MACH-IV (test)

Last updated

The MACH-IV is a 20 question Likert scale psychometric designed to test levels of Machiavellianism in individuals. [1] In personality psychology, Machiavellianism refers to a personality construct which comprises manipulativeness, deceitfulness, and a callous, calculating orientation. [2] It is the most widely used Machiavellianism test by researchers. [3]

Contents

Background

Social psychologist Richard Christie was interested in the motivations and underlying personality traits of manipulators. He proposed that they had certain characteristics that made them more willing to take advantage of others, such as having a lack of affect and empathy in interpersonal dealings, and a lack of concern for morality. [4] He viewed Machiavelli as a source to gain ideas from and eventually wrote test items that were loosely based on his general writing style. [5] He and his research partner Florence Geis published their results in the book "Studies in Machiavellianism" in 1970. [6]

Factors

The MACH-IV has 20 questions, all which are designed to tap into the following factors: "Views", "Tactics", and "Morality". The "Views" factor is related to beliefs that are self interested and cynical, the "Tactics" factor focuses on the endorsement of manipulation as a means to take advantage of others, and the "Morality" factor deals with one's adherence to moral scruple. [3]

Items

Items featured on the test include questions such as "most people who get ahead in the world lead clean, moral lives" and "P.T. Barnum was wrong when he said that there's a sucker born every minute". [7]

High vs low scorers

Those who score high are classified as High Machs, while those who score low are classified as Low Machs. High scorers were more likely to win experimental games by deceiving the other person, while low Machs tried playing by the rules of the experiment. Overall, High Machs are more likely to be manipulative, exploitatve, and callous, while Low Machs are the opposite-viewing others in more of an empathetic viewpoint. [8] Research has consistently shown that men score higher than women in Machiavellianism. [9]

Other MACH tests

While the MACH-IV is the most utilized scale for Machiavellianism, there have been other tests which predate and postdate the Mach IV. The MACH V was created to address criticisms given to the MACH IV, but it is no longer used due to psychometric issues, such as poor validity. [3] [10] According to psychologists, the Mach V suffered from "scoring problems, low internal consistency, and the underlying factor structure is not as clear as that of the Mach IV". [11]

Kiddie Mach

The Kiddie Mach is a variant of the MACH test, but for children. The test features questions simple enough for a child to understand, such as "the best way to get along with people is to tell them things that make them happy". [12] The Kiddie Mach features 20 questions, similar to the regular MACH-IV. High scores on the Kiddie Mach were negatively correlated with the Basic Empathy Scale. [13] Children who score high on the Kiddie Mach also score low on other empathy scales. [14] Studies have reported internal consistency reliability coefficients ranging from 0.70 to 0.76 for the Mach IV scale. [15] [16] The Kiddie Mach Scale, however, demonstrated lower internal reliability, with coefficients between 0.60 and 0.70. [17] Via studies on Machiavellianism in children, it was found that the trait is influenced by both genetics and the environment (especially the shared environment). [18] In studies it was shown that high scorers on the Kiddie Mach had a better time detecting when their opponent was lying and when they told the truth. They were also able to conceal their deception when playing a bluffing game. High scorers were also able to convince their peers to eat quinine flavored crackers and used deceit to get various rewards. [19]

FFMI

In theory, Machiavellianism is stated to be different from psychopathy because of potential levels of conscientiousness (the quality of being organized and careful). However, empirical tests don't show this difference, and in actuality they measure Machiavellianism as including low conscientiousness. [20]

Research by Katherine Collison and others aimed to develop a better way to measure Machiavellianism that matches theoretical understanding. The researchers started by asking experts to describe Machiavellianism using 30 specific personality traits from the five-factor model of personality. The experts identified 13 key traits, notably low agreeableness (being uncooperative) and high conscientiousness. [20]

The researchers then created a questionnaire called the Five Factor Machiavellianism Inventory (FFMI), starting with 201 questions based on these traits. They tested it in two studies with 710 people from Amazon's Mechanical Turk platform. They shortened the questionnaire to 52 questions and confirmed it worked well by comparing it to other established measures of personality, including the Big Five traits, existing Machiavellianism tests, psychopathy, narcissism, ambition, and impulsivity. The results suggest this new FFMI test could be a possible tool for measuring Machiavellianism. [20] The FFMI displayed positive correlations with a range of criteria for vocational and work-related success and was shown to be distinct from psychopathy. [21]

MPS

Dahling, Whitaker, and Levy (2009) developed the Machiavellian Personality Scale (MPS) to address the shortcomings of the original MACH-IV. [22] However, reliability issues arose with the MPS, the same ones that historically have been associated with the Mach IV. [23]

Validity and criticism

There have been questions raised as to the validity of the MACH-IV. Because of this MACH-IV has been the subject of criticism by researchers over the years. [1] One such criticism is that the test does not measure anything different from narcissism and psychopathy. John McHoskey even stated that the MACH-IV could be used to evaluate psychopathy in a non-criminal population. [24] It has also come under criticism for simply being outdated. For example, Daniel Jones has stated that the scale, while it is commendable in many ways, is "not helping the field with precision". He ultimately states that it "should be replaced by assessments that are more precise reflections of the construct." [25] John Rauthmann and others have stated that, while the MACH-IV is "a generally reliable and valid scale", it has its shortcomings. These include the response styles of the test takers, the varying factor structures, the scale merely being a measure of cynicism only and "insufficient content and construct validity". The researchers developed their own scale instead to study Machiavellianism multidimensionally instead of unidimensionally to prevent the construct from becoming hard to study effectively. [26] Psychologist Jason Dahling and others have created another measure of Machiavellianism, dubbed the Machiavellian Personality Scale (or MPS for short). [27] Scholars point out that while the construct is named after Machiavelli, the scale is not related to him outside of bearing his name, and that his political ideas are irrelevant. [28]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Personality test</span> Method of assessing human personality constructs

A personality test is a method of assessing human personality constructs. Most personality assessment instruments are in fact introspective self-report questionnaire measures or reports from life records (L-data) such as rating scales. Attempts to construct actual performance tests of personality have been very limited even though Raymond Cattell with his colleague Frank Warburton compiled a list of over 2000 separate objective tests that could be used in constructing objective personality tests. One exception, however, was the Objective-Analytic Test Battery, a performance test designed to quantitatively measure 10 factor-analytically discerned personality trait dimensions. A major problem with both L-data and Q-data methods is that because of item transparency, rating scales, and self-report questionnaires are highly susceptible to motivational and response distortion ranging from lack of adequate self-insight to downright dissimulation depending on the reason/motivation for the assessment being undertaken.

In social science research, social-desirability bias is a type of response bias that is the tendency of survey respondents to answer questions in a manner that will be viewed favorably by others. It can take the form of over-reporting "good behavior" or under-reporting "bad", or undesirable behavior. The tendency poses a serious problem with conducting research with self-reports. This bias interferes with the interpretation of average tendencies as well as individual differences.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Agreeableness</span> Personality trait

Agreeableness is a personality trait referring to individuals that are perceived as kind, sympathetic, cooperative, warm, honest, and considerate. In personality psychology, agreeableness is one of the five major dimensions of personality structure, reflecting individual differences in cooperation and social harmony.

Psychopathy, or psychopathic personality, is a personality construct characterized by impaired empathy and remorse, in combination with traits of boldness, disinhibition, and egocentrism. These traits are often masked by superficial charm and immunity to stress, which create an outward appearance of feigned normalcy.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Psychopathy Checklist</span> Psychopathy scale

The Psychopathy Checklist or Hare Psychopathy Checklist-Revised, now the Psychopathy Checklist—revised (PCL-R), is a psychological assessment tool that is commonly used to assess the presence and extent of psychopathy in individuals—most often those institutionalized in the criminal justice system—and to differentiate those high in this trait from those with antisocial personality disorder, a related diagnosable disorder. It is a 20-item inventory of perceived personality traits and recorded behaviors, intended to be completed on the basis of a semi-structured interview along with a review of "collateral information" such as official records. The psychopath tends to display a constellation or combination of high narcissistic, borderline, and antisocial personality disorder traits, which includes superficial charm, charisma/attractiveness, sexual seductiveness and promiscuity, affective instability, suicidality, lack of empathy, feelings of emptiness, self-harm, and splitting. In addition, sadistic and paranoid traits are usually also present.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Dark triad</span> Offensive personality types

The dark triad is a psychological theory of personality, first published by Delroy L. Paulhus and Kevin M. Williams in 2002, that describes three notably offensive, but non-pathological personality types: Machiavellianism, sub-clinical narcissism, and sub-clinical psychopathy. Each of these personality types is called dark because each is considered to contain malevolent qualities.

In psychology, grandiosity is a sense of superiority, uniqueness, or invulnerability that is unrealistic and not based on personal capability. It may be expressed by exaggerated beliefs regarding one's abilities, the belief that few other people have anything in common with oneself, and that one can only be understood by a few, very special people. The personality trait of grandiosity is principally associated with narcissistic personality disorder (NPD), but also is a feature in the occurrence and expression of antisocial personality disorder, and the manic and hypomanic episodes of bipolar disorder.

The Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI) was developed in 1979 by Raskin and Hall, and since then, has become one of the most widely utilized personality measures for non-clinical levels of the trait narcissism. Since its initial development, the NPI has evolved from 220 items to the more commonly employed NPI-40 (1984) and NPI-16 (2006), as well as the novel NPI-1 inventory (2014). Derived from the DSM-III criteria for Narcissistic personality disorder (NPD), the NPI has been employed heavily by personality and social psychology researchers.

In psychology, manipulation is defined as an action designed to influence or control another person, usually in an underhanded or unfair manner which facilitates one's personal aims. Methods someone may use to manipulate another person may include seduction, suggestion, coercion, and blackmail to induce submission. Manipulation is generally considered a dishonest form of social influence as it is used at the expense of others. Barring mental disabilities, humans are inherently capable of manipulative and deceptive behavior, with the main differences being of specific personality characteristics or disorders.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">HEXACO model of personality structure</span> Six-dimensional model of human personality

The HEXACO model of personality structure is a six-dimensional model of human personality that was created by Ashton and Lee and explained in their book, The H Factor of Personality, based on findings from a series of lexical studies involving several European and Asian languages. The six factors, or dimensions, include honesty-humility (H), emotionality (E), extraversion (X), agreeableness (A), conscientiousness (C), and openness to experience (O). Each factor is composed of traits with characteristics indicating high and low levels of the factor. The HEXACO model was developed through similar methods as other trait taxonomies and builds on the work of Costa and McCrae and Goldberg. The model, therefore, shares several common elements with other trait models. However, the HEXACO model is unique mainly due to the addition of the honesty-humility dimension.

The Psychopathic Personality Inventory (PPI-Revised) is a personality test for traits associated with psychopathy in adults. The PPI was developed by Scott Lilienfeld and Brian Andrews to assess these traits in non-criminal populations, though it is still used in clinical populations as well. In contrast to other psychopathy measures, such as the Hare Psychopathy Checklist (PCL), the PPI is a self-report scale, rather than an interview-based assessment. It is intended to comprehensively index psychopathic personality traits without assuming particular links to anti-social or criminal behaviors. It also includes measures to detect impression management or careless responding.

The Levenson Self-Report Psychopathy scale (LSRP) is a 26-item, 4-point Likert scale, self-report inventory to measure primary and secondary psychopathy in non-institutionalized populations. It was developed in 1995 by Michael R. Levenson, Kent A. Kiehl and Cory M. Fitzpatrick. The scale was created for the purpose of conducting a psychological study examining antisocial disposition among a sample of 487 undergraduate students attending psychology classes at the University of California, Davis.

Callous-unemotional traits (CU) are distinguished by a persistent pattern of behavior that reflects a disregard for others, and also a lack of empathy and generally deficient affect. The interplay between genetic and environmental risk factors may play a role in the expression of these traits as a conduct disorder (CD). While originally conceived as a means of measuring the affective features of psychopathy in children, measures of CU have been validated in university samples and adults.

Delroy L. Paulhus is a personality psychology researcher and professor. He received his doctorate from Columbia University and has worked at the University of California, Berkeley and the University of California, Davis. Currently, Paulhus is a professor of psychology at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver, Canada where he teaches undergraduate and graduate courses. He is best known for being the co creator of the dark triad, along with fellow researcher Kevin Williams.

Machiavellianism in the workplace is a concept studied by many organizational psychologists. Conceptualized originally by Richard Christie and Florence Geis, Machiavellianism in psychology refers to a personality trait construct based on a cold, callous and exploitative orientation. It has been adapted and applied to the context of the workplace and organizations by psychology academics. Oliver James wrote on the effects of Machiavellianism and other dark triad personality traits in the workplace, the others being narcissism and psychopathy.

Everyday sadism is a personality trait characterized by the enjoyment of inflicting or witnessing pain upon other people or animals. Those who fit the characteristic are referred to as "sadists" or as "sadistic". Sadism has been associated with a lack of empathy, and with psychopathic traits.

The Dark Triad Dirty Dozen (DTDD) is a brief 12-question personality inventory test to assess the possible presence of the three subclinical dark triad traits: Machiavellianism, narcissism, and psychopathy. The DTDD was developed to identify the dark triad traits among subclinical adult populations. It is a screening test.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Machiavellianism (psychology)</span> Personality construct

In the field of personality psychology, Machiavellianism is the name of a personality trait construct characterized by interpersonal manipulation, indifference to morality, lack of empathy, and a calculated focus on self-interest. Psychologists Richard Christie and Florence L. Geis created the construct and named it after Niccolò Machiavelli, as they used truncated and edited statements similar to his writing style to study variations in human behaviors. The construct's relation to the thinker himself is exclusively nominal. 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 are more likely to have a high level of manipulativeness, deceitfulness and a cynical, unemotional temperament.

Richard Christie (1918–1992) was an American social and personality psychologist. He was influential in many studies on human psychology, most notably in the creation of the personality trait known as Machiavellianism.

Studies in Machiavellianism is a book published in 1970 by psychologists Richard Christie and Florence L. Geis. It is a collection of 38 studies into the interpersonal personality variable that they dubbed Machiavellianism. It is the first book on the subject, the first use of the word "Machiavellianism" as the name of a personality variable, and would launch an entire field of study.

References

  1. 1 2 Rauthmann, John F. "Investigating the MACH–IV with item response theory and proposing the trimmed MACH." Journal of personality assessment 95.4 (2013): 388-397.
  2. Jones, D. N., & Paulhus, D. L. (2014). Introducing the short dark triad (SD3) a brief measure of dark personality traits. Assessment, 21(1), 28-41.
  3. 1 2 3 Monaghan, C., Bizumic, B., & Sellbom, M. (2016). The role of Machiavellian views and tactics in psychopathology. Personality and Individual Differences, 94, 72-81.
  4. Christie, R., & Geis, F. L. (2013). Studies in machiavellianism. Academic Press.
  5. 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
  6. "Despite such popular uses of concepts from Machiavelli, “Machiavellianism”, as a concept in psychology, was not formulated until 1970."
    • Monaghan, C. (2019). Two-Dimensional Machiavellianism: Conceptualisation, Measurement, and Well-Being.
  7. Studies in Machiavellianism, page 17
  8. Dahling, J. J., Whitaker, B. G., & Levy, P. E. (2009). The development and validation of a new Machiavellianism scale. Journal of management, 35(2), 219-257.
  9. Jones, Daniel N.; Paulhus, Delroy L. (2009). "Machiavellianism". In Leary, Mark R.; Hoyle, Rick H. (eds.). Handbook of Individual Differences in Social Behavior. Guilford Press. pp. 93–108. ISBN 978-1-59385-647-2.
  10. Williams, M. L., Hazleton, V., & Renshaw, S. (1975). The measurement of Machiavellianism: A factor analytic and correlational study of Mach IV and Mach V. Speech Monographs, 42, 151–159. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03637757509375889
  11. Fehr, B., Samsom, D., & Paulhus, D. L. (1992). The construct of Machiavellianism: Twenty years later. In C. D. Spielberger, & J. N. Butcher (Eds.), Advances in personality assessment. 9. (pp. 77–116). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum
  12. Handbook of Individual Differences in Social Behavior, pg 102
  13. Geng, Y., Qin, B., Xia, D., & Ye, Q. (2011). Reliability and validity of the kiddie mach scale in Chinese children. Psychological Reports, 108(1), 229-238.
  14. Loftus, S. T., & Glenwick, D. S. (2001). Machiavellianism and empathy in an adolescent residential psychiatric population. Residential Treatment for Children & Youth, 19(2), 39-57.
  15. Williams, M. L., Hazleton, V., & Renshaw, S. (1975) The measurement of Machiavellianism: a factor analytic and correlation study of Mach IV and Mach V. Communication Monographs, 42,151-159.
  16. Corral, S., & Calvete, E. (2000) Machiavellianism: dimensionality of the Mach IV and its relation to self-monitoring in a Spanish sample. The Spanish journal of Psychology, 3, 3-13.
  17. Sutton, J., & Keogh, E. (2001) Components of Machiavellian beliefs in children: relationships with personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 30,137-148.
  18. Handbook of Individual Differences in Social Behavior, pg 103
  19. Lau, K. S., & Marsee, M. A. (2013). Exploring narcissism, psychopathy, and Machiavellianism in youth: Examination of associations with antisocial behavior and aggression. Journal of Child and Family studies, 22, 355-367.
  20. 1 2 3 Collison, K. L., Vize, C. E., Miller, J. D., & Lynam, D. R. (2018). Development and preliminary validation of a five factor model measure of Machiavellianism. Psychological assessment, 30(10), 1401.
  21. Kückelhaus, B. P., Blickle, G., Kranefeld, I., Körnig, T., & Genau, H. A. (2021). Five factor Machiavellianism: Validation of a new measure. Journal of Personality Assessment, 103(4), 509-522.
  22. Dahling, J. J., Whitaker, B. G., & Levy, P. E. (2009). The development and validation of a new Machiavellianism scale. Journal of management, 35(2), 219-257.
  23. Miller, B. K., Smart, D. L., & Rechner, P. L. (2015). Confirmatory factor analysis of the Machiavellian Personality Scale. Personality and individual differences, 82, 120-124.
  24. McHoskey, J. W., Worzel, W., & Szyarto, C. (1998). Machiavellianism and psychopathy. Journal of personality and social psychology, 74(1), 192.
  25. Shining Light on the Dark Side of Personality: Measurement Properties and Theoretical Advances, p. 80
  26. Rauthmann, John F.; Will, Theresa (30 April 2011). "Proposing a Multidimensional Machiavellianism Conceptualization"
  27. Dahling, Jason J.; Whitaker, Brian G.; Levy, Paul E. (March 2009). "The Development and Validation of a New Machiavellianism Scale". Journal of Management. 35 (2): 219–257. doi:10.1177/0149206308318618. S2CID   54937924.
  28. Cohen, A. (2018). Counterproductive work behaviors: Understanding the dark side of personalities in organizational Life. Routledge.