Machiavellianism (psychology)

In the field of personality psychology, Machiavellianism is a personality trait centered on manipulativeness, callousness, and indifference to morality.[1] Though unrelated to the historical figure or his works, the trait is named after the political philosophy of Niccolò Machiavelli, as psychologists Richard Christie and Florence Geis used edited and truncated statements inspired by his works to study variations in human behaviors.[2][3][4] Their Mach IV test, a 20-question, Likert-scale personality survey, became the standard self-assessment tool and scale of the Machiavellianism construct. Those who score high on the scale (High Machs) are more likely to have a high level of deceitfulness and an unempathetic temperament.[5]

Machiavellianism
SpecialtyPersonality psychology
CausesGenetic and environmental
Differential diagnosisSociopathy, Narcissism, Psychopathy, Sadism
Machiavellianism is one of the traits in the dark triad model, along with psychopathy and narcissism.

It is one of the dark triad traits, along with narcissism and psychopathy.[6][7]

Origin of the construct

In the 1960s, Richard Christie and Florence L. Geis wanted to analyze those who manipulated others, and developed a test using a selection of statements, including a few truncated and edited sentences from Machiavelli's works as test items, naming the construct "Machiavellianism" after Machiavelli.[8][1] They wanted to assess whether or not those who were in agreement with the statements would behave differently than others who disagreed, specifically in regards to manipulative actions. Their Mach IV test, a 20-question, Likert-scale personality survey, became the standard self-assessment tool of the Machiavellianism construct. Using their scale, Christie and Geis conducted multiple experimental tests that showed that the interpersonal strategies and behavior of "high Machs" and "low Machs" differ.[9] People scoring high on the scale (high Machs) tend to endorse manipulative statements, and behave accordingly, contrary to those who score lowly (low Machs). Their basic results have been widely replicated.[10] Measured on the Mach IV scale, males score, on average, slightly higher on Machiavellianism than females.[9][11]

Etiology

A behavioral genetics study noted that Machiavellianism has both significantly genetic and environmental influences.[12][13] There has also been extensive research on Machiavellianism in young children and adolescents, via a measure dubbed the "kiddie Mach" test.[14][15]

Motivation

A 1992 review described the motivation of those high on the Machiavellianism scale as related to cold selfishness and pure instrumentality, and those high on the trait were assumed to pursue their motives (e.g. sex, achievement, sociality) in duplicitous ways. More recent research on the motivations of high Machs compared to low Machs found that they gave high priority to money, power, and competition and relatively low priority to community building, self-love, and family commitment. High Machs admitted to focusing on unmitigated achievement and winning at any cost.[16][17]

Opportunism

In general, people high in Machiavellianism will attempt to achieve their goals by whatever means necessary. This includes things such as bending and breaking rules, cheating, and stealing. People high in Machiavellianism are able to easily switch between working with others and using others to achieve their goals. People high in Machiavellianism do not have the same level of emotions as others and as such are more willing to do things others see as terrible or immoral. In the pursuit of their goals, people high in Machiavellianism will even go so far as to hurt and manipulate others if they think it would be beneficial.[18]

Abilities

Due to their skill at interpersonal manipulation, there has often been an assumption that high Machs possess superior intelligence, or ability to understand other people in social situations. However, some research has established that Machiavellianism is unrelated to IQ.[19] Recently, new research gives support to a contrary viewpoint.[20]

Furthermore, studies on emotional intelligence have found that high Machiavellianism is usually associated with low emotional intelligence as assessed by both performance and questionnaire measures.[21] Both emotional empathy and emotion recognition have been shown to have negative correlations with Machiavellianism.[22][23] Additionally, research has shown that Machiavellianism is unrelated to a more advanced theory of mind, that is, the ability to anticipate what others are thinking in social situations. If high Machs actually are skilled at manipulating others, this appears to be unrelated to any special cognitive abilities as such, and may simply be due to a greater willingness to engage in manipulation.[16]

Relations with other personality traits

Machiavellianism is one of the three personality traits referred to as the dark triad, along with narcissism and psychopathy. Some psychologists consider Machiavellianism to be essentially a subclinical form of psychopathy, as they both share manipulative tendencies and cold callousness as their primary attributes.[24][25][26] More recent research suggests that while Machiavellianism and psychopathy overlap heavily, they are distinct personality constructs.[16][27] Psychopathy differs from Machiavellianism mainly in impulsivity, a lack of long term planning and self control.[28]

Machiavellianism has been found to be negatively correlated with agreeableness (r = −0.47) and conscientiousness (r = −0.34), two dimensions of the "big five" personality model (NEO-PI-R).[28] However, Machiavellianism correlates more highly with the honesty-humility dimension of the six-factor HEXACO model than with any of the big five dimensions.[16] Machiavellianism has also been located within the interpersonal circumplex, which consists of the two independent dimensions of agency and communion. Agency refers to the motivation to succeed and to individuate the self, whereas communion refers to the motivation to merge with others and to support group interests. Machiavellianism lies in the quadrant of the circumplex defined by high agency and low communion.[16] Machiavellianism has been found to lie diagonally opposite from a circumplex construct called self-construal, a tendency to prefer communion over agency. This suggests that people high in Machiavellianism do not simply wish to achieve, they wish to do so at the expense of (or at least without regard to) others.[16][29]

Game theory

In 2002, the Machiavellianism scale of Christie and Geis was applied by behavioral game theorists Anna Gunnthorsdottir, Kevin McCabe and Vernon L. Smith[11] in their search for explanations for the spread of observed behavior in experimental games, in particular individual choices which do not correspond to assumptions of material self-interest captured by the standard Nash equilibrium prediction. It was found that in a trust game, those with high Mach-IV scores tended to follow homo economicus' equilibrium strategies while those with low Mach-IV scores tended to deviate from the equilibrium, and instead made choices that reflected widely accepted moral standards and social preferences.

Dimensionality

Although there have been myriad proposed factor structures, two dimensions emerge most consistently within factor-analytic research – differentiating Machiavellian views from behaviors.[30] Although the Mach IV scale is unable to reliably capture the two dimensions, a 10-item subset of the scale known as the "two-dimensional Mach IV" (TDM-V), reproduces the views and tactics dimensions across countries, genders, sample types, and scale category length.[31][32] The "views" dimension appears to capture the neurotic, narcissistic, pessimistic, and distrustful aspects of Machiavellianism, while the "tactics" component captures the more unconscientious, self-serving, and deceitful behavioral aspects.

Hot and cold empathy

There are two distinct types of empathy which people use to relate to each other which are referred to as hot and cold empathy. Cold empathy refers to the understanding of how others might react to one's actions or a certain event. Hot empathy refers to the emotional reaction others might have to an event. People high in machiavellianism tend to have a better understanding of cold empathy than hot empathy which can lead to the perception of them as cold and uncaring.[18] This way of acting is referred to as a cold to hot empathy gap where someone with cold empathy does not realize the full effect of their actions on others.[33]

Alexithymia

Alexithymia is considered a key trait associated with Machiavellianism. It is the lack of awareness of emotion, including one's own emotion and the emotion of others. Those with alexithymia, alexithymics, are unable to recognize emotion nor describe them.[34] This can lead to problems figuring out one's own feelings as well as relating and connecting to how others feel. Alexithymia can manifest in various degrees, depending on the individual and their environment. It may be product of a limited understanding of an emotion after a shallow experience of said emotion.[18] Alexithymia is suspected to be the reason why Machiavellians focus so much mental energy towards manipulating people and situations. They do not recognize the feeling of guilt and empathy so there is little to no consequence.

In the workplace
Main article: Machiavellianism in the workplace

Machiavellianism is also studied by organizational psychologists, especially those who study manipulative behaviors in workplace settings. Workplace behaviors associated with this concept include flattery, deceit, coercion, and abusive supervision.[35][36]

Machiavellianism can also have a moderating effect on job pursuit intentions. This is because job seekers have access to so many internet resources that can provide information and background on potential employers. This wide availability of information about an organization's political climate can have a huge effect on the recruiting process. Machiavellianism can be a moderator in this relationship because "this trait reflects the extent to which an individual would 'fit' into a highly political work environment"[37]

See also

References
  1. Jones, D. N., & Paulhus, D. L. (2009). Machiavellianism. In M. R. Leary & R. H. Hoyle (Eds.), Handbook of individual differences in social behavior (pp. 93–108). New York, NY, US: The Guilford Press.
  2. Christie, R. Geis, F. "Some Consequences with Taking Machiavelli Seriously" in Edgar F. Borgatta and William W. Lambert (eds.). Handbook of Personality Theory and Research
  3. Studies in Machiavellianism, "Scale Construction", pg 10
  4. Rauthmann, J. F., & Will, T. (2011). Proposing a multidimensional Machiavellianism conceptualization. Social Behavior and Personality, 39(3), 391-404.
  5. Spielberger, Charles D.; Butcher, James N. (2013-10-31). Advances in Personality Assessment. Routledge. ISBN 9781317844006.
  6. Paulhus, D., Williams, K.The Dark Triad of personality: Narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy
  7. Lyons, Minna (2019-01-11). The Dark Triad of Personality: Narcissism, Machiavellianism, and Psychopathy in Everyday Life. Academic Press. ISBN 978-0-12-814292-9.
  8. Christie, Richard "On being detached about Machiavellianism"
  9. Christie, R. & Geis, F. (1970) "Studies in Machiavellianism". NY: Academic Press. Page 260
  10. Repacholi, Betty; Slaughter, Virginia, eds. (March 2004). "Bypassing Empathy: A Machiavellian Theory of Mind and Sneaky Power". Individual Differences in Theory of Mind: Implications for Typical and Atypical Development. pp. 40–67. doi:10.4324/9780203488508-7 (inactive 2021-01-14). ISBN 978-1-135-43234-8.CS1 maint: DOI inactive as of January 2021 (link)
  11. Gunnthorsdottir, Anna; McCabe, Kevin; Smith, Vernon (2002). "Using the Machiavellianism instrument to predict trustworthiness in a bargaining game". Journal of Economic Psychology. 23: 49–66. doi:10.1016/S0167-4870(01)00067-8.
  12. Vernon, Philip A.; Villani, Vanessa C.; Vickers, Leanne C.; Harris, Julie Aitken (2008). "A behavioral genetic investigation of the Dark Triad and the Big 5". Personality and Individual Differences. 44 (2): 445–452. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2007.09.007.
  13. Furnham, Adrian; Richards, Steven C.; Paulhus, Delroy L. (March 2013). "The Dark Triad of Personality: A 10 Year Review". Social and Personality Psychology Compass. 7 (3): 199–216. doi:10.1111/spc3.12018. S2CID 32281294.
  14. Christie, Richard; Geis, Florence L. (2013-10-22). Studies in Machiavellianism. Academic Press. p. 331. ISBN 9781483260600.
  15. Chabrol, Henri; Van Leeuwen, Nikki; Rodgers, Rachel; Séjourné, Natalène (November 2009). "Contributions of psychopathic, narcissistic, Machiavellian, and sadistic personality traits to juvenile delinquency". Personality and Individual Differences. 47 (7): 734–739. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2009.06.020.
  16. Jones, Daniel N.; Paulhus, Delroy L. (2009). "Chapter 7. Machiavellianism". In Leary, Mark R.; Hoyle, Rick H (eds.). Handbook of Individual Differences in Social Behavior. New York/London: The Guilford Press. pp. 257–273. ISBN 978-1-59385-647-2.
  17. Spielberger, Charles D.; Butcher, James N. (2013-10-31). Advances in Personality Assessment. Routledge. ISBN 9781317844013.
  18. read, Ben Taylor Last updated: 8 Oct 2018~ 5 min (2016-11-24). "Machiavellianism, Cognition, and Emotion: Understanding how the Machiavellian Thinks, Feels, and Thrives". psychcentral.com. Retrieved 2020-03-19.
  19. Jean M. Phillips; Stanley M. Gully (14 February 2013). Organizational Behavior: Tools for Success. Cengage Learning. pp. 85–. ISBN 978-1-133-95360-9.
  20. Kowalski, Christopher Marcin; Kwiatkowska, Katarzyna; Kwiatkowska, Maria Magdalena; Ponikiewska, Klaudia; Rogoza, Radosław; Schermer, Julie Aitken (2018). "The Dark Triad traits and intelligence: Machiavellians are bright, and narcissists and psychopaths are ordinary". Personality and Individual Differences. 135: 1–6. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2018.06.049.
  21. Austin, Elizabeth J.; Farrelly, Daniel; Black, Carolyn; Moore, Helen (2007). "Emotional intelligence, Machiavellianism and emotional manipulation: Does EI have a dark side?". Personality and Individual Differences. 43: 179–189. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2006.11.019.
  22. Christie, Richard; Geis, Florence L. (2013-10-22). Studies in Machiavellianism. Academic Press. ISBN 9781483260600.
  23. Rauthmann, John F.; Will, Theresa (30 April 2011). "Proposing a Multidimensional Machiavellianism Conceptualization". Social Behavior and Personality. 39 (3): 391–403. doi:10.2224/sbp.2011.39.3.391.
  24. Miller, Joshua D.; Hyatt, Courtland S.; Maples-Keller, Jessica L.; Carter, Nathan T.; Lynam, Donald R. (2017). "Psychopathy and Machiavellianism: A Distinction Without a Difference?". Journal of Personality. 85 (4): 439–453. doi:10.1111/jopy.12251. PMID 26971566.
  25. McHoskey, John W.; Worzel, William; Szyarto, Christopher (1998). "Machiavellianism and psychopathy". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 74 (1): 192–210. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.74.1.192. PMID 9457782.
  26. Lyons, Minna (2019-01-11). The Dark Triad of Personality: Narcissism, Machiavellianism, and Psychopathy in Everyday Life. Academic Press. p. 44. ISBN 978-0-12-814292-9.
  27. Paulhus, Delroy L.; Jones, Daniel N. (2015). "Measures of Dark Personalities". Measures of Personality and Social Psychological Constructs. pp. 562–594. doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-386915-9.00020-6. ISBN 978-0-12-386915-9.
  28. Paulhus, Delroy L.; Williams, Kevin M. (2002). "The Dark Triad of personality: Narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy". Journal of Research in Personality. 36 (6): 556–563. doi:10.1016/S0092-6566(02)00505-6.
  29. Jones, Daniel N.; Paulhus, Delroy L. (2012), "Differentiating the Dark Triad Within the Interpersonal Circumplex", Handbook of Interpersonal Psychology, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, pp. 249–267, doi:10.1002/9781118001868.ch15, ISBN 9781118001868, S2CID 55425895
  30. Fehr, B.; Samsom, D.; and Paulhus, D. L., 1992. The Construct of Machiavellianism: Twenty Years Later. In C. D. Spielberger & J. N. Butcher (Eds), Advances in Personality Assessment (Vol 9), pp. 77–116. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  31. Monaghan, Conal; Bizumic, Boris; Sellbom, Martin (2016). "The role of Machiavellian views and tactics in psychopathology". Personality and Individual Differences. 94: 72–81. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2016.01.002.
  32. Monaghan, Conal; Bizumic, Boris; Sellbom, Martin (2018). "Nomological network of two-dimensional Machiavellianism". Personality and Individual Differences. 130: 161–173. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2018.03.047.
  33. Loewenstein, George (2005). "Hot-Cold Empathy Gaps and Medical Decision Making" (PDF). Health Psychology. 24 (4S): S49-56. doi:10.1037/0278-6133.24.4.S49. PMID 16045419.
  34. "Alexithymia: Symptoms, diagnosis, and links with mental health". www.medicalnewstoday.com. Retrieved 2020-04-29.
  35. Calhoon, R. P. (1 June 1969). "Niccolo Machiavelli and the Twentieth Century Administrator". Academy of Management Journal. 12 (2): 205–212. doi:10.2307/254816. JSTOR 254816.
  36. In pursuit of power: The role of authoritarian leadership in the relationship between supervisors’ Machiavellianism and subordinates' perceptions of supervisory behavior
  37. Djurdjevic, Emilija; Rosen, Christopher C.; Conroy, Samantha A.; Rawski, Shannon L.; Sosna, Katherine U (June 2019). "The influence of political climate on job pursuit intentions and the moderating effect of Machiavellianism". International Journal of Selection and Assessment. 27 (2): 180–192. doi:10.1111/ijsa.12242. ISSN 0965-075X. S2CID 151216697.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.