PsychologicalMANIPULATIVE

Machiavellianism

What it is

A strategic, cynical orientation to other people — treating them as instruments, telling them what they want to hear, and keeping emotional distance — first measured by Christie and Geis in 1970 and named for the author of The Prince.

How it works

Richard Christie built the Mach-IV scale from statements drawn from Machiavelli — that the best way to handle people is to tell them what they want to hear, that one should never reveal the real reason for an action unless it is useful — and with Florence Geis published Studies in Machiavellianism in 1970. High scorers (“high Machs”) endorse strategic deception and distrust others. The experimental findings were specific: high Machs won more in bargaining games and were more persuasive, but only under three conditions Christie and Geis called the “cool syndrome” — face-to-face interaction, latitude for improvisation, and emotional involvement of the other party that the high Mach did not share. Where rules were fixed and emotions absent, they had no advantage. Wilson, Near and Miller's 1996 synthesis treats the trait as a social strategy that pays in some environments and not others, and later work finds high Machs are flexible tacticians rather than uniformly hostile: they cooperate when watched and defect when not. The persuasion profile that follows is recognizable — flattery calibrated to the listener, strategic disclosure, alliances of convenience, and a willingness to let others carry the emotional weight of a negotiation. The trait is continuous and appears in every profession and party; the tactics, not the people, are the subject here.

Real-world examples

  • •Christie and Geis (1970): in a three-player game in which two players had to form a coalition to split ten dollars, high Machs consistently ended up with the most, switching partners fluidly and keeping others emotionally engaged while remaining detached themselves.
  • •Machiavelli's advice in The Prince — that it is safer to be feared than loved, and that a ruler must seem merciful, faithful, and religious while being ready not to be — is the literary source of the construct and of much of the scale's wording.
  • •Negotiation training that teaches calibrated questions and strategic silence is legitimate; the same techniques, combined with misrepresenting one's alternatives and feigning warmth, are the high-Mach playbook.
  • •Kish-Gephart, Harrison and Treviño's 2010 meta-analysis found Machiavellianism among the individual traits most consistently associated with unethical choices at work, especially where supervision is loose and outcomes are hard to measure.

Ethical guidelines

  • ●Telling people what they want to hear in order to steer them is deception even when every sentence is true; the ethics of influence turn on what you let the other person believe about your aims.
  • ●Emotional detachment is a legitimate professional skill in a surgeon or a mediator; it becomes manipulation when paired with cultivating an emotional involvement in the other party that you intend to exploit.
  • ●Do not label opponents “Machiavellian” as a substitute for showing what they did; the term is a measured trait, not an insult with evidence attached.
  • ●If strategic thinking is your strength, disclose your interests in any negotiation where the other party is emotionally invested and you are not.

How to defend against it

  • ►Remove the three conditions of the cool syndrome: negotiate in writing rather than face-to-face, fix the rules and agenda in advance, and keep your own emotional stake out of the room.
  • ►Verify flattery against the record. A high-Mach compliment is calibrated to what you want to hear; check whether the same person says it about others, and whether it is tied to an ask.
  • ►Ask directly what the other party wants and watch for the answer that only makes sense as a means; strategic disclosure is the tell.
  • ►Bring an unaffiliated third party into any deal where you are invested and the other side is cool; their detachment cancels the advantage.
  • ►Keep alliances explicit. Coalition-switching works in the dark; put agreements in writing with everyone present.

References

  1. Christie, R., & Geis, F. L. (1970). Studies in Machiavellianism. Academic Press
    The Mach-IV scale, the bargaining experiments, and the cool-syndrome conditions under which high Machs prevail.
  2. Wilson, D. S., Near, D., & Miller, R. R. (1996). Machiavellianism: A synthesis of the evolutionary and psychological literatures. Psychological Bulletin, 119(2), 285-299
    Machiavellianism as a context-dependent social strategy.
  3. Jones, D. N., & Paulhus, D. L. (2009). Machiavellianism. In M. R. Leary & R. H. Hoyle (Eds.), Handbook of Individual Differences in Social Behavior (pp. 93-108). Guilford Press
    Review of the trait as strategic, flexible manipulation distinct from psychopathy and narcissism.
  4. Kish-Gephart, J. J., Harrison, D. A., & Treviño, L. K. (2010). Bad apples, bad cases, and bad barrels: Meta-analytic evidence about sources of unethical decisions at work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(1), 1-31
    Machiavellianism as a consistent individual-level predictor of unethical workplace choices.
  5. Machiavelli, N. (1532). The Prince. Florence (first published posthumously)
    The source text from which the construct and the scale items were drawn.
Last reviewed
Suggest a correction

Detect Machiavellianism in any text

Paste any message, email, or article into our free Manipulation Detector to see if Machiavellianism or other techniques are being used on you.

Try the Detector FreeCreate Free Account