Key Points
Early neglect, abuse, and other traumas can influence a person’s tendency to exploit others later in life.
People who try to control others have an unflattering view of humanity coupled with a willingness to use any means to achieve their goals.
People with a high degree of Machiavellianism do not seek personal pleasure but rather end-oriented results.
Are there people in your life who you feel have their agenda when they interact with you? Perhaps you have started a relationship with a fellow volunteer or coworker while completing a group project. However, after a couple of weeks, you begin to sense that this other person does not seem to have the best wishes of the group at heart.
After missing several deadlines, this person tells what you believe to be lies, such as “I sent this email—didn’t you receive it?” Worse, you find yourself being asked to be a conspirator, as it were, by also lying to other group members about the overdue items. To cover up the fact that the work wasn’t done, this person asks you to send an email that you know contains false information and won’t accept a refusal when you say you prefer not to. Your only recourse, without being dishonest with yourself, is to finish the work for both of you so that it can be done on time.
The tendency to manipulate others to achieve one’s ends falls under the category of “Machiavellianism,” a historical reference to the Italian philosopher Machiavelli associated with the phrase “the end justifies the means.” As a new study by Conal Monaghan and colleagues from the Australian National University (2020) points out, “History is also filled with many political leaders who have achieved and maintained power through callous and deceitful disregard for the freedom of their citizens” (p. 277).
The Australian researchers suggest that the psychological quality of Machiavellianism is “a relatively stable individual difference that is positively associated with unethical behavior in and outside of social interactions” (p. 278). Your group project collaborator may meet the criteria for this undesirable personality trait by tending to lie and manipulate without showing concern for the well-being of the group.
In their review of previous research, Monaghan and colleagues point out the importance of distinguishing between the manipulative tactics of people high in Machiavellianism and their views that others are untrustworthy, weak, and vulnerable to exploitation. Moreover, they suggest that this highly hostile trait is shaped by environmental factors rather than being part of personality. Childhood experiences that may shape the tendency to exploit and use others include early neglect, abuse, and exposure to other traumas that lead to the development of cynicism and distrust.
Although the authors do not cite Erik Erikson, his theory of psychosocial development seems relevant. Erikson suggested that you can achieve a sense of trust early in life if you grow up in an environment where you feel cared for and safe. In addition, as Monaghan and others suggest, feeling trust can also help you develop empathy and a sense of morality, making you less likely to seek to harm or exploit others.
While there is a reasonable basis for why someone might try to manipulate and exploit you, this doesn’t help matters when you have to figure out how to avoid these unpleasant outcomes with the people in your life. According to the Australian research team, people who try to control you do so from a combination of “an unflattering and pessimistic view of humanity, which is seen as naive, untrustworthy, selfish, and manipulative” (p. 278). This is the “perspectives” dimension of Machiavellianism. The second dimension, known as “tactics,” reflects “a willingness to use any means, regardless of conventional morality, to achieve their goals” (p. 278). Those high in Machiavellianism do not seek personal pleasure, but rather those outcomes that are directed toward a specific goal. They may enjoy seeing their convictions fulfilled to some extent (i.e., that others are naive), but their primary motivation is to get the job done with as little work on their part as possible.
Against this background, the Australian-led research team set out to develop an instrument that would make it possible to assess the two separate dimensions (opinions and tactics) of the Brief Machiavellianism Scale. They predicted that, if their scale were valid, the opinions dimension would be positively associated with a range of negative emotions (fear and emotional detachment) as well as high levels of narcissism. The authors expected that scores on Machiavellian tactics would be positively associated with psychopathy and the desire to maximize personal gain in a moral dilemma task. Monaghan et al. based their work on samples that included undergraduate students as well as employees of an international company and online participants recruited from a public website associated with the study.
The final 12-item scale is divided into two components, opinions and tactics, as shown below. The first three items in each category are scored as positive indicators and the second three as negative indicators of the trait:
Opinions subscale:
In my opinion, it is human nature to be dishonest.
I think most people take advantage of others in appropriate situations.
When people do something nice for me, they have another agenda.
I feel that deep down, people trust each other.
I think people would rather help each other than act selfishly.
I think most people are naturally kind.
Sub-tactics:
I think it’s okay to be unethical for the greater good.
I think it’s okay to take advantage of others to achieve an important goal.
It’s sometimes necessary to mislead others to get things done.
I value honesty over progress.
For me, it’s never justifiable to deceive others.
For me, it’s not worth doing something if it requires being unethical.
After subjecting scores on these items to rigorous statistical testing, including having scores from the same people over time (to assess consistency), the authors concluded that this two-factor measure performed as they expected. As they expected, people who scored high on the perspectives dimension were more likely to have hostile views of others, be highly narcissistic, and have lower levels of well-being.
Again, participants who scored high on the scale of the tactic were more likely to have higher predictive traits of psychopathy, a lack of desire for reciprocity, and an approach to moral dilemmas that emphasized means over ends. In other words, with just these 12 items, you should be able to get an accurate picture of an individual’s tendency to try to subjugate you to their cynical and exploitative worldviews.
Now that you know someone has this very unpleasant trait, how can you avoid being treated unfairly and dishonestly as they try to bend you to their will? Most importantly, realize that just as they are used to controlling people, they are likely to be more changeable than you might imagine. If “just say no” comes to mind, go ahead and follow that idea. Their cruelty and lack of morality shouldn’t stop you from asserting your free will, especially once you realize how low their empathy is. Second, consider reminding these individuals of the importance of achieving whatever goal you’re supposed to be working toward. In this group project, if your coworker wants to see results, you can emphasize that the best way to do that is to join forces. In short, most everyday manipulators you come across aren’t trying to take over the world in the true Machiavellian sense. Moreover, as Monaghan and others point out, Machiavellianism is a trait, not a category, and one that can be shaped through experience. There may be hope for those who control your life, but at the same time, avoid forcing them to fulfill their desires so that you can fulfill yours.
