روش گوناگون برای نفوذ اجتماعی: شخصیت های سه گانه تاریک و تاکتیک نفوذ اجتماعی
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||تعداد کلمات|
|37271||2012||6 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||4759 کلمه|
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Personality and Individual Differences, Volume 52, Issue 4, March 2012, Pages 521–526
To avoid detection, those high on Dark Triad traits (i.e., narcissism, psychopathy, and Machiavellianism) may adopt a protean approach to interpersonal influence. We show the Dark Triad traits correlate with a number of unique tactics of influence (Study 1; N = 259). We show this protean approach was insensitive to differences in targets of manipulation (Study 2; N = 296). When forced to choose one tactic to solve different adaptive problems, the Dark Triad traits were correlated with unique tactical choices (Study 3; N = 268). We show these associations are generally robust to controlling for the Big Five and participants’ sex (Study 1 and 2). We discuss the theoretical implications of these findings for both life history and cheater-detection theories.
How do people like Bernie Madoff and characters like James Bond influence others? How are they able to be successful when they embody the Dark Triad traits (i.e., narcissism, psychopathy, and Machiavellianism; Paulhus & Williams, 2002)? Most research has treated these traits as bad for individuals and society (Kowalski, 2001). Indeed, these traits are linked to antisocial tendencies like dishonesty (Lee & Ashton, 2005), aggressiveness (Jones & Paulhus, 2010), disagreeableness (Paulhus & Williams, 2002), and alcohol, cigarette, drug use (Jonason, Koenig, & Tost, 2010). Despite these apparently antisocial correlates, evolutionary psychologists suggest that even undesirable personality traits can be adaptive (i.e., providing solutions to problems like mating or survival), but may be so only on a shorter timescale (Buss, 2009). In the present study, we attempt to understand how those high on the Dark Triad traits may enact a successful fast life strategy. Life history theory proposes that individual differences are emergent solutions to adaptive problems that are activated by key social and environmental events (Kaplan & Gangestad, 2005). Natural selection may have shaped individuals to adopt mutualistic or antagonistic social strategies in response to differing socioecological conditions (Figueredo et al., 2006). Unfortunately, little is known about the tactical ways individuals enact an antagonistic life strategy. Narcissism is linked to a number of tactics of social influence (Buss & Chiodo, 1991), those high on the Dark Triad are selfish, competitive, and strategic (Jonason et al., 2010 and Jones and Paulhus, 2010), and Machiavellianism is characterized by interpersonal manipulation (Christie & Geis, 1970). This suggests to us that these traits might be part of a “cheater strategy” (Jonason et al., 2009 and Mealey, 1995). Taking an evolutionary perspective, we ask, “What is the primary adaptive challenge of anyone enacting a cheater strategy?” The cheater is successful in as much as he/she wins in a co-evolutionary arms race with cheater-detection mechanisms (Cosmides and Tooby, 1992 and Cummins, 1999). Most research on cheater-detection is focused on those who would be cheated, not on those who are doing the cheating. The challenge for cheaters may be to avoid detection over repeated exchanges. We would argue that a powerful way to avoid detection is to use a “whatever-it-takes” attitude towards social influence (Gunnthorsdottir, McCabe, & Smith, 2002). By not relying on any one strategy, cheaters may be able to avoid detection. If we assume that people are looking for—and are overly attentive to—patterns in the world, then being protean in the manipulation tactics they deploy may be adaptive. There is considerable advantage noted in the biological literature on the adaptive value of protean behavior or being unpredictable (Driver & Humphries, 1988). Thus, the Dark Triad traits are expected to correlate positively with multiple manipulation tactics. In particular, we expect each trait to provide a unique approach to social influence, adding to the protean approach to social influence we described above. We expect tactics that are “colder” to be isolated to psychopathy because of the selfish, impulsive, and aggressive nature of those who embody this trait (Hare, 1996 and Jones and Paulhus, 2010). The psychopath may use seduction, coercion, and hardball as means of getting her/his way, but these tactics alone likely come with considerable risk. These risks may be offset by other parts of the Dark Triad. Machiavellianism may provide for one important tactic that may have considerable efficacy and limited adverse effects. The tactic of charm may be characteristic of those high on Machiavellianism ( Wilson, Near, & Miller, 1996). Similar to Machiavellianism, the narcissistic approach to social influence may provide more benefits than costs. Narcissism has been described as an approach-orientation ( Foster & Trimm, 2008) and these individuals may be interested in pleasing others to gain external validation ( Bogart, Benotsch, & Pavlovic, 2004). That is, they may do things in hopes of others viewing them favorably. In so doing, they may use tactics like social comparison and reciprocity. In three studies, we examine how individuals characterized by the Dark Triad traits enact their life history strategy at the tactical level. Study 1 assesses the basic correlations between the Dark Triad and tactics of influence. Study 2 assesses the tactics people use when trying to influence four types of individuals. Study 3 examines the tactics people use when trying to influence four types of individuals in efforts of succeeding at four adaptive goals.