solving, or conflict resolution. In narcissistic abuse, stonewalling can be used strategically to exert control or passively punish the victim. It differs from temporary withdrawal for emotional regulation, as it is prolonged and intended to block resolution (Gottman, 1999).

Strategic Withdrawal

A planned, temporary disengagement from interaction with the abusive individual to allow emotional regulation, prevent escalation, and reinforce boundaries. This may be used in combination with other communication techniques (Herman, 1992).

Supply (Narcissistic Supply)

The admiration, attention, or emotional energy required by individuals with narcissistic traits to maintain self-esteem and emotional equilibrium. Sources of supply may be idealised, devalued, or discarded as their utility changes (APA, 2013).

________________________________________

T

Threats

Verbal or behavioural indications of potential harm directed toward the victim, their loved ones, or their property. In narcissistic abuse, threats are used to instil fear, maintain compliance, or punish perceived disobedience (Stark, 2007).

Time-Limited Communication

A technique that restricts the duration of conversations or correspondence to reduce opportunities for manipulation or emotional exhaustion. This may involve pre-scheduled call times, set meeting durations, or concise written exchanges (Eddy, 2014).

Trauma Bond

A strong emotional attachment formed between an abuser and victim through cycles of abuse and intermittent reinforcement of positive behaviours. Neurobiologically, trauma bonding is associated with dysregulation of stress and reward systems, involving cortisol, dopamine, oxytocin, and adrenaline (Dutton & Painter, 1993; Carnes, 1997).

Triangulation

The involvement of a third party to manipulate relational dynamics, create rivalry, or validate the abuser’s perspective. Triangulation may be intentional or emerge from habitual interpersonal patterns, but it serves to destabilise and disempower the victim (Minuchin, 1974).

________________________________________

V

Victim Card

The presentation of oneself as the injured or oppressed party to deflect blame, elicit sympathy, or manipulate perceptions. In narcissistic abuse, this may be deliberate impression management or a reflexive defence against perceived criticism (Goffman, 1959).

Violence

The use of physical force with the intent to cause harm, intimidate, or control. In narcissistic abuse, violence may occur alongside emotional, psychological, or sexual abuse, and can escalate when the abuser perceives a loss of control (APA, 2013).

________________________________________

W

Wound (Narcissistic) 

A core developmental trauma theorised to occur in childhood when caregivers fail to provide adequate attunement, validation, or consistent support for the child’s emerging sense of self (Kohut, 1971; Kernberg, 1975). This injury disrupts the formation of stable self-esteem and an integrated identity, often leading to reliance on external validation and maladaptive defences. In adulthood, individuals with unresolved narcissistic injury may react to perceived criticism, rejection, or loss of status with disproportionate defensiveness, withdrawal, or rage — responses understood as reactivations of the original wound (Ronningstam, 2005).

________________________________________

References 

• American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.).
• Baumeister, R. F., Stillwell, A., & Wotman, S. R. (1998). Victim and perpetrator accounts of interpersonal conflict: Autobiographical narratives about anger. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(2), 492–509.
• Beattie, M. (1987). Codependent no more: How to stop controlling others and start caring for yourself. Hazelden.
• Braiker, H. B. (2004). Who’s pulling your strings? How to break the cycle of manipulation. McGraw-Hill.
• Campbell, W. K., & Foster, C. A. (2007). The narcissistic self: Background, an extended agency model, and ongoing controversies. In C. Sedikides & S. Spencer (Eds.), The self (pp. 115–138). Psychology Press.
• Carnes, P. (1997). The betrayal bond: Breaking free of exploitive relationships. Health Communications.
• Carnes, P. (1997). The betrayal bond: Breaking free of exploitive relationships. Health Communications.
• Cermak, T. L. (1986). Diagnosing and treating co-dependence. Johnson Institute Books.
• Dutton, D. G., & Painter, S. (1981). Traumatic bonding: The development of emotional attachments in battered women and other relationships of intermittent abuse. Victimology, 6, 139–155.
• Dutton, D. G., & Painter, S. (1993). Emotional attachments in abusive relationships: A test of traumatic bonding theory. Violence and Victims, 8(2), 105–120.
• Ferster, C. B., & Skinner, B. F. (1957). Schedules of reinforcement. Appleton-Century-Crofts.
• Freeman, S. (2017). The narcissist in your life: Recognizing the patterns and learning to break free. Skyhorse Publishing.
• Freud, S. (1964). The neuro-psychoses of defence. In J. Strachey (Ed. & Trans.), The standard edition of the complete psychological works of Sigmund Freud (Vol. 3, pp. 41–61). (Original work published 1894).
• Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. Doubleday.
• Gottman, J. M. (1999). The seven principles for making marriage work. Crown.
• Herman, J. L. (1992). Trauma and recovery: The aftermath of violence—from domestic abuse to political terror. Basic Books.
• Kernberg, O. (1984). Severe personality disorders: Psychotherapeutic strategies. Yale University Press.
• Kohut, H. (1971). The analysis of the self. International Universities Press.
• Lamb, S., & Keon, S. (1995). Abusive relationships: From victim to survivor. SAGE Publications.
• Minuchin, S. (1974). Families and family therapy. Harvard University Press.
• Pincus, A. L., & Lukowitsky, M. R. (2010). Pathological narcissism and narcissistic personality disorder. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 6, 421–446.
• Ritter, K., Dziobek, I., Preißler, S., Rüter, A., Vater, A., Fydrich, T., … & Roepke, S. (2014). Lack of empathy in patients with narcissistic personality disorder. Psychiatry Research, 215(1), 241–247.
• Ronningstam, E. (2005). Identifying and understanding the narcissistic personality. Oxford University Press.
• Skinner, B. F. (1953). Science and human behavior. Macmillan.
• Stark, E. (2007). Coercive control: How men entrap women in personal life. Oxford University Press.
• Stern, R. (2018). The gaslight effect: How to spot and survive the hidden manipulation others use to control your life. Harmony.
• Vrij, A. (2008). Detecting lies and deceit: Pitfalls and opportunities (2nd ed.). Wiley.
• Walker, L. E. (1979). The battered woman. Harper and Row.