Internalised Shame and Grandiosity: Understanding the Connection

When the need to feel exceptional may be protecting something more vulnerable

Psychotherapy in South West London | Relational Therapy | Emotion Focused Therapy (EFT)

There is a form of psychological distress that can be difficult to recognise because, from the outside, it may resemble confidence. A person may be accomplished, intelligent, ambitious and capable, accustomed to performing well, earning admiration and appearing to have things under control.

Yet alongside these strengths, there may be a persistent sensitivity to criticism, rejection, failure or being overlooked. Another person’s success may feel threatening; disagreement may be experienced as disrespect; and a mistake may evoke intense shame or humiliation. The absence of recognition can provoke anger, defensiveness or despair that seems difficult to reconcile with an outward appearance of self-assurance.

Vulnerability may also be expressed through harsh self-criticism. Attention becomes focused on perceived flaws and inadequacies, accompanied by a private conviction of being less interesting, successful, attractive or worthy than others. Self-worth can become caught between a need to feel exceptional and a fear of being fundamentally inadequate.

These experiences invite consideration of the possible relationship between internalised shame and grandiosity. This is one psychological formulation, not a universal explanation. Grandiosity does not necessarily conceal shame, and neither grandiosity nor sensitivity to criticism, in itself, establishes a diagnosis. The question is how, in particular circumstances, a person’s sense of worth may become dependent on achievement, recognition, superiority or the avoidance of vulnerability.

The private experience of shame

Shame differs from a general sense of low self-esteem. Whereas low self-esteem may involve a negative evaluation of oneself, shame can carry a more global sense of defectiveness: not simply having done something wrong, but feeling that something is fundamentally wrong with who one is.

Shame can remain hidden from others. A person may appear confident and accomplished while privately fearing that closer scrutiny would reveal something inadequate or unworthy. Gilbert (2002) explores shame as a biopsychosocial experience, highlighting its relationship to how the self is experienced and evaluated in social contexts.

There is no single pathway through which shame develops. Experiences such as humiliation, bullying, rejection, emotional neglect or persistent criticism may contribute to it. Shame may also develop in less overtly hostile environments, particularly where affection or approval appears conditional on achievement, compliance or meeting others’ expectations.

When a child repeatedly experiences disapproval or conditional acceptance, they may come to interpret relational difficulties as evidence of personal inadequacy. Rather than recognising the limitations or emotional difficulties of the adults around them, they may conclude that they are somehow not good enough. Such experiences do not inevitably lead to internalised shame, but they can shape how a person subsequently understands themselves and anticipates the responses of others.

Where self-worth becomes closely tied to achievement or approval, being exceptional may come to feel necessary for being valued. This belief can persist into adulthood, influencing how success, failure, criticism and relationships are experienced.

When being ordinary feels threatening

Grandiosity is often associated with arrogance, superiority, an inflated sense of importance or a strong need for admiration. However, ordinary confidence, ambition and pride need to be distinguished from a more pervasive reliance on exceptional status or superiority to maintain self-worth.

Clinical literature on narcissistic functioning distinguishes between grandiose and vulnerable presentations, which may coexist or vary across contexts (Pincus et al., 2014). This distinction helps avoid treating outward confidence and underlying vulnerability as mutually exclusive, while recognising that neither presentation necessarily reveals the other.

Grandiosity can sometimes function as a way of managing feelings of inadequacy or vulnerability. When feeling insignificant or exposed is difficult to tolerate, maintaining a sense of superiority may offer temporary relief. Achievement, admiration or being right can help restore a threatened sense of value.

If failure evokes shame, striving for success may become more than a pursuit of achievement; it may become a way of avoiding the possibility of feeling fundamentally inadequate. If dependence feels dangerous, a person may emphasise self-sufficiency. If another person’s success provokes painful comparison, asserting one’s own superiority may help counter the resulting sense of diminishment.

None of these responses is inherently pathological. Ambition, independence and enjoyment of recognition are ordinary aspects of human experience. Difficulties may arise when they become rigid requirements for maintaining self-worth, leaving little room for uncertainty, dependence, mistakes or the achievements of others.

No one can always be the most successful, admired or capable person in the room. When a sense of worth depends on occupying that position, ordinary experiences such as criticism, competition, failure or being overlooked can take on disproportionate emotional significance. External validation may provide relief, while the underlying insecurity remains.

This is one possible relationship between shame and grandiosity: a vulnerable sense of self-worth may be managed through a compensatory investment in exceptionalism. It is not, however, the only explanation for grandiose attitudes or behaviour. Their meaning and function need to be understood in the context of the individual concerned.

Shame, withdrawal and difficulties in relating to others

The management of shame can also influence how a person approaches relationships. Distancing from others may reduce the risk of rejection, criticism or unwanted exposure. A strong emphasis on independence may protect against the vulnerability associated with needing another person. Entitlement or a sense of superiority may help manage painful comparisons or feelings of being overlooked.

Capaldi and Elliott (2024), in their qualitative study of negative treatment of self in socially anxious clients, describe a category they call hostile freedom or separation from others. This encompasses interpersonal patterns including distancing, self-entitlement or grandiosity, and relinquishing personal responsibility. Their findings offer a perspective on how ways of relating to oneself and others may become intertwined. However, the study does not establish that these patterns are necessarily driven by shame or that they apply beyond the specific clinical context investigated.

Such strategies can be protective in the short term while carrying interpersonal costs. Distance may reduce immediate vulnerability but also perpetuate loneliness. A sense of superiority may temporarily counter feelings of inadequacy while making reciprocal relationships more difficult. Attempts to avoid criticism may limit opportunities for meaningful feedback, repair and emotional connection.

The same behaviour can serve different functions in different contexts. Entitlement may reflect shame or insecurity, but it may also arise from learned expectations, beliefs about fairness or other factors. Understanding its significance requires exploration rather than assuming that a more vulnerable emotion must lie beneath it.

Looking beneath anger without assuming what it means

Anger, contempt, defensiveness and withdrawal can sometimes accompany experiences of shame, humiliation or fear of rejection. A person may feel exposed, insignificant or frightened that others will see them as inadequate, without being fully aware of these feelings or finding them easy to express.

From an emotion-focused perspective, anger may sometimes be a secondary or protective response to more vulnerable emotions (Greenberg, 2011). In other circumstances, anger may be a primary and appropriate response to injustice, threat, frustration or violated boundaries. Different emotions may also coexist.

The clinical task is not to assume that anger conceals shame, but to explore the person’s emotional experience and the meaning of the situation. What appears disproportionate from the outside may have a particular significance for the person experiencing it; equally, a strong emotional response should not automatically be interpreted as evidence of underlying pathology.

Understanding the possible vulnerability associated with a reaction does not invalidate the emotion or diminish responsibility for the behaviour that follows. Emotional understanding and accountability are complementary aspects of therapeutic work.

Why intimate relationships can become difficult

Intimate relationships can bring difficulties with self-worth into sharper focus. Closeness offers the possibility of feeling known, valued and accepted, but it also involves emotional exposure, dependence and the negotiation of differences. Where shame is persistent, the desire for intimacy may coexist with a fear that being more fully known will expose aspects of the self experienced as inadequate or unworthy.

Relational experiences may then acquire meanings that extend beyond the immediate interaction. A partner’s independence may be experienced as rejection, a boundary as a threat to connection, or disagreement as a judgement of the self rather than a difference of perspective. Another person’s success may evoke painful comparison, while feedback about a particular behaviour may be experienced as evidence of global personal inadequacy.

These interpretations cannot be inferred from behaviour alone. Their significance needs to be explored in the context of the person’s experience, relational history and the circumstances of the interaction.

Responses may include anger, defensiveness, dismissal, attempts to control the interaction or withdrawal. While these responses may sometimes protect against shame or a threatened sense of worth, they can leave the other partner feeling constrained, confused or responsible for providing repeated reassurance. Over time, the relationship may become organised around managing one person’s distress, leaving less room for both partners to express their needs and maintain their autonomy.

Beneath such patterns there may be a longing for affirmation: a hope that being seen as valuable by another person will resolve a more enduring uncertainty about one’s own worth. This is a possible formulation, not a conclusion to impose. Similar relational difficulties can arise for different reasons, and the meaning of a pattern must be understood within the particular relationship.

It is also important to distinguish emotional understanding from excusing harmful behaviour. Shame and vulnerability may help explain certain reactions, but they do not justify intimidation, coercion or persistent emotional harm. A partner’s boundaries, independent identity or success do not necessarily signify rejection. Each person remains responsible for how they treat others, and both partners have a right to emotional safety and autonomy.

The limits of external validation

Admiration, achievement and recognition can be meaningful, but difficulties may arise when they become essential to maintaining self-worth. Criticism, disagreement or perceived rejection may then feel like a threat to one’s value, while reassurance offers only temporary relief.

When underlying beliefs about inadequacy remain unchanged, the need for external confirmation may return with each new setback. This is one possible pattern, not a universal explanation for reassurance-seeking.

The aim is not to eliminate the need for approval or connection, but to develop a more flexible sense of self-worth that is less dependent on comparison, performance or constant affirmation.

How therapy may help

From an emotion-focused perspective, responses such as grandiosity, anger, withdrawal or perfectionism may sometimes help manage painful emotions, including shame, fear of rejection or feelings of inadequacy. Their function cannot be assumed; it must be understood within the person’s individual experience.

Therapy can help people attend to their emotional experience, explore the meanings attached to it and identify the needs associated with their responses. Within a supportive therapeutic relationship, this may involve accessing emotions that have been avoided or difficult to tolerate, rather than focusing solely on changing thoughts or controlling behaviour (Greenberg, 2011).

In emotion-focused therapy, change involves more than recognising an emotion: it can involve transforming it through the processing of emotional experience and the emergence of more adaptive responses. For example, when shame is experienced and explored in a context of emotional safety, it may become possible to access self-compassion, assertive anger in response to mistreatment, or grief for unmet needs. These processes are individual and cannot be assumed to follow a fixed sequence.

Understanding the emotional function of a response does not mean endorsing its consequences. Therapy can make room for compassion towards the person’s difficulties while also exploring the impact of their behaviour on others and supporting responsibility where appropriate.

Towards a more secure sense of self-worth

A more secure sense of self-worth does not depend on the absence of shame, ambition or a desire for recognition, but on being able to experience these feelings without defining the self entirely through them.

As self-worth becomes less contingent on achievement, comparison or approval, success and failure may become easier to hold in perspective. This can support greater openness to feedback, recognition of personal limitations and more direct expression of emotional needs in relationships.

The aim is not to replace grandiosity with self-criticism, but to develop a more flexible relationship with the self, in which vulnerability and imperfection can be acknowledged without becoming evidence of fundamental inadequacy.

Exploring these patterns in therapy

Recognising these patterns does not establish a diagnosis, nor does it mean that grandiosity necessarily functions to defend against shame. Their meaning can only be understood within the context of an individual’s experience.

Therapy offers space to explore how self-worth is experienced, what happens when it feels threatened, and how established responses to vulnerability shape emotional and relational life. The aim is not to confirm a particular explanation, but to develop a more nuanced understanding of the person’s experience and the ways they have learned to manage emotional pain.

Over time, this exploration may support a less conditional sense of self-worth, in which vulnerability and imperfection can be experienced without becoming evidence of fundamental inadequacy. If you would like to explore these issues in your own life, you can find out more about my approach to psychotherapy on my psychotherapy webpage.

References

Capaldi, K., & Elliott, R. (2024). Negative treatment of self in socially anxious clients. Person-Centered & Experiential Psychotherapies, 23(1), 101–121. https://doi.org/10.1080/14779757.2023.2201937

Gilbert, P. (2002). Body shame: A biopsychosocial conceptualisation and overview, with treatment implications. In P. Gilbert & J. Miles (Eds.), Body Shame: Conceptualisation, Research and Treatment (pp. 3–54). Routledge.

Greenberg, L. S. (2011). Emotion-Focused Therapy. American Psychological Association.

Pincus, A. L., Cain, N. M., & Wright, A. G. C. (2014). Narcissistic grandiosity and narcissistic vulnerability in psychotherapy. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 5(4), 439–443. https://doi.org/10.1037/per0000031