The Relationship Between Dark Triad Personality Traits and Belief in a Just World

The Relationship Between Dark Triad Personality Traits and Belief in a Just World

Jamie Peutherer1, Lana Ireland

Department of Psychology, Glasgow Caledonian University, Cowcaddens Road, Glasgow G4 0BA, Scotland

1Corresponding Author: Tel. +44 7340 093237 Email. [email protected]

J. Peutherer & L. Ireland | The Relationship Between Dark Triad Traits of Personality and Belief in a Just World

2

AbstractThe Dark Triad (DT) is made up of three personality traits which are all related to socially

and morally undesirable behaviours, these are psychopathy, narcissism, and

Machiavellianism. These constructs were investigated with regards to their relationship with

Belief in a Just World (BJW), the tendency to believe that people generally receive outcomes

deserving of their actions. 177 UK domiciles took part in an online survey containing

measures of both DT and BJW; it was hypothesised that each DT trait would correlate

negatively with BJW. No predicted correlations were observed, however a significant

positive correlation was found between narcissism and BJW in male respondents. Theoretical

implications of this relationship are discussed. The present study represents an important step

in exploring how moral beliefs should be considered in both treating and working with DT

individuals, as well as beginning to understand the DT individual’s moralistic world-view.

Keywords: Dark Triad; Narcissism; Psychopathy; Machiavellianism; Belief in a Just World;

Morality; Personality


3

1. Introduction

The Dark Triad is made up of three personality traits which have been consistently

correlated with generally negative, immoral, unhelpful, and even malevolent behaviours -

these are psychopathy, Machiavellianism, and narcissism. Previous research on the

behaviours and attitudes of those scoring high in Dark Triad traits has focused intensely on

their associated behaviours and thinking in areas such as aggression (Walsh, 2013), mating

strategies (Jonason, Li, Webster, & Schmitt, 2009; Jonason, Luevano, & Adams, 2012),

empathy (Ali, Amorim, & Chamorro-Premuzic, 2009), and romantic relationships (Rohmann,

Bierhoff, & Schmohr, 2011). Despite this surge in interest, significantly fewer studies have

investigated the beliefs held by Dark Triad individuals which may also have a role to play in

their associated behaviours. This is arguably an important area of Dark Triad research worth

exploration when considering the moral implications of the actions associated with Dark

Triad personality traits. One set of individual and measurable beliefs which relate to morality

is Belief in a Just World (BJW), first put forward by Lerner (1980) as part of Just World

Theory.

Just World Theory is the global cognitive bias whereupon individuals subconsciously

hold the belief that people generally receive outcomes which are morally consistent with their

actions. This bias was thought to make the individual’s life easier to plan as well as making

goals seem more achievable as the individual could seemingly predict the consequences of

their behaviours (Lerner, 1980). Evidence for this theory having an effect on behaviour has

come in many forms, including observation of victim derogation (Lerner & Simmons, 1966),

responsibility attribution (Shaver, 1970), revenge attitudes (Kaiser, Brooke Vick, & Major,

2004), and helping behaviours (Depalma, Madey, Tillman, & Wheeler, 1999).

Studies investigating BJW and its relationship with personality traits are still in their

infancy, however some research in this field has found correlations between BJW and more


4

popular personality models such as the Five-Factor Model (Nudelman, 2013; Wolfradt &

Dalbert, 2003) and the HEXACO model (Bollmann, Krings, Maggiori, & Rossier, 2015).

However, no study published to date has yet explored BJW directly with regards to the Dark

Triad model.

Analysing the relationship between Dark Triad traits and BJW may offer insight into

how individuals possessing the traits perceive the world they live in through the lens of

morality. Understanding their attitudes towards the morality behind their actions and the

actions of others may aid in predicting the behaviours such an individual may present. Such

understanding could theoretically inform practitioners in the type of interventions they offer

their client, they could inform employers on who to hire to fill a vacant position, and they

could even inform individuals working in prison inmate reformation programmes.

In the case of psychopathy, it would seem almost logical to presume that an individual

scoring high in the trait would also score low in BJW. This is because of the trait’s

association with a lack of empathy for others (Mullins-Nelson, Salekin, & Leistico, 2006),

antisocial behaviour (Leistico, Salekin, DeCoster, & Rogers, 2008), and overrepresentation in

prison populations (Kiehl & Hoffman, 2011). A plethora of studies have found that high

levels of prison inmates score high enough to be considered psychopathic (Coid et al., 2009;

Ullrich, Paelecke, Kahle & Marneros, 2003). Others have also found psychopathy to be

linked with violent and aggressive tendencies (Serin, 1991; Walsh, 2013). If those high in

belief in a just world believe that morally wrong actions lead to negative outcomes then it

should follow that they would be less likely to engage in these types of behaviours, especially

those which would lead to imprisonment. Interestingly, Spielberger (1988) posits that those

high in BJW are less likely to express anger via potentially destructive means such as insults,

breaking objects, and door-slamming. Those high in BJW are also thought to be significantly

more dedicated to just means in attempting to achieve goals (Hafer, 2000). It becomes all too


5

clear that many aspects of a strong BJW seem incompatible with the findings regarding

psychopaths. With that in mind, it is hypothesised that psychopathy will be negatively

correlated with BJW.

With regards to narcissism, there are mixed thoughts as to whether the trait would

have a profound effect on BJW, and similarly whether BJW would influence narcissism.

While the attributes associated with narcissism are generally considered somewhat negative

and unhelpful -- such as an obvious self-focus, problems with exaggerating achievements,

problems sustaining relationships, difficulties with empathy, and being overly sensitive to

perceived insults and criticism (Thomas, 2010) – they appear not to be as malicious as

attributes associated with psychopathy. Wink (1991) argues that there are two distinct types

of narcissist; these are the overt and the covert narcissist. Overt narcissists were marked by

extraversion, grandiosity, and exhibitionism while covert narcissists were more associated

with introversion, anxiety, and insecurity. It could be argued that BJW be associated with

both types in that the overt narcissist may be assumed to have a strong BJW as the individual

believes themselves to be living in a world where they are superior, and that this is justified.

While the opposite may be true of the covert narcissist who masks their insecurities and

anxiety with exhibitionism and grand actions but may actually feel inferior and that this

perception of themselves is made so through an unjust world. Rose (2002) demonstrates this

to some degree by showing that overt narcissists report a higher self-esteem and life

satisfaction than covert narcissists, which is interesting to note when considering that BJW

also positively correlated with subjective wellbeing (Correia, Batista, & Lima, 2009). It was

therefore hypothesised that narcissism will be positively correlated with BJW.

Machiavellianism is perhaps the most easily argued trait to be associated with a low

BJW because of the negative moral outlook and self-serving behaviours which it is

characterised by (Jones and Paulhus, cited in Leary & Hoyle, 2009). Those scoring high in


6

Machiavellianism (high-machs) have been shown to carry out a range of behaviours which

would appear to be at odds with having a high BJW, such as cheating in academic settings

(Williams, Nathanson, and Paulhus, 2010), emotionally manipulating others (Grams &

Rogers, 1990), and lying (DePaulo & Rosenthal, 1979; Geis & Moon, 1981). It would be

logical to assume that one who believes that negative actions lead to negative outcomes

would avoid such actions. Machiavellian individuals are even described as having “features

of cynical worldviews and amorality” according to Jones and Paulhus (cited in Leary &

Hoyle, 2009). With this in mind it appears doubtful that Machiavellianism would be a

common trait among those with a high BJW, therefore it is hypothesised that

Machiavellianism will correlate negatively with BJW.

As personality traits have been shown to be rather consistent over time and age

(Fraley & Roberts, 2005; Roberts & DelVecchio, 2000), BJW could be targeted instead of

personality in an attempt to reduce the antisocial behaviours associated with Dark Triad traits,

assuming BJW can bring about change in personality over time. Just World Beliefs have been

shown to be somewhat malleable; being vulnerable to strong influence from television media

(Appel, 2008) and even mood (Goldenberg & Forgas, 2012). They are also easily threatened

by stimuli which challenge their BJW, most commonly through observing a victim suffering

(Correia, Vala, & Aguiar, 2007; Lerner & Miller, 1978; Miller, 1977). Assuming BJW has a

relationship with Dark Triad traits, and that this relationship can bring about personality

and/or behavioural change over time, research in this area could provide a new avenue of

consideration for practitioners working with Dark Triad individuals.

The present study investigated whether any of the Dark Triad traits of

Psychopathy, Narcissism, and Machiavellianism showed any relationship with BJW; as well

as how strong and in what direction this relationship erred. It was hypothesised that


7

psychopathy and Machiavellianism would correlate negatively with BJW. It was also

hypothesised that Narcissism would correlate positively with BJW.


8

2. Method

2.1 Sample & Procedure

Participants were United Kingdom domiciles between the ages of 18 and 65 years old.

All were recruited by the researcher through opportunity sampling via the internet. An online

hyperlink leading to the questionnaire was shared on the social media websites Facebook and

Twitter along with a brief but conservative introduction to the study. This hyperlink was also

shared via posts on the forums The Student Room and Personality Cafe to reach potential

participants all over the UK.

Participants were further recruited secondarily from snowball sampling by asking

participants who had already taken part to further share the questionnaire hyperlink among

others online. This ensured a higher response rate and thus a more representative sample. Any

responses gathered from those living outside the UK were omitted from data analysis to

reduce possible confounding factors associated with differences in culture.

A total of 194 responses were gathered, 17 responses were omitted due to not being

from UK domiciles, leaving a final total of 177 valid responses. The mean age of all valid

participants was 24.7 (SD=8.1) with 74.6% of respondents indicating that they were female

(N=132), 24.3% indicating that they were male (N=43), and 1.1% opting to indicate as

‘Other’ (N=2).


9

3. Measures

3.1 The Short Dark Triad (SD3) (Jones & Paulhus, 2014)

The SD3 is a 27 item questionnaire used to assess levels of subclinical psychopathy,

Machiavellianism, and narcissism personality traits in neurotypical populations (see

appendix 1). The questionnaire is split into 3 subscales, one measuring each trait. Each trait

is measured by 9 statements which the participant must indicate agreement or disagreement

with on a 1 to 5 Likert scale, where 1 is Strongly Disagree and 5 is Strongly Agree.

Many studies on TDT have seen researchers using a different questionnaire tool to

measure each DT trait (Jakobwitz & Egan, 2006; Jonason et al., 2009; Vernon, Villani,

Vickers, & Harris, 2008) which is not overly economical in regards to data collection and

analysis. These studies tended to use tools such as the The Self-Report Psychopathy Scale-III

(Paulhus, Hemphill & Hare, in press), The Levenson Self-Report Psychopathy Scale

(Levenson, Kiehl, & Fitzpatrick, 1995), The Mach-IV (Christie & Geis, 1970), and the

Narcissistic Personality Inventory (Raskin & Hall, 1979). A higher response rate was

expected by using the SD3 as it only took around 10 minutes of the participant’s time to fill

out. Having the full questionnaire online also meant that participants were able to take part

wherever and whenever they pleased, making it superior in some ways to the methods used in

previous Dark Triad studies.

The SD3 was also chosen due to the empirical evidence supporting its validity in

measuring the aforementioned personality traits. Jones and Paulhus (2014) conducted four

studies which supported the SD3 as being a reliable and valid measure of all DT traits. Many

modern studies have also now used the SD3 in their DT research successfully (Arvan, 2013;

Baughman, Dearing, Giammarco, & Vernon, 2012; Holtzman, 2011; Sumner, Byers,

Boochever, & Park, 2012), further cementing that the SD3 is a useful and legitimate tool for


10

measuring DT traits. Of the shorter and more economical DT measures, the SD3 has also

shown more validity and predictive power than the previously widely used Dirty Dozen

created by Jonason and Webster (2010) (Jones & Paulhus, 2014; Lee et al., 2013; Maples,

Lamkin, & Miller, 2014).

3.2 General Belief in a Just World Scale (Dalbert, Montada, & Schmitt, 1987)

The GBJWS is a short 6-item questionnaire which measures the participant’s level of

belief regarding whether the world is generally a just place (see appendix 2). Each item was

a statement which the participant would read and then indicate how much they agreed with

each statement via a 1-6 Likert scale, where 1 was Strongly Agree and 6 was Strongly

Disagree.

The GBJWS was chosen as a measure of just world beliefs for many reasons,

including its common usage in just world research, and due to the fact it is economical for

both gathering responses and for data analysis. The GBJWS has been successfully used to

measure just world beliefs in a wide variety of research areas including in investigating BJW

and internet use (Zhang, Zhang, & Zhu, 2013), attitudes towards immigration (Dalbert, &

Yamauchi, 1994), its relationship with the five factor model of personality (Wolfradt, &

Dalbert, 2003), and religious preferences (Zweigenhaft, 1985). Its wide use in so many

different areas of research support its use in reliably measuring just world beliefs, allowing

them to correlate with other constructs. The GBJWS can also be praised for its parsimony in

that it can reliably measure just world beliefs using only 6 items (Dalbert & Katona-Sallay,

1996; Dalbert & Yamauchi, 1994). This makes it extremely economical for developing an

online questionnaire, for making the questionnaire experience shorter for the convenience of

participants, and for a more streamlined data analysis.


11

The General Belief in a Just World Scale was chosen over its personal counterpart,

Dalbert’s (1999) Personal Belief in a Just World Scale (PBJWS), for two main reasons.

Firstly, the present study aimed to investigate DT individuals with regards to their beliefs

about how their actions are justified in the context of the morals instilled in the culture they

live in. This would ask the question of whether DT individuals exhibit their ‘negative’ or

‘maladaptive’ behaviours with the reasoning that they are justified by virtue of living in an

already unjust world. In contrast, using the PBJWS would arguably instead investigate

whether DT individuals believed that their own life experiences and treatment by others has

been justified or not. This is perhaps an area worth investigating with future research as it has

been shown that many important life aspects can reliably be predicted from its use (Dalbert,

1999).

3.3 The Online Questionnaire

The online questionnaire (see appendix 3) consisted of an information form, a

demographic information form, the SD3 and GBJWS tests, a debriefing form, and finally a

thank you message.

The information sheet gave the participant some vague but accurate information on what the

study as investigating and what they should expect. It also informed participants how long the

study was likely to take and contact information for if they wanted to contact the researcher.

It asked the participant to check a box before clicking to continue, this confirmed that they

understood what was required of them and was an indication that they agreed to take part.

The demographic information form asked the participants a few non-personal

questions so that data could be grouped by these variables during data analysis. These

included questions on the sex of the participant, what country they currently lived in, and


12

their current age. Participants were also asked to give the last two letters of their postcode

followed by the date of their birth. This would create a unique code of which their data could

be identified from if required.

Next participants would fill out both the SD3 and the GBJWS; these were recreated in

digital form which allowed participants to take the tests by simply clicking on their level of

agreement for each statement. Statements were displayed in a random order for every

participant so as to reduce the chance that the participant would know what each scale was

measuring.

The debriefing form would then reveal the actual aims, objective, and hypotheses of

the study. Participants were thanked for taking part and were once again given contact details

of the researchers. At this point, the participant could either click the submit button to save

their responses or they could navigate away from the page so that responses were not saved.

This ensured that the participant had the option not to provide their data after learning of the

true intentions of the study.

The thank you message appeared after clicking the submit button on the debriefing

form. It once again thanked the participant for taking part and also asked them to share the

questionnaire hyperlink among friends and family on social media platforms.


13

4. Results

4.1 Descriptive Statistics

Table 1 displays mean scores and standard deviations for overall scores (n=177) in

each Dark Triad trait and BJW, as well as a breakdown by sex (Males n=43, Females n=132).

See Appendix 4 for all SPSS data outputs.

Table 1 - Descriptive Statistics

Mean (SD) Overall

Sample

Mean (SD) Males Mean (SD)

Females

BJW Score 3.07 (.812) 2.96 (.979) 3.13 (.737)

Psychopathy Score 2.09 (.591) 2.5 (.649) 1.96 (.511)

Narcissism Score 2.53 (.598) 2.6 (.664) 2.51 (.579)

Machiavellianism Score 2.98 (.696) 3.18 (.779) 2.9 (.649)


14

4.2 Inferential Statistics

4.2.1 Analysis of All Responses

A Spearman’s Rho bivariate correlation was carried out to analyse the relationship

between BJW and overall scores of each Dark Triad trait. Table 2 shows that there were no

significant results found between each trait and BJW scores, however it should be noted that

both psychopathy and narcissism showed close to significant results.

Table 2 - Inferential Correlations

Overall Belief in a Just World Score

Correlation Coefficient Sig. (2-tailed)

Overall Psychopathy Score -.139 .065

Overall Narcissism Score .144 .056

Overall Machiavellianism Score -.029 .702


15

4.2.2 Analysis of Sex Differences

Data was split by sex and analysed once more using a Spearman’s Rho to look for

differences between the sexes in regards to a correlation between each DT trait and BJW.

Results showed a significant positive relationship between narcissism and BJW in males but

not in females. Results of this analysis can be seen in Table 3.

Table 3 - Inferential Correlations Between SexesOverall Belief in a Just World Score

Correlation Coefficient Sig. (2-tailed)

Male (N=43)


Overall Machiavellianism Score -.012 .940

Overall Narcissism Score .315 .039*

Female (N=132)


Overall Machiavellianism Score .008 .930

Overall Narcissism Score .072 .409

● * Indicates a significant result at the .05 level (two-tailed)

A scatterplot showing the relationship between Overall Narcissism Score and Overall

BJW Score in males can be seen in Figure 1.


16

Fig 1 - Scatterplot of Male Narcissism & BJW Scores


17

5. Discussion

The present study aimed to find a relationship between Dark Triad personality traits

and Belief in a Just World. Analysis of the data showed no significant correlation in either

direction between the Dark Triad personality traits and BJW in the overall sample. In regards

to narcissism, this is a similar result to Ames, Rose, and Anderson’s (2006) findings.

However, a significant positive correlation was found between narcissism and BJW when

considering only male respondents, this suggests that there may be sex differences regarding

these constructs that have not yet been adequately explored. This finding may help in

understanding the worldview of the narcissist in that how they view the world may coincide

with a high BJW, while their actions themselves may not.

One interpretation of the male narcissism and BJW relationship is that some

narcissists may view the world as just if their position in that world is perceived to be

superior to others. The narcissist may believe that the reality they live in is a just world

because they perceive themselves to have an abundance of positive qualities that they

objectively deserve. Being aware of such as mind-set may help in working with male

narcissists in a therapeutic scenario where the practitioner is attempting to understand the

point of view of the client. Future research is required in this area to firstly confirm a

consistent relationship between narcissism and BJW in males, and secondly to explore

whether this interpretation of the narcissist mind-set is valid. If this is the case, the next step

may be to investigate whether this differs between the covert and overt narcissist described

by Rose (2002).

The sex differences in this finding are also worth exploring in order to

understand the differences between and within each sex when discussing Dark Triad traits. It

is well documented that females tend to score lower in all Dark Triad traits compared to

males (Foster, Campbell, & Twenge, 2003; Jonason et al., 2009; Jonason, Li, & Buss, 2010;


18

Paulhus & Williams, 2002). Some studies have also found that males tend to score higher in

BJW compared to females (Bègue & Bastounis, 2003; Hunt, 2000), however others have not

observed this trend (Feather, 1991; Wolfradt & Dalbert, 2003), or rather conclude that this

difference in negligible in terms of significance (O'Connor, Morrison, McLeod, & Anderson,

1996). It could simply be that males are more likely to be more narcissistic as well as having

a higher BJW and that these two constructs compliment and reinforce each other via a

positive feedback loop.

It is important to consider the main limitation of the present study in that only around

a quarter of responses were from male respondents, whereas almost three quarters were from

females respondents. This poses two main issues, firstly, that the correlation between

narcissism and BJW in the overall sample may not have reached significance because of the

overabundance of female responses which are characterised by lower scores in Dark Triad

traits (Foster, Campbell, & Twenge, 2003; Jonason et al., 2009; Jonason, Li, & Buss, 2010;

Paulhus & Williams, 2002). This may explain why the correlation between narcissism and

BJW in the overall sample only approached significance at the .05 level r(175)=.144, p=.056.

The second issue is that the relationship between narcissism and BJW in males is based on a

fairly small sample of males (43 in total) which may not be overly representative of the

population. Future replications could recruit a much larger sample size, with an equal ratio of

males to females, in order to confirm this sex difference and to aid in explaining its origins if

it is consistently present.

Assuming that male narcissism and BJW show a consistent relationship, it could very

well be argued that males may benefit overall by embracing narcissism with the idea that this

may also increase their BJW. Such individuals could reap the benefits of narcissism such as

an increased self-esteem (Sedikides, Rudich, Gregg, Kumashiro, & Rusbult, 2004) and

increased creativity (Furnham et al. 2013) while also benefiting from a high BJW which is


19

associated with increased life satisfaction (Correia, Batista, & Lima, 2009). The advantages

of increasing both traits could also continue into improving relationships with others

depending on what the individual values, such as having more sexual partners (Jonason et al.,

2012) or generally acting more prosocial towards others (Strelan, 2007). Developing a

stronger narcissistic outlook may also bring with it some inherent disadvantages however.

Some researchers have linked the trait with poorer long-term academic performance (Robins

& Beer, 2001), counterproductive work behaviour (Grijalva & Newman, 2014; Penney &

Spector, 2002), and increased aggressive behaviours (Reidy, Zeichner, Foster, & Martinez,

2008). Similarly, a high BJW has been linked with authoritarian attitudes (Connors &

Heaven, 1987) and revenge-seeking (Kaiser, Brooke Vick, & Major, 2004).

The potentially positive impact of the individual of being a narcissist with a strong

BJW has implications for the classic argument of whether narcissism can be considered

healthy or not. Publications as early as those written in 1914 by Sigmund Freud (2014) have

argued for narcissism to be a normal and healthy part of child development. More modern

empirical studies have even supported the positive elements of narcissism by demonstrating

its relationship with traits such as everyday wellbeing and self-esteem (Sedikides et al.,

2004). In contrast, other individuals such as Lasch (1978) have argued that narcissism is

inherently negative and destructive, and that the trait has penetrated into most aspects of

normalised culture. Considering all of the advantages narcissism may bring, especially when

considered with the benefits of having a high BJW, this attitude of a healthy narcissism,

similar to that of Federn (1953), may one day become normalised. Practitioners may find

themselves fostering a healthy narcissism in clients as a way of increasing self-esteem and

life satisfaction, among other benefits. Further research should investigate the trait of

narcissism as a tool for positive self-growth; its therapeutic use could see it growing as a

positive personality trait in moderation.


20

With both the benefits and negatives in mind, the conclusion one may arrive at is that

narcissism bestows both advantages and disadvantages to the individual in different

scenarios, this more neutral way of perceiving narcissism is echoed by the likes of Campbell

and Foster (2007). An individual may be making a trade-off by embracing narcissism.

Whether this trade-off is overall positive or negative is a matter of individual perspective,

something which would likely be influenced by past experience, moral attitudes, and social

context. Interestingly, Campbell and Foster (2007, pp. 125-126) appear to support the

argument that narcissism is a helpful trait, purporting “that narcissism is either neutral or

even slightly beneficial for individuals”. Perhaps by reframing narcissism in a more healthy

and constructive way, one can develop beneficial thinking and behaviour reminiscent of the

helpful attributes of both narcissism and strong BJW.

The present study represents the first attempt at investigating the relationship between

the traits within the Dark Triad model and Belief in a Just World. While none of the stated

hypotheses were supported by the attained results, an unexpected positive relationship was

uncovered in the form of narcissism and BJW in the male sample. While Psychopathy and

Narcissism were not found to have a significant relationship with BJW in the overall sample,

this is strongly believed to be due to issues with methodology. This single element is what

future studies in this area of research should focus on in order to confirm whether this

relationship between narcissism and BJW is consistent in both the general population and in

male narcissists. Such research will prove valuable in the attempt to understand how Dark

Triad individuals perceive the external world in a moralistic context.


21

Acknowledgements

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public,

commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.


22

References

Ali, F., Amorim, I. S., & Chamorro-Premuzic, T. (2009). Empathy deficits and trait emotional intelligence in psychopathy and Machiavellianism. Personality and Individual Differences, 47(7), 758-762.

Ames, D. R., Rose, P., & Anderson, C. P. (2006). The NPI-16 as a short measure of narcissism. Journal of Research in Personality, 40(4), 440-450.

Appel, M. (2008). Fictional Narratives Cultivate Just‐World Beliefs. Journal of Communication, 58(1), 62-83.

Arvan, M. (2013). A lot more bad news for conservatives, and a little bit of bad news for liberals? Moral judgments and the dark triad personality traits: A follow-up study. Neuroethics, 6(1), 51-64.

Baughman, H. M., Dearing, S., Giammarco, E., & Vernon, P. A. (2012). Relationships between bullying behaviours and the Dark Triad: A study with adults. Personality and Individual Differences, 52(5), 571-575.

Bègue, L., & Bastounis, M. (2003). Two spheres of belief in justice: Extensive support for the bidimensional model of belief in a just world. Journal of personality, 71(3), 435-463.

Bollmann, G., Krings, F., Maggiori, C., & Rossier, J. (2015). Differential associations of personal and general just-world beliefs with the Five-Factor and the HEXACO models of personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 87, 312-319.

Campbell, W. K., & Foster, J. D. (2007). The narcissistic self: Background, an extended agency model, and ongoing controversies. The self, 115-138.

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

Coid, J., Yang, M., Ullrich, S., Roberts, A., Moran, P., & Bebbington, P. et al. (2009). Psychopathy among prisoners in England and Wales. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 32(3), 134-141.

Connors, J., & Heaven, P. C. (1987). Authoritarianism and just world beliefs. The Journal of Social Psychology, 127(3), 345-346.

Correia, I., Batista, M. T., & Lima, M. L. (2009). Does the belief in a just world bring happiness? Causal relationships among belief in a just world, life satisfaction and mood. Australian Journal of Psychology, 61(4), 220-227.


23

Correia, I., Vala, J., & Aguiar, P. (2007). Victim’s innocence, social categorization, and the threat to the belief in a just world. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43(1), 31-38.

Dalbert, C. (1999). The world is more just for me than generally: About the personal belief in a just world scale's validity. Social Justice Research, 12(2), 79-98.

Dalbert, C., & Katona-Sallay, H. (1996). The "Belief in a Just World" Construct in Hungary. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 27(3), 293-314.

Dalbert, C., & Yamauchi, L. A. (1994). Belief in a just world and attitudes toward immigrants and foreign workers: A cultural comparison between Hawaii and Germany. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 24(18), 1612-1626.

Dalbert, C., Montada, L., & Schmitt, M. (1987). Belief in a just world: Validation correlates of two scales. Psychologische Beitrage, 29(4), 596-615.

Depalma, M., Madey, S., Tillman, T., & Wheeler, J. (1999). Perceived Patient Responsibility and Belief in a Just World Affect Helping. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 21(2), 131-137.

DePaulo, B. M., & Rosenthal, R. (1979). Telling lies. Journal of personality and social psychology, 37(10), 1713.

Facebook,. (2015). Facebook. Retrieved 21 December 2015, from https://www.facebook.com

Feather, N. T. (1991). Human Values, Global Self‐Esteem, and Belief in a Just World. Journal of Personality, 59(1), 83-107.

Foster, J. D., Campbell, W. K., & Twenge, J. M. (2003). Individual differences in narcissism: Inflated self-views across the lifespan and around the world. Journal of Research in Personality, 37(6), 469-486.

Fraley, R. C., & Roberts, B. W. (2005). Patterns of continuity: a dynamic model for conceptualizing the stability of individual differences in psychological constructs across the life course. Psychological review, 112(1), 60.

Freud, S. (2014). On narcissism: An introduction. Read Books Ltd.

Furnham, A., Hughes, D., & Marshall, E. (2013). Creativity, OCD, Narcissism and the Big Five. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 10, 91-98.

Geis, F. L., & Moon, T. H. (1981). Machiavellianism and deception. Journal of personality and social psychology, 41(4), 766.


24

Goldenberg, L., & Forgas, J. P. (2012). Can happy mood reduce the just world bias? Affective influences on blaming the victim. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48(1), 239-243.

Grams, W., & Rogers, R. (1990). Power and Personality: Effects of Machiavellianism, Need for Approval, and Motivation on Use of Influence Tactics. The Journal of General Psychology, 117(1), 71-82.

Grijalva, E., & Newman, D. (2014). Narcissism and Counterproductive Work Behavior (CWB): Meta-Analysis and Consideration of Collectivist Culture, Big Five Personality, and Narcissism's Facet Structure. Applied Psychology, 64(1), 93-126.

Hafer, C. L. (2000). Investment in long-term goals and commitment to just means drive the need to believe in a just world. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(9), 1059-1073.

Holtzman, N. S. (2011). Facing a psychopath: Detecting the dark triad from emotionally-neutral faces, using prototypes from the Personality Faceaurus. Journal of Research in Personality, 45(6), 648-654.

Hunt, M. O. (2000). Status, religion, and the "belief in a just world": Comparing african americans, latinos, and whites. Social Science Quarterly, 81(1), 325-343.

Jakobwitz, S., & Egan, V. (2006). The dark triad and normal personality traits. Personality and Individual Differences, 40(2), 331-339.

Jonason, P., Li, N., & Buss, D. (2010). The costs and benefits of the Dark Triad: Implications for mate poaching and mate retention tactics. Personality and Individual Differences, 48(4), 373-378.

Jonason, P., Li, N., Webster, G., & Schmitt, D. (2009). The dark triad: Facilitating a short-term mating strategy in men. Eur. J. Pers., 23(1), 5-18.

Jonason, P., Luevano, V., & Adams, H. (2012). How the Dark Triad traits predict relationship choices. Personality and Individual Differences, 53(3), 180-184.

Jones, D. N., & Paulhus, D. L. (2014). Introducing the Short Dark Triad (SD3): A brief measure of dark personality traits. Assessment, 21, 28-41.

Jonason, P. K., & Webster, G. D. (2010). The dirty dozen: a concise measure of the dark triad. Psychological assessment, 22(2), 420.


25

Kaiser, C., Brooke Vick, S., & Major, B. (2004). A Prospective Investigation of the Relationship Between Just-World Beliefs and the Desire for Revenge After September 11, 2001. Psychological Science, 15(7), 503-506.

Kiehl, K. A., & Hoffman, M. B. (2011). The criminal psychopath: History, neuroscience, treatment, and economics. Jurimetrics, 51, 355–397.

Lasch, C. (1978). The culture of narcissism. New York: Norton.

Leary, M., & Hoyle, R. (2009). Handbook of individual differences in social behavior. New York: Guilford Press.

Lee, K., Ashton, M. C., Wiltshire, J., Bourdage, J. S., Visser, B. A., & Gallucci, A. (2013). Sex, power, and money: Prediction from the dark triad and Honesty–Humility. European Journal of Personality, 27(2), 169-184.

Leistico, A. M. R., Salekin, R. T., DeCoster, J., & Rogers, R. (2008). A large-scale meta-analysis relating the hare measures of psychopathy to antisocial conduct. Law and human behavior, 32(1), 28.

Lerner, M. (1980). The belief in a just world. New York: Plenum Press.

Lerner, M. J., & Miller, D. T. (1978). Just world research and the attribution process: looking back and ahead. Psychological bulletin, 85(5), 1030.

Lerner, M., & Simmons, C. (1966). Observer's reaction to the "innocent victim": Compassion or rejection?. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4(2), 203-210.

Levenson, M. R., Kiehl, K. A., & Fitzpatrick, C. M. (1995). Assessing psychopathic attributes in a noninstitutionalised population. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 151–158.

Maples, J., Lamkin, J., & Miller, J. (2014). A test of two brief measures of the dark triad: The dirty dozen and short dark triad. Psychological Assessment, 26(1), 326-331.

Miller, D. T. (1977). Altruism and threat to a belief in a just world. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13(2), 113-124.

Mullins-Nelson, J. L., Salekin, R. T., & Leistico, A. M. R. (2006). Psychopathy, empathy, and perspective-taking ability in a community sample: Implications for the successful psychopathy concept. International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 5(2), 133-149.


26

Nudelman, G. (2013). The Belief in a Just World and Personality: A Meta-analysis. Soc Just Res, 26(2), 105-119.

O'Connor, W. E., Morrison, T. G., McLeod, L. D., & Anderson, D. (1996). A meta-analytic review of the relationship between gender and belief in a just world. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 11(1), 141.

Paulhus, D. L., Hemphill, J. F., & Hare, R. D. (in press). Self-Report Psychopathy scale (SRP-III). Toronto: Multi-Health Systems.

Paulhus, D., & Williams, K. (2002). The Dark Triad of personality: Narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy. Journal of Research in Personality, 36(6), 556-563.

Penney, L., & Spector, P. (2002). Narcissism and Counterproductive Work Behavior: Do Bigger Egos Mean Bigger Problems?. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 10(1&2), 126-134.

Personality Cafe,. (2015). Personality Cafe. Retrieved 21 December 2015, from http://personalitycafe.com

Raskin, R., & Hall, T. (1979). A narcissistic personality inventory. Psychological Reports, 45, 590

Reidy, D. E., Zeichner, A., Foster, J. D., & Martinez, M. A. (2008). Effects of narcissistic entitlement and exploitativeness on human physical aggression. Personality and Individual Differences, 44(4), 865-875.

Roberts, B. W., & DelVecchio, W. F. (2000). The rank-order consistency of personality traits from childhood to old age: a quantitative review of longitudinal studies. Psychological bulletin, 126(1), 3.

Robins, R., & Beer, J. (2001). Positive illusions about the self: Short-term benefits and long-term costs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80(2), 340-352.

Rohmann, E., Bierhoff, H., & Schmohr, M. (2011). Narcissism and Perceived Inequity in Attractiveness in Romantic Relationships. European Psychologist, 16(4), 295-302.

Rose, P. (2002). The happy and unhappy faces of narcissism. Personality and Individual Differences, 33(3), 379-391.

Sedikides, C., Rudich, E., Gregg, A., Kumashiro, M., & Rusbult, C. (2004). Are Normal Narcissists Psychologically Healthy?: Self-Esteem Matters. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(3), 400-416.


27

Serin, R.. (1991). Psychopathy and violence in criminals. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 6(4), 423-431.

Shaver, K. G. (1970). Defensive attribution: Effects of severity and relevance on the responsibility assigned for an accident. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 14(2), 101.

Spielberger, C. D. (1988). State-trait anger expression inventory: Professional manual.Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.

Strelan, P. (2007). The prosocial, adaptive qualities of just world beliefs: Implications for the relationship between justice and forgiveness. Personality and Individual Differences, 43(4), 881-890.

Sumner, C., Byers, A., Boochever, R., & Park, G. J. (2012). Predicting dark triad personality traits from twitter usage and a linguistic analysis of tweets. Machine Learning and Applications (ICMLA), 2012 11th International Conference on (Vol. 2, pp. 386-393). IEEE.

Thestudentroom.co.uk,. (2015). The Student Room. Retrieved 21 December 2015, from http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk

Thomas, D. (2010). Narcissism. Sussex: Book Guild.

Twitter.com,. (2015). Welcome to Twitter - Login or Sign up. Retrieved 21 December 2015, from https://twitter.com

Ullrich, S., Paelecke, M., Kahle, I., and Marneros, A. (2003). Categorical and dimensional assessment of psychopathy in German offenders. Prevalence, gender differences and aging. Der Nervenarzt, 74, 1002-1008.

Vernon, P., Villani, V., Vickers, L., & Harris, J. (2008). A behavioral genetic investigation of the Dark Triad and the Big 5. Personality and Individual Differences, 44(2), 445-452.

Walsh, Z. (2013). Psychopathy and criminal violence: The moderating effect of ethnicity. Law and Human Behavior, 37(5), 303-311.

Williams, K., Nathanson, C., & Paulhus, D. (2010). Identifying and profiling scholastic cheaters: Their personality, cognitive ability, and motivation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 16(3), 293-307.

Wink, P. (1991). Two faces of narcissism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61(4), 590.


28

Wolfradt, U., & Dalbert, C. (2003). Personality, values and belief in a just world. Personality and Individual Differences, 35(8), 1911-1918.

Zhang, Z., Zhang, J., & Zhu, T. (2013). Relationship between internet use and general belief in a just world among chinese retirees. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 16(7), 553-558.

Zweigenhaft, R. L. (1985). Religious preference and belief in a just world. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 111(3), 331-348.


29

Appendix 1 - The Short Dark Triad (SD3) (Jones & Paulhus, 2014)

Please rate your agreement or disagreement with each item using the following guidelines.

1 2 3 4 5

StronglyDisagree

Disagree Neither Agree

nor Disagree

Agree StronglyAgree

Machiavellianism subscale

1. It's not wise to tell your secrets.

2. I like to use clever manipulation to get my way.

3. Whatever it takes, you must get the important people on your side.

1. Avoid direct conflict with others because they may be useful in the future.

2. It’s wise to keep track of information that you can use against people later.

3. You should wait for the right time to get back at people.

4. There are things you should hide from other people because they don’t need to know.

5. Make sure your plans benefit you, not others.

6. Most people can be manipulated.

Narcissism subscale

1. People see me as a natural leader.

2. I hate being the center of attention. (R)

3. Many group activities tend to be dull without me.

4. I know that I am special because everyone keeps telling me so.

5. I like to get acquainted with important people.

6. I feel embarrassed if someone compliments me. (R)

7. I have been compared to famous people.

8. I am an average person. (R)

9. I insist on getting the respect I deserve.


30

Psychopathy

1. I like to get revenge on authorities.

2. I avoid dangerous situations. (R)

3. Payback needs to be quick and nasty.

4. People often say I’m out of control.

5. It’s true that I can be mean to others.

6. People who mess with me always regret it.

7. I have never gotten into trouble with the law. (R)

8. I enjoy having sex with people I hardly know

9. I’ll say anything to get what I want.

SCORING AND PSYCHOMETRICS

Reverse the scoring on all the reversals items (marked with R). Then calculate the mean of

the 9 items within each subscale: The following norms are based on a sample of 387

undergraduate students.

NORMS

Mean S.D. Alpha

Machiavellianism 3.1 .76 .78

Narcissism 2.8 .88 .77

Psychopathy 2.4 1.0 .80

INTERCORRELATIONS


31

Machiavellianism Narcissism Psychopathy

Machiavellianism -- .23 .37

Narcissism -- .20

Psychopathy --


32

Appendix 2 - General Belief in a Just World Scale (Dalbert, Montada, & Schmitt, 1987)


33

Appendix 3 - Online Questionnaire

Appendix 3.1 - Information Form


34

Appendix 3.2 - Demographic Information Form


35

Appendix 3.3 - General Belief in a Just World Scale Within Online Questionnaire


36

Appendix 3.4 - Short Dark Triad (SD3) Within Online Questionnaire


37

Appendix 3.5 - Debriefing Form


38

Appendix 3.6 - ‘Thank you’ Message


39

Appendix 4 – SPSS Data Outputs

Descriptives

Descriptive Statistics

N Minimum Maximum Mean

Std.

Deviation Variance

Respondant Overall

BJW Score

177 1.17 5.67 3.0687 .81290 .661

Respondant Overall

Machiavellianism Score

177 1.44 5.00 2.9774 .69634 .485

Respondant Overall

Narcissism Score

177 1.22 4.22 2.5304 .59794 .358

Respondant Overall

Psychopathy Score

177 1.00 4.11 2.0954 .59184 .350

Valid N (listwise) 177

Descriptives

What is your sex? = Female Descriptive Statisticsa


Std.

Deviation Variance

Respondant Overall

BJW Score

132 1.33 5.67 3.1250 .73746 .544

Respondant Overall


132 1.56 4.44 2.9015 .64900 .421

Respondant Overall

Narcissism Score

132 1.22 4.11 2.5135 .57866 .335

Respondant Overall

Psychopathy Score

132 1.00 3.56 1.9613 .51130 .261



40

a. What is your sex? = Female

What is your sex? = Male

Descriptive Statisticsa


Std.

Deviation Variance

Respondant Overall

BJW Score

43 1.17 5.00 2.9574 .97935 .959

Respondant Overall


43 1.44 5.00 3.1783 .77934 .607

Respondant Overall

Narcissism Score

43 1.22 4.22 2.5969 .66447 .442

Respondant Overall

Psychopathy Score

43 1.11 4.11 2.5039 .64895 .421


a. What is your sex? = Male

What is your sex? = Other

Descriptive Statisticsa


Std.

Deviation Variance

Respondant Overall

BJW Score

2 1.33 2.17 1.7500 .58926 .347

Respondant Overall


2 2.89 4.44 3.6667 1.09994 1.210

Respondant Overall

Narcissism Score

2 2.00 2.44 2.2222 .31427 .099

Respondant Overall

Psychopathy Score

2 1.89 2.44 2.1667 .39284 .154


41


a. What is your sex? = Other

Explore

Case Processing Summary

Cases

Valid Missing Total

N Percent N Percent N Percent

Respondant Overall BJW

Score

177 100.0% 0 0.0% 177 100.0%

Respondant Overall


177 100.0% 0 0.0% 177 100.0%

Respondant Overall

Narcissism Score

177 100.0% 0 0.0% 177 100.0%

Respondant Overall

Psychopathy Score

177 100.0% 0 0.0% 177 100.0%

Descriptives

Statistic Std. Error

Respondant Overall BJW

Score

Mean 3.0687 .06110

95% Confidence Interval

for Mean

Lower Bound 2.9482

Upper Bound 3.1893

5% Trimmed Mean 3.0692

Median 3.0000

Variance .661

Std. Deviation .81290


42

Minimum 1.17

Maximum 5.67

Range 4.50

Interquartile Range 1.08

Skewness .077 .183

Kurtosis .071 .363

Respondant Overall


Mean 2.9774 .05234


for Mean

Lower Bound 2.8741

Upper Bound 3.0807


Median 3.0000

Variance .485


Minimum 1.44

Maximum 5.00

Range 3.56

Interquartile Range 1.00

Skewness .199 .183

Kurtosis -.174 .363

Respondant Overall

Narcissism Score

Mean 2.5304 .04494


for Mean

Lower Bound 2.4417

Upper Bound 2.6191


Median 2.4444

Variance .358


43


Minimum 1.22

Maximum 4.22

Range 3.00

Interquartile Range .78

Skewness .493 .183

Kurtosis .082 .363

Respondant Overall

Psychopathy Score

Mean 2.0954 .04449


for Mean

Lower Bound 2.0076

Upper Bound 2.1832


Median 2.0000

Variance .350


Minimum 1.00

Maximum 4.11

Range 3.11

Interquartile Range .89

Skewness .640 .183

Kurtosis .302 .363

Tests of Normality

Kolmogorov-Smirnova Shapiro-Wilk

Statistic df Sig. Statistic df Sig.

Respondant Overall BJW .085 177 .003 .990 177 .222


44

Score

Respondant Overall


.058 177 .200* .990 177 .246

Respondant Overall

Narcissism Score

.094 177 .001 .974 177 .002

Respondant Overall

Psychopathy Score

.105 177 .000 .965 177 .000

*. This is a lower bound of the true significance.

a. Lilliefors Significance Correction

Nonparametric Correlations

Correlations

Respondant

Overall BJW

Score

Respondant

Overall

Machiavellianis

m Score

Spearman's rho Respondant Overall

BJW Score

Correlation

Coefficient

1.000 -.029

Sig. (2-tailed) . .702

N 177 177

Respondant Overall


Correlation

Coefficient

-.029 1.000

Sig. (2-tailed) .702 .

N 177 177

Respondant Overall

Narcissism Score

Correlation

Coefficient

.144 .295**

Sig. (2-tailed) .056 .000

N 177 177

Respondant Overall Correlation -.139 .489**


45

Psychopathy Score Coefficient

Sig. (2-tailed) .065 .000

N 177 177

Correlations

Respondant

Overall

Narcissism

Score

Respondant

Overall

Psychopathy

Score


BJW Score

Correlation

Coefficient

.144 -.139

Sig. (2-tailed) .056 .065

N 177 177

Respondant Overall


Correlation

Coefficient

.295** .489**

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000

N 177 177

Respondant Overall

Narcissism Score

Correlation

Coefficient

1.000 .288**


N 177 177

Respondant Overall

Psychopathy Score

Correlation

Coefficient

.288** 1.000


N 177 177

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Nonparametric Correlations

What is your sex? = Female


46

Correlationsa

Respondant

Overall BJW

Score

Respondant

Overall

Machiavellianis

m Score


BJW Score

Correlation

Coefficient

1.000 .008


N 132 132

Respondant Overall


Correlation

Coefficient

.008 1.000


N 132 132

Respondant Overall

Narcissism Score

Correlation

Coefficient

.072 .277**

Sig. (2-tailed) .409 .001

N 132 132

Respondant Overall

Psychopathy Score

Correlation

Coefficient

-.117 .425**

Sig. (2-tailed) .182 .000

N 132 132

Correlationsa

Respondant

Overall

Narcissism

Score

Respondant

Overall

Psychopathy

Score


BJW Score

Correlation

Coefficient

.072 -.117

Sig. (2-tailed) .409 .182


47

N 132 132

Respondant Overall


Correlation

Coefficient

.277** .425**

Sig. (2-tailed) .001 .000

N 132 132

Respondant Overall

Narcissism Score

Correlation

Coefficient

1.000 .252**


N 132 132

Respondant Overall

Psychopathy Score

Correlation

Coefficient

.252** 1.000


N 132 132


a. What is your sex? = Female

What is your sex? = Male

Correlationsa

Respondant

Overall BJW

Score

Respondant

Overall

Machiavellianis

m Score


BJW Score

Correlation

Coefficient

1.000 -.012


N 43 43


48

Respondant Overall


Correlation

Coefficient

-.012 1.000


N 43 43

Respondant Overall

Narcissism Score

Correlation

Coefficient

.315* .347*

Sig. (2-tailed) .039 .023

N 43 43

Respondant Overall

Psychopathy Score

Correlation

Coefficient

-.188 .652**

Sig. (2-tailed) .228 .000

N 43 43

Correlationsa

Respondant

Overall

Narcissism

Score

Respondant

Overall

Psychopathy

Score


BJW Score

Correlation

Coefficient

.315* -.188

Sig. (2-tailed) .039 .228

N 43 43

Respondant Overall


Correlation

Coefficient

.347* .652**

Sig. (2-tailed) .023 .000

N 43 43

Respondant Overall

Narcissism Score

Correlation

Coefficient

1.000 .413**


N 43 43


49

Respondant Overall

Psychopathy Score

Correlation

Coefficient

.413** 1.000


N 43 43

*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).


a. What is your sex? = Male

What is your sex? = Other

Correlationsa

Respondant

Overall BJW

Score

Respondant

Overall

Machiavellianis

m Score


BJW Score

Correlation

Coefficient

1.000 -1.000

Sig. (2-tailed) . .

N 2 2

Respondant Overall


Correlation

Coefficient

-1.000** 1.000

Sig. (2-tailed) . .

N 2 2

Respondant Overall

Narcissism Score

Correlation

Coefficient

-1.000** 1.000**

Sig. (2-tailed) . .

N 2 2


50

Respondant Overall

Psychopathy Score

Correlation

Coefficient

-1.000** 1.000**

Sig. (2-tailed) . .

N 2 2

Correlationsa

Respondant

Overall

Narcissism

Score

Respondant

Overall

Psychopathy

Score


BJW Score

Correlation

Coefficient

-1.000 -1.000

Sig. (2-tailed) . .

N 2 2

Respondant Overall


Correlation

Coefficient

1.000 1.000

Sig. (2-tailed) . .

N 2 2

Respondant Overall

Narcissism Score

Correlation

Coefficient

1.000 1.000

Sig. (2-tailed) . .

N 2 2

Respondant Overall

Psychopathy Score

Correlation

Coefficient

1.000** 1.000

Sig. (2-tailed) . .

N 2 2


a. What is your sex? = Other


51

The Relationship Between Dark Triad Personality Traits and Belief in a Just World

Documents