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. 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. People scoring high on the scale tend to endorse manipulative statements, and behave accordingly, contrary to those who score lowly. Their basic results have been widely replicated. Measured on the Mach - IV scale, males score, on average, slightly higher on Machiavellianism than females.
Etiology
A recent behavioral genetics study noted that Machiavellianism has both significantly genetic and environmental influences. There has also been extensive research on Machiavellianism in young children and adolescents, via a measure dubbed the "kiddie Mach" test.
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 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.
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.
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. Recently, new research gives support to a contrary viewpoint. 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. Both emotional empathy and emotion recognition have been shown to have negative correlations with Machiavellianism. 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.
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. More recent research suggests that while Machiavellianism and psychopathy overlap heavily, they are distinct personality constructs. Psychopathy differs from Machiavellianism mainly in impulsivity, a lack of long term planning and self control. Machiavellianism has been found to be negatively correlated with agreeableness and conscientiousness, two dimensions of the "big five" personality model. However, Machiavellianism correlates more highly with the honesty-humility dimension of the six-factor HEXACO model than with any of the big five dimensions. 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. 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 others.
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 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. 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", reproduces the views and tactics dimensions across countries, genders, sample types, and scale category length. 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.
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. 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.
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. 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. 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
Machiavellianism is also studied by organizational psychologists, especially those whom study manipulative behaviors in workplace settings. Workplace behaviors associated with this concept include flattery, deceit, coercion, and abusive supervision.
