Re-conceptualizing Machiavellianism and Social-Cognitive Skills

Abstract

Abstract. Machiavellianism is presumed to encompass advanced social-cognitive skill, but research has generally suggested that Machiavellian individuals are rather deficient in social-cognitive skill. However, previous research on the matter has been limited to measures of (a) Machiavellianism that are unidimensional and saturated with both antagonism and disinhibition and measures (b) only one type of social-cognitive skill. Using a large college sample ( N = 461), we examined how various dimensions of Machiavellianism relate to two types of social-cognitive skill: person-perception skill and general social prediction skill. Consistent with some prior theorizing, the planful dimension of Machiavellianism was positively related to both person-perception and general social prediction skills; antagonistic dimensions of Machiavellianism were negatively related to both skills; either agentic or cynical dimensions of Machiavellianism were generally unrelated to both skills. Overall, the current evidence suggests a complicated relationship between Machiavellianism and social-cognitive skill because Machiavellianism encompasses features that blend deficiency, proficiency, and average levels of social-cognitive skills.

Malicious mind readers? A meta-analysis on Machiavellianism and cognitive and affective empathy

“…The research is also aware of the strengths and weaknesses of diverse Mach scales concerning the factor structure and validity (Dahling et al, 2009;Paulhus & Jones, 2015). Some scholars suggested that different facets of Mach might account for differential or in some cases even opposing effects on empathy (Al Aïn et al, 2013;Hart et al, 2020). Our results support this assumption in that some Mach scales revealed more negative correlations than others did and that some measures even revealed null correlations.…”

“…A major point regards the issue that most studies treated Mach as unidimensional, although there is evidence on the superiority of the multidimensional assessment of Mach (e.g., Andreou, 2004;Andrew et al, 2008;Dahling et al, 2009;Hart et al, 2020;Monaghan et al, 2016Monaghan et al, , 2018Monaghan et al, , 2020Sutton & Keogh, 2001). The research is also aware of the strengths and weaknesses of diverse Mach scales concerning the factor structure and validity (Dahling et al, 2009;Paulhus & Jones, 2015).…”

“…Nevertheless, there remained a large proportion of variance unaccounted for by the Mach scale used. According to Hart et al (2020), long-term oriented, agentic aspects of Mach account for advantages in PCE, whereas disadvantages in PCE are due to distrustful, misanthropic facets of Mach. In the current meta-analysis, often-employed alternatives to the Mach-IV were short scales that mix up distinguishable facets of their higher-order construct and thus blur distinct relations between Mach and crucial criteria.…”

To be fooled or not to be fooled: Approach and avoidance facets of Machiavellianism.

“…However, Mach scales originating from the Mach IV (e.g., TDMS) reveal higher correlations among each other as compared to Mach scales that were developed independently, which applies to the MaaQ (Kavish et al, 2019). Consistent with this, Hart et al (2021) detected predominantly small correlations between the facets of the FFMI (Collison et al, 2018) and those of the TDMS (Monaghan et al, 2020), indicating a general anisomorphy among Mach scales (see also Monteiro et al, 2020). As opposed to both the MaaQ and the TDMS, the SD4-Mach scale does not provide a multidimensional structure.…”

To be fooled or not to be fooled: Approach and avoidance facets of Machiavellianism

“…However, Mach scales originating from the Mach IV (e.g., TDMS) reveal higher correlations among each other as compared to Mach scales that were developed independently, which applies to the MaaQ (Kavish et al, 2019). Consistent with this, Hart et al (2020) detected predominantly small correlations between the facets of the FFMI (Collison et al, 2018) and those of the TDMS (Monaghan et al, 2020), indicating a general anisomorphy among Mach scales (see also Monteiro et al, 2020). As opposed to both the MaaQ and the TDMS, the SD4-Mach scale does not provide a multidimensional structure.…”