An integration of the Machiavellianism (MACH) and psychopathy constructs based on a dimensional view of personality and personality disorders and a recognition of B. Karpman's (1941Karpman's ( , 1948 conceptual distinction between primary and secondary psychopathy is presented. Positive associations between MACH and both primary and secondary psychopathy were found. It is concluded that the Mach-IV is a global measure of psychopathy in noninstitutionalized populations (i.e., one that assesses but confounds both primary and secondary psychopathy) and that the primary differences between MACH and psychopathy are not traceable to substantive theoretical issues but to the different professional affiliations they are associated with: personality and social psychology and clinical psychology, respectively.Although the fourth edition of the American Psychiatric Association's (1994) Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV) identifies personality disorders as taxonomies, numerous authors have argued for a dimensional approach to the classification of personality disorders and psychopathology in general (

Four studies examined the generality of attitude polarization (C. G. Lord, L. Ross, & M. R. Lepper, 1979). Biased assimilation of essays on 2 controversial issues was substantial and correlated with reported attitude change. Polarization was observed for reported attitude change on capital punishment and generally stronger in Ss with extreme than moderate attitudes. Polarization was not indicated in a pre-post measurement design. For affirmative action, reported polarization was not observed. The hypothesis that Ss reporting polarization would subsequently write particularly strong essays was not supported, although those reporting depolarization wrote relatively weak essays. The results suggest the relevance of individual differences in reported attitude change but do not confirm the powerful inferences frequently drawn regarding the pervasive, undesirable consequences of self-reported attitude polarization.An influential, frequently cited experiment in the social cognition literature is that by Lord, Ross, and Lepper (1979). In this study, proponents and opponents of capital punishment were shown an identical set of alleged research findings containing evidence both in favor of and against capital punishment. Two important phenomena were observed. First, subjects evaluated more positively the research that agreed with their preexisting position, a result termed biased assimilation. Thus, subjects who were in favor of capital punishment rated method Xzs superior to method Y if the former yielded support for the deterrent effect of capital punishment, but rated the identical method as inferior if it refuted the efficacy of capital punishment. The converse was true for subjects opposed to capital punishment.The second, particularly intriguing finding was that subjects reported that their attitudes had become more extreme in the direction of their initial point of view after evaluating the research evidence, an effect termed attitude polarization. Thus, showing proponents and opponents of capital punishment an identical body of mixed evidence appeared "to increase further the gap between their views" (Lord et al, 1979(Lord et al, , p. 2105. Lord et al. (1979) suggested that in the subjects' biased processing of the research information, they had emerged with an inflated sense of the amount of evidence supporting their initial belief. Correlational analyses involving the relative degree of biased assimilation and the magnitude of reported attitude change (polarization) supported this account. That subjects gave substantially higher evaluations to research that supported

No abstract

Two experiments examined stereotype and risk factors in suntanning. In the first, subjects formed more positive impressions of a target described as having a suntan than of a control target. Ratings were not as positive, however, if the tan was portrayed as having been intentionally sought. A negative facet to the tan stereotype, in terms of perceived vanity, was also observed. In the second, subjects observed a videotape documenting the risks associated with sun exposure either before or after responding to a questionnaire dealing with attitudes and beliefs about suntanning. The results were consistent with the interpretation that the tape influenced observers in the direction of perceiving a tan as less attractive and enhancing their concern about the dangers of tanning. Subjects displayed the “optimistic bias” effect (Weinstein, 1980) in their estimated likelihood of getting skin cancer. While those with higher reported tan levels were more likely to endorse the attractiveness stereotype associated with a suntan, there was minimal evidence that these individuals were apprehensive or concerned about the risk factors. Their responses to a number of items suggested a measure of resistance or denial. Women generally indicated greater awareness and concern about risks than did men. The results of both studies suggest the important role played by images perceived to be associated with suntanning. In the context of mounting evidence regarding the carcinogenic properties of sun exposure, implications for changes in tanning behavior were considered.

Associations of Machiavellianism and narcissism were examined in two samples (Ns = 214 and 205) via the Mach-IV and the Narcissistic Personality Inventory. Scores on these self-report measures were correlated. Machiavelianism scores were positively associated with aspects of narcissism which indicate maladjustment, i.e., entitlement and exploitativeness, and inversely associated with adaptive narcissistic tendencies, i.e., self-sufficiency. The discussion focuses on the relative adjustment of those scoring high on Machiavelianism.