That headline is a bit flippant–maybe this creates a statistical foundation where before there was only theory–but you’d expect them to at least mention vulnerable narcissism somewhere in the paper.
Disirregardless of originality, the paper is a good read. And “Tendency for Interpersonal Victimhood” is a more descriptive label than “vulnerable narcissist,” which is confusing and paradoxical. But I would have preferred something a bit more direct and assertive, like “victim complex” or “self-identified victimhood”.
Here’s an introduction to vulnerable narcissism: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-superhuman-mind/202003/6-signs-you-might-be-vulnerable-narcissist
Example quote from the TIV paper, to demonstrate that it’s actually enjoyable to read:
Moral elitism refers to the perception of immaculate morality of the self and the immorality of the other side. Victimhood has been associated with a sense of differentiation and moral superiority (Leahy, 2012). At the individual level, moral elitism may be used to control others by accusing them of immoral, unfair or selfish behavior, while seeing oneself as highly moral and ethical (Urlic et al. , 2010), possibly as a defense mechanism against painful emotions (Berman, 2014a). Similarly, collective victimhood is based on beliefs about the justness of one’s group’s goals and positive image, while emphasizing the wickedness of the opponent’s goals and characteristics (Bar-Tal, Chernyak-Hai, Schori, & Gundar, 2009).
Maybe the real lost tribe of Israel was the friends we made along the way.