Machiavellianism vs. Attitude Inventory

Abstract

The Machiavellianism V Attitude Inventory (Mach V) is an early iteration of a psychological scale designed to measure the personality trait of Machiavellianism. Developed by Richard Christie and colleagues around 1969, the Mach V utilizes a unique forced-choice format, requiring respondents to select the statement they consider “most true” and the one they consider “most false” from a cluster of three attitude statements. This format was specifically chosen to mitigate social desirability bias inherent in earlier, simpler scales.

The Mach V served as a precursor to the more famous and widely adopted Mach IV scale, which became the standard instrument for measuring this construct in social psychology research. The core focus of the inventory is assessing cynical worldviews, manipulative tactics, and emotional detachment typical of high-Mach individuals, reflecting attitudes consistent with the philosophy attributed to Niccolò Machiavelli.

Keywords

Machiavellianism, Mach V, Mach IV, Personality, Manipulation, Attitude Inventory, Christie, Forced-choice format, Social measurement.

Authors

Richard Christie, Florence L. Geis, and others.

Purpose

The primary purpose of the Machiavellianism V Attitude Inventory was the empirical measurement of the Machiavellianism trait—a personality characteristic defined by a tendency toward interpersonal manipulation, emotional coldness, and a pragmatic disregard for conventional morality. The scale was created to move beyond simple self-report questionnaires by utilizing a triadic forced-choice format.

This specific methodological approach forces the respondent to choose between statements representing high-Mach views, low-Mach views, and neutral or irrelevant filler items. This structure was crucial for the early development of personality research, aiming to create a more objective measure of an inherently socially undesirable trait by controlling for the tendency of respondents to present themselves favorably.

Construct

The Mach V measures the psychological construct of Machiavellianism, which operationalizes characteristics derived from the political philosophy articulated by Niccolò Machiavelli. Psychologically, the construct encompasses several components, including a pragmatic and cynical view of others, a willingness to manipulate, and a focus on self-interest and instrumental goals rather than moral principles.

High-Mach individuals, as assessed by this inventory, hold a generally cynical belief that people are inherently weak, easily manipulated, and driven primarily by self-interest, thereby justifying the use of deception and cunning to achieve desired outcomes. The items in the Mach V reflect three key attitudinal clusters: Tactics (strategies for manipulation), Views of Human Nature (cynicism and distrust), and Morality (pragmatic disregard for ethical constraints).

Validity

While the Mach IV is the most commonly studied version, the Mach V demonstrated initial construct validity by showing expected correlations with behavioral measures of manipulation and success in specific experimental settings, particularly those involving bargaining or negotiation. The inherent design using a forced-choice format was a direct attempt to enhance validity by reducing the impact of confounding variables like social desirability bias, leading to a purer measure of the true attitude.

Subsequent psychometric studies often confirmed high correlation between the Mach V and Mach IV, supporting the notion that they measure the same underlying personality dimension. The content validity of the scale is strong, as the items were meticulously developed by Christie and Geis based on direct quotations and interpretations of Machiavelli’s works.

Reliability

Reliability estimates for the Mach V, though less frequently reported in isolation than those for the Mach IV, generally suggested acceptable internal consistency for an early psychological scale. Because of the non-standard scoring method required by the forced-choice format (which involves comparing items rather than rating them independently), standard internal consistency metrics like Cronbach’s Alpha often yield values slightly lower than those observed for the simpler Mach IV Likert scale.

However, published reports indicated that the scale possessed sufficient test-retest reliability across short administration intervals, suggesting that the measured trait is stable over time. Historically, researchers sometimes preferred the Mach IV for large-scale studies due to its scoring simplicity, but the Mach V remains a crucial instrument in the history of Machiavellianism measurement due to its methodological rigor.

Factor Analysis

Initial factor analysis conducted on the Mach V items typically supported a strong single factor corresponding to the general construct of Machiavellianism. The unique triadic structure of the forced-choice format, however, complicates the application of standard exploratory factor analysis methods designed for unconstrained continuous scales.

Research focusing on the subsequent Mach IV scale, which shares conceptual content, often suggests the presence of distinct sub-dimensions, such as Views of Human Nature and Manipulative Tactics. These dimensions are implicitly addressed within the item clusters of the Mach V, but the scale is primarily designed to produce a single, summative high-Mach score reflecting the global attitude.

Instrument

Test Type: Psychological scale; Attitude Inventory.

Format: Triadic Forced-Choice Format (20 item clusters, 60 total statements).

Language Available: Primarily English; subsequent Mach scales have been adapted into numerous languages.

Population Group: General adult population; widely used in academic and student samples.

Age Group: Adolescents and Adults (typically college-aged and older).

Population Details: Originally standardized using undergraduate student populations in social psychology studies at institutions such as Columbia University and the University of Michigan.

Test Methodology: Respondents are presented with 20 clusters of three statements (A, B, C) and must select one statement as “most true” and one as “most false.” Scoring assigns 3 points for selecting the high-Mach statement as “most true,” 2 points for the neutral item, and 1 point for the low-Mach item. Points are reversed for “most false” selections. Total scores range from 20 (low Mach) to 160 (high Mach).

Keywords

Machiavellianism, Personality Assessment, Triadic Choice, Attitude Measurement, Cynicism, Manipulation, Christie and Geis, Psychometrics.

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Information not publicly available.

Affiliation Email addresses: Information not available from the source content.

Correspondence Address: Correspondence generally directed to the Department of Social Psychology, Columbia University, at the time of publication (1969).

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The Mach V was developed circa 1969. As an early, academic psychological scale used primarily for research purposes, its items were published in major psychological measure compendiums and are generally considered available for non-commercial academic use.

No specific fee or commercial licensing structure is typically associated with the Mach V for non-profit research. Permissions should be sought from the primary authors or the institutions that published the early compendiums.

The original PDF containing this instrument can be downloaded here: https://www.psc.isr.umich.edu/dis/infoserv/isrpub/pdf/Measuresofsocialpsychologicalattitudes_2928_.PDF

Reference’s

Christie, R., and others. (1968). Unpublished manuscript, Department of Social Psychology, Columbia University.

Robinson, John P., Shaver, Phillip R. (1969). Measures of Political Attitudes. Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan. Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Christie, R., and F. L. Geis. (1970) How devious are you? Take the Machiavelli test to find out. Journal of Management in Engineering 15.4: 17.

Christie, R. & Geis, F. (1970) Studies in Machiavellianism. NY: Academic Press.

Corral, Susana and Calvete, Esther. (2000). Machiavellianism: Dimensionality of the Mach IV and its Relation to Self-Monitoring in a Spanish Sample. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 3(1); 3-13.

Items of the Machiavellianism V Attitude Inventory

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

1.

A. It takes more imagination to be a successful criminal than a successful business man.

B. The phrase “the road to hell is paved with good intentions” contains a lot of truth.

C. Most men forget more easily the death of their father than the loss of their property.

2.

A. Men are more concerned with the car they drive than with the clothes their wives wear.

B. It is very important that imagination and creativity in children be cultivated.

C. People suffering from incurable diseases should have the choice of being put painlessly to death.

3.

A. Never tell anyone the real reason you did something unless it is useful to do so.

B. The well-being of the individual is the goal that should be worked for before anything else.

C. Once a truly intelligent person makes up his mind about the answer to a problem he rarely continues to think about it.

4.

A. People are getting so lazy and self- indulgent that It is bad for our country.

B. The best way to handle people is to tell them what they want to hear.

C. I t would be a good thing if people were kinder to others less fortunate than themselves.

5.

A. Most people are basically good and kind.

B. The best criteria for a wife or husband is compatibility — other ch‎aracteristics are nice but not essential.

C. Only after a man has gotten what he wants from life should he concern himself with the injustices in the world.

6.

A. Most people who get ahead in the world lead clean‚ moral lives.

B. Any man worth his salt shouldn’t be blamed for putting his career above his family.

C. People would be better off if they were concerned less with how to do things and more with what to do.

7.

A. A good teacher is one who points out unanswered questions rather than gives explicit answers.

B. When you ask someone to do something for you‚ it is be s t to give the real reasons for wanting it rather than giving reasons which might carry more weight.

C. A person’s job is the best s ingle guide as to the sort of person he is.

8.

A. The construction of such monumental works as the Egyptian pyramids was worth the enslavement of the workers who built them.

B. Once a way of handling problems has been worked out it is best to stick to it.

C. One should take action only when sure that It is morally right.

9.

A. The world would be a much better place to live in if people would let the future take care of itself and concern themselves only with enjoying the present.

B. It is wise to flatter important people.

C. Once a decision has been made‚ it is best to keep changing it as new circumstances arise.

10.

A. It is a good policy to act as if you are doing the things you do because you have no other choice.

B. The biggest difference between most criminals and other people is that criminals are stupid enough to get caught.

C. Even the most hardened and vicious criminal has a spark of decency somewhere with in him.

11.

A. All in all‚ it is better to be humble and honest than to be important and dishonest.

B. A man who is able and willing to work hard has a good chance of succeeding in whatever he wants to do.

C. I f a thing does not help us in our daily lives‚ It isn’t very important.

12.

A. A person shouldn’t be punished for breaking a law which he thinks is unreasonable.

B. Too many criminal s are not punished for their crime.

C. There is no excuse for lying to someone else.

13.

A. Generally speaking‚ men won’t work hard unless they’re forced to do so.

B. Every person is entitled to a second chance‚ even after he commits a serious mistake.

C. People who can’t make up their minds aren’t worth bothering about.

14.

A. A man’s first responsibility is to his wife‚ not his mother.

B. Most men are brave.

C. It’s best to pick friends that are intellectually stimulating rather than ones It is comfortable to be around.

15.

A. There are very few people in the world worth concerning oneself about.

B. It is hard to get ahead without cutting corners here and there.

C. A capable person motivated for his own gain is more useful to society than a well-meaning but in effective one.

16.

A. It is best to give others the impression that you can change your mind easily .

B. It is a good working policy to keep on good terms with everyone.

C. Honesty is the best policy in all cases.

17.

A. It is possible to be good in all respects.

B. To help oneself I s good; to help others even better.

C. War and threats of war are unchangeable facts of human life.

18.

A. Barnum was probably right when he said that there’s at least one sucker born every minute.

B. Life is pretty dull unless one deliberately stirs up some excitement.

C. Most people would be better off if they controlled their emotions.

19.

A. Sensitivity to the feelings of others is worth more than poise in social situations.

B. The ideal society is one where everybody knows his place and accepts it.

C. It is safest to assume that all people have a vicious streak and it will come out when they are given a chance.

20.

A. People who talk about abstract problems usually don’t know what they are talking about.

B. Anyone who completely trusts anyone else is asking for trouble.

C. It is essential for the functioning of a democracy that everyone votes.