The Dark Triad and Faking Ability on Self-Report Personality

231 Pages·2008·18.19 MB·English

The Dark Triad and Faking Ability on Self-Report Personality Inventories and
Autobiographical Accounts

by

Bonnie M. MacNeil

A thesis submitted to the Department of Psychology
in conformity with the requirements for
the degree of Doctor of Philosophy

Queen’s University
Kingston, Ontario, Canada
October 2008

Copyright © Bonnie M. MacNeil, 2008
i
ii
ABSTRACT
Three studies were undertaken to examine the relationship between the Dark Triad (i.e.,
psychopathy, Machiavellianism, and narcissism) and faking ability. Study 1 examined the
relationship between psychopathy and the ability to fake good and fake bad on self-report
personality inventories in a sample of 84 male federal offenders. Results showed that
when faking good, successful fakers scored significantly higher than unsuccessful fakers
on carefree nonplanfulness, and significantly lower on stress immunity. When faking bad,
successful and unsuccessful fakers did not differ significantly on psychopathy total or
subscale scores. Study 2 examined the effect of the Dark Triad on the ability to fake good
and fake bad on self-report personality inventories in a sample of 166 undergraduates.
Results indicated that when faking good, total psychopathy significantly predicted
successful faking for 1 of 3 methods of evaluation, while Machiavellianism significantly
predicted success at faking good for 2 of 3 methods of evaluation. Narcissism was
unrelated to success at faking good. In addition, the Dark Triad constructs did not predict
success at faking bad. Study 3 examined the relationship between the Dark Triad
constructs and the ability to fake good interpersonally. In this study, 32 undergraduates
comprising four groups (i.e., controls, and individuals high in psychopathy,
Machiavellianism, and narcissism) provided videotaped self-presentations. A separate
group of 134 university students subsequently rated the veracity of these presentations.
Results indicated that when faking good, psychopathy and narcissism groups were rated
as more believable than the control group. Conversely, the Machiavellianism group was
less successful at faking good than the control group. Contributions of this research to the
fields of personality assessment and self-presentation are discussed.
ii
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First and foremost, I would like to thank my supervisor, Dr. Ronald Holden. I am
extremely fortunate to have had such a knowledgeable, compassionate, supportive, and
dedicated mentor over the past five years. Countless times, Dr. Holden has welcomed me
into his office when I have dropped by unexpectedly, and immediately set aside his work
to offer his time and knowledge. Despite his busy schedule, he was always willing to take
the time to answer my many questions.
I also want to express my gratitude to my committee members, Dr. Roderick
Lindsay and Dr. Vernon Quinsey. I am extremely thankful for their helpful ideas, useful
perspectives, and invaluable feedback throughout the dissertation process.
Special thanks to the “clinical crew” and my labmates for their unbelievable
support and friendship through all the ups and downs of our program. Also, I would like
to thank my parents and sister for their unwavering love and support that has meant more
to me than they’ll ever know. Finally, heartfelt thanks to my fiancé, Andrew, for his love,
sense of humour, ability to always make me smile, and for believing in me through it all.
iii
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT ………………………………………………………………………... ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ………………………………………………………... iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS …………………………………………………………... iv
LIST OF TABLES ………………………………………….……………………… viii
LIST OF FIGURES ………………………………………………………………... x
CHAPTER 1: GENERAL INTRODUCTION …………………………………...... 1
Overview …………………………………………………………………...... 1
Self-Presentation …………………………………………………………...... 1
Theoretical Models of Self- Presentation ……………………………... 2
Self-Presentation Tactics ………………………………...……………. 4
Operational Definitions Used in this Dissertation ………………...….. 6
Faking on Self-Report Personality Inventories ………….…………… 6
Interpersonal Faking …………….……………………………………. 8
The Dark Triad ………………………………………………………………. 9
Psychopathy ……………………………………...…………………… 10
Machiavellianism ……………………..………………………………. 13
Narcissism ……………………….……………………………………. 15
Teasing Apart the Dark Triad Constructs …………………………….. 18
The Dark Triad and Faking Ability …………………………………………. 23
Psychopathy and Faking Ability ……………………………………… 23
Machiavellianism and Faking Ability ……………………………….... 28
Narcissism and Faking Ability …………………..……………………. 30
iv
v
Present Investigation …………………...……………………………………. 32
CHAPTER 2: STUDY ONE …………………………………………..…………… 34
Overview and Hypotheses ………………………..…………………………. 34
Method …………………………….………………………………………… 36
Participants …….……………………………………………………… 36
Measures ……………………………………………………………… 37
Procedure ……………………………………………………………... 42
Results ……………………………………………………………………….. 43
Descriptive Statistics ……………..…………………………………… 44
Successful versus Unsuccessful Fakers: Main Analyses ……...……… 48
Successful versus Unsuccessful Fakers: Additional Analyses ……..… 57
Discussion …………………………………………………………………… 63
CHAPTER 3: STUDY TWO ……….……………………………………………… 68
Overview and Hypotheses ………………………..…………………………. 68
Method ………………………………………………………………………. 69
Participants ……………………………….…………………………… 69
Measures …………………………………….………………………... 70
Procedure ……………………………………...……………………… 73
Results ………………………….……………………………………………. 74
Descriptive Statistics ………………………..………………………… 74
Successful versus Unsuccessful Fakers: Preliminary Analyses …….… 79
Successful versus Unsuccessful Fakers: Main Analyses ………..….… 83
Discussion …………………………………………………………………… 91
v
vi
CHAPTER 4: STUDY THREE ……………………………………………….…… 96
Overview and Hypotheses ………………………..…………………………. 96
Method …………………………………………………….………………… 98
Study 3a: Creation of Stimuli …………………………………...……. 98
Participants ………………………...…………………………… 98
Measures ………………………..……………………………… 99
Procedure ……………………………………………..………... 100
Study 3b: Obtaining Stimuli Ratings ……………………………….… 103
Participants …………………………………………………...… 103
Procedure …………………………………………….………… 103
Results ……………………………………………………………….………. 104
Descriptive Statistics for Study 3a Target Participants …………..…… 104
Descriptive Statistics for Study 3b Ratings ………………………...… 108
Main Analyses: Success at Faking Good Across Personality Groups ... 113
Discussion …………………………………………………………………… 118
CHAPTER 5: GENERAL DISCUSSION …………………………………………. 123
The Dark Triad and Faking on Self-Report Personality Inventories ………... 125
The Dark Triad and Interpersonal Faking Ability …………………..………. 128
Theoretical Implications ………………………………………………….…. 131
Clinical Implications ……………………...…………………………………. 134
Limitations ……………………………………………………………..……. 135
Future Directions ……………………………………………………………. 139
vi
vii
Conclusions ……………………………………………………………….…. 141
REFERENCES …………………………………………………………………..… 143
APPENDIX A: Materials for Study 1 ……………………………………………… 166
APPENDIX B: Materials for Study 2 ……………………………………………… 185
APPENDIX C: Materials for Study 3a ……………………………..……………… 198
APPENDIX D: Materials for Study 3b ……………………………..……………… 206
vii
viii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1 Description of PPI Subscales and Sample Items …………………….... 39
Table 2.2 Descriptive Statistics for the PPI Total and Subscales (n = 84) ….…… 46
Table 2.3 Descriptive Statistics for the Validity Indices (HPSI, PDS-IM, & PRF)
……………………………………………………………………….… 47
Table 2.4 Psychopathy by Ability to Fake Good on the HPSI …………..………... 50
Table 2.5 Psychopathy by Ability to Fake Bad on the HPSI ……………....……… 52
Table 2.6 Psychopathy by Ability to Fake Good on the PDS-IM ……...………... 53
Table 2.7 Psychopathy by Ability to Fake Bad on the PDS-IM ……………...….. 54
Table 2.8 Psychopathy by Ability to Fake Good on a Combination of the HPSI,
PDS-IM, and PRF ………………………..............…………..…...…… 56
Table 2.9 Psychopathy by Ability to Fake Bad on a Combination of the HPSI,
PDS-IM, and PRF ……………………………………………………... 58
Table 2.10 Psychopathy by Ability to Fake Exceptionally (Good and Bad) on a
Combination of the HPSI, PDS-IM and PRF ……….……………..…. 59
Table 2.11 Means and (SDs) for HPSI Subscales by Ability to Fake Good and
Fake Bad ……………….…………………………………………..…. 61
Table 2.12 Summary Table: Effect Sizes for Significant Effects of Psychopathy
and HPSI subscales with Successful Faking ………………………….. 65
Table 3.1 Descriptive Statistics for the SRP-E, Mach-IV, and NPI Total and
Subscales (n = 159) ……………………………………………….…… 76
Table 3.2 Sex differences for the SRP-E, Mach-IV, and NPI Total and Subscales
(n = 159) ……………………………………………………………….. 77
viii
ix
Table 3.3 Descriptive Statistics for the Validity Indices (HPSI, PDS-IM, & PRF)
………………………….……………………………………………… 80
Table 3.4 Logistic Regressions Predicting Success at Faking Good from the
Dark Triad Constructs …………………………………………………. 85
Table 3.5 Logistic Regressions Predicting Success at Faking Good on the HPSI
from the SRP-E Subscales …………………….………………………. 87
Table 3.6 Logistic Regressions Predicting Success at Faking Bad from the
Dark Triad Constructs …………………………………………………. 88
Table 4.1 Descriptive Statistics of the Targets (n = 32) on the Dark Triad
Measures ………………………………………………………………. 106
Table 4.2 Sex Differences of the Targets on the Dark Triad Measures ………….. 107
Table 4.3 Means and Standard Deviations of Target SRP-E, Mach-IV, and NPI
Total Scores by Personality Group ……………………………….…… 109
Table 4.4 Descriptive Statistics for Veracity, Believability, and Physical
Attractiveness Ratings ………………………………………………… 112
Table 4.5 Main Analyses: Means, Standard Deviations, and Significant
Differences in Ratings Across Personality Groups for Faking Good
Targets …………………………………………………………….…… 116

ix
x
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 4.1 SRP-E, Mach-IV, and NPI total scores of targets by personality group
relative to the control group (psychopathy, Machiavellianism, and
narcissism) ……………………………………………………………. 110

x