The essence of Machiavellianism. What to do with the manipulator
People living in modern society are very different. They have different points of view, measures of interaction with others. But, of course, one thing connects them all: a goal in life that everyone would like to achieve. The methods of achieving the goal, sometimes, also differ.
What is Machiavellianism?
The term Machiavellianism comes from the English word machiavellianism. At first, it was used when talking about political science, which meant a very tough policy of the state, using brute force. Subsequently, the term moved into a completely different industry. Machiavellianism in psychology means a person's personal beliefs that he can and should manipulate other people. Also, this term suggests that a person has certain skills for this, which he develops to achieve his goals, usually this person has the gift of persuasion, besides, he is well versed in what other people want, knows their intentions, aspirations, desires .
The emergence of the term "Machiavellianism"
For the first time, this phenomenon was talked about in the Renaissance after the work of an Italian thinker called "The Sovereign" saw the light. In it, N. Machiavelli shared his ideas, where he connected the propensity to manipulate with the personal characteristics of individuals. In his opinion, when ruling a state, the ruler does not have to take into account the wishes of the people, because with the help of brute force, you can achieve anything, and the people will have nowhere to go, they will fulfill any requirements. For the sake of the prosperity and development of the state, the interests of ordinary people can be neglected. In modern times, the concept of Machiavellianism is more equated with cynicism, deceit and cunning.
Direction principles
From the very beginning of his career, Machiavelli was distinguished by cunning and deceit. Throughout his life, he made a huge contribution to ensuring that his beloved Florence could stand on the world political arena. For some time he had a chance to communicate with Cesare Borgia, a cruel and prudent Italian commander who dreams of creating a single Italian state and ruling it. But in his game he was not always honest. Machiavelli's work "The Prince" described this particular person, where he put forward his principles of Machiavellianism. The fact is that soon a war broke out between the Roman Empire and Venice. Riots broke out in the country, and N. Machiavelli was imprisoned on charges of conspiracy. Under the threat of execution and torture, he does not admit his guilt, so he is released. In his work, he describes how those who preach goodness and justice, in fact, build their power on cruelty and violence. It was in honor of Machiavelli that a separate direction was called "Machiavellianism". This is a kind of conviction that it would be better if a cruel ruler rules the state, who does not hide his intentions, but keeps it under control, than a dozen weak people who understand nothing about political affairs. In his understanding, the fundamental principle should be a strong state with an equally strong ruler who leads his people to prosperity.
Psychological properties of personality
The term "Machiavellianism" has long been used in foreign psychology. We are talking about the behavior of a person in interpersonal relationships, when he hides his true intentions by any means and uses special maneuvers and manipulations (this can be flattery, deceit, intimidation, and so on) to divert the attention of others, as a result of which they, without realizing it, do whatever they are told. Scientists have proven that a person who has Machiavellianism is a person prone to excessive suspicion, hostility, negativity and selfishness. That is, such a person in relations with other people behaves coldly and aloofly because of distrust of others. Machiavellian people are ambitious, smart, persistent, they always know what they want. Indecision, cowardice and sentimentality are weakly expressed in them.
Research methodology
In Russian psychology, the concept of "Machiavellianism" is not as widespread as in foreign psychology. American scientists conducted several studies of the work "The Sovereign" and, on its basis, compiled a series of psychological questions to identify Machiavellianism. Since Machiavellianism is widespread, there are a huge number of examples. The daughter is doing a math assignment, suddenly she asks her mother to come and help her. Mom helps. After a while, the daughter again asks for a favor, the mother comes up again. And then again, and again. Finally, after another request, my mother can not stand it, sits next to her and finishes the task herself. The daughter is glad, because she was not going to do this task at all, and now she is glad that she was able to make her mother complete the task for her. That is, in the understanding of scientists, Machiavellianism is a combination of emotional and behavioral characteristics, in which a person is able, when communicating, to convince another to follow his instructions.
Research results
In their answers to psychological questions, the Machiavellians rated the moral qualities of their personality very low. This means that they recognize the impossibility of combining their type of behavior and socially approved moral attitudes. The results of the study indicate that Machiavellians are more sociable and it does not depend on whether they are lying or telling the truth, but decency, honesty, friendliness are put on the back burner. In addition, it turned out that women have slightly higher rates of Machiavellianism than men.
In modern humanitarian knowledge, the problem of manipulation of individual and social consciousness and behavior is studied in 2 main aspects:
1. Violation of an individual's rights . Treating a person as an object, not as a subject.
2. Manipulative behavior as one of the reasons misunderstandings between people . The presence of a manipulative orientation in at least one of the communication partners prevents mutual understanding between them.
Manipulation
Different meanings of the concept of "manipulation":
- direct meaning. Manipulation is the movement of the hands associated with the performance of a specific task.
- Manipulation is a psychological impact on another person, which is not always realized by him and forces him to act in accordance with the goals of the manipulator. May be
i. conscious the subject of manipulation: socially desirable (with the best of intentions), not approved (aimed at obtaining one's own benefit), forced (to achieve a result useful to all). The manipulator, regardless of the virtuous or selfish motive, is aware of the social undesirability of his behavior, may feel guilty.
ii. Unconscious manipulation is manifested in the use of lies. Lies are fundamentally different from lies, as a deliberate distortion of facts. Lies can turn out to be an external manifestation of defense mechanisms: the desire to protect the inner world, not to open the soul, a manifestation of condescension.
Manipulation may be unconscious, a person may suffer from his manipulative behavior, perhaps an invaluable attitude to manipulative behavior.
Machiavellianism
Machiavellianism is a psychological syndrome based on a combination of interrelated cognitive, motivational and behavioral characteristics.
Machiavellianism is seen as a personality trait and as a set of behavioral strategies.
The main psychological components of Machiavellianism as personality traits :
- the belief that when communicating with others it is possible and necessary to manipulate, manipulation is not only a natural, but also the most effective way of interaction.
- specific skills and manipulation skills. Built on understanding the psychology of a partner.
Machiavellianism as a personality trait reflects a wish and intention man to manipulate other people. Machiavellianism is the tendency of a person to manipulate others, hiding his true intentions, and with the help of false distractions (flattery, deceit, bribery, intimidation), to ensure that the partner, without realizing it, changes the original goals of his behavior.
Machiavellian- a subject who manipulates others on the basis of a credo, certain life principles that serve as his justification for manipulative behavior. Machiavellian manipulating always consciously and exclusively for your own benefit. Has no feelings guilt, believes that manipulation is normal, effective method communication with people.
The confidence of the Machiavellian in his rightness has an inspiring effect on people, they do not have an unpleasant feeling that is characteristic of the victims of manipulation. There is a false sense of mutual understanding, since there is only one-sided understanding of the partner's psychology - from the Machiavellian side.
Machiavellianism quantitative characteristic, everyone is capable of such behavior, but all to a different degree.
MAC scale
Machiavellianism as a scientific category has been widely used in foreign psychological research since 1970. the idea of using the concept of "Machiavellianism" in relation to the psychology of individual differences belongs to psychologists from Columbia University to Richard Christie and Florence Grace . The basis of the concept was the way of thinking Nicocolo Machiavelli set out in the book "Sovereign" . Machiavelli believed that in order to effectively manage people, the ruler can use any means. He had a low opinion of human nature, considered people to be bad and believed that morally reprehensible methods could be used.
Grace and Christy, based on the analysis of the book, conducted a content analysis - 250 statements that are related to manipulation. Then they gave these statements to 30 qualified psychologists for examination, after which 170 statements remained. Further, psychodiagnostic work and factor analysis were carried out, and the psychological questionnaire "Mac-scale" was created. There are 5 versions of the questionnaire, but the poppy 4 scale, consisting of 20 statements, is the most common.
In 2000, a Russian-language adaptation of the methodology for studying the Machiavellian personality (MAK 4) was made.
High scores on the poppy scale 4.
- Syndrome of emotional coldness
When coming into contact with others from whom nothing is needed, they tend to be emotionally aloof, aloof, distrustful of others. social detachment, focused not on interpersonal relationships, but on the problem, more purposeful, aimed at achieving the goal.
- More convincing in communication: they evaluate others more accurately and are more honest with themselves.
- More frequent, but less deep contact with others.
- High suspicion, hostility. Inverse relationship between the level of Maquialism and empathy. Reflects disbelief that most people can be trusted to be altruistic. Independent and freedom-loving.
- Correlation with externality.
- Low scores according to the method of social desirability.
- Men with high scores are more likely to flatter women
- Managers with VO are more focused on the success of their work.
- No correlation with intelligence and education
Outcome: High Grades: bold, ambitious, dominant, persistent, selfish.
Low Grades: cowardly, indecisive, honest, reliable, sentimental, swayable.
Age features.
Young people have higher scores on the Mac scale. Level increases up to 35 years
Machiavellianism, as a behavioral strategy, is effective only for short-term contacts, but is not applicable for long-term communication.
Gender differences.
Men score higher.
Women have a lower awareness of their own competence. Women have a phenomenon - the fear of success. Many women tend not to show their intelligence, skills and abilities, they are afraid to be in a leadership position. Women use their weakness to manipulate.
Correlation with openness, closeness in communication.
Women are more open. self-disclosure studies: boys and girls reveal themselves in different areas: girls - interpersonal relationships, thoughts and feelings, boys - intentions, striving for achievement.
Communicative rigidity of Machiavellians.
Flexibility is one of the most important conditions for mutual understanding in interpersonal communication, the ability to use different behavior depending on the requirements of the context.
The level of Machiavellianism is negatively correlated with communicative flexibility. Machiavellians are more rigid. They are convinced that manipulation is the most effective way.
Not capable of emotional involvement in relationships, sensitive rigidity: they use stereotypical forms of emotional response.
The trend of dominance of economic and social-status values over moral and humanistic ones.
Shepard: There are areas where the Machiavellians lose out. Managers from two hypermarkets were compared: structured and unstructured environments. If the environment is structured, then the Machiavellians lose. If unstructured, then the Machiavellians win.
study: Socherman: there are situations when a person manipulates successfully for a long time, then he gets so used to success, then in a situation with uncertain success, Machiavellians usually lose by refusing to use manipulation (in this case, manipulation consists in demonstrating false incompetence or weaknesses), and ordinary people use manipulation. Machiavellianists eschew strategies that call for weakness, even when it might be their advantage.
result: the manipulative orientation of the behavior of subjects in communication and the high degree of machiavellian personality in at least one of the communicants reduces the likelihood of reaching mutual understanding between them. Machiavellians are not flexible communicators. In communication, they often show communicative rigidity, which prevents not only the achievement of goals or goals, but also mutual understanding with a partner.
Why is it important for a manager to know about Machiavellianism?
"End justifies the means"
Machiavellianism- the tendency of a person to manipulate people in interpersonal relationships.
Machiavellian- a manipulator aimed at seizing and retaining power in the organization. The Machiavellian is characterized by sophisticated deceit, treachery, subtle cynicism, and cold reason. The Machiavellian disregards the norms of morality in pursuit of dominance and power over other people. Machiavellian uses manipulation as the main means to achieve his goals.
Machiavellian manager I am sure that I can manage better than my leader. Machiavellian techniques are more often aimed at the very top of the organization. Machiavellian actions hinder the achievement of corporate Goals and undermine the competitiveness of the enterprise. When a Machiavellian is at the very top of management, one can expect the collapse of the business model.
Niccolò Machiavelli, Niccolò di Bernardo dei Machiavelli (1469-1527) Italian philosopher, politician, writer. In Florence, he served as Secretary of State - Secretary of the "Council of Ten" from 1498 to 1512. Responsible for the diplomatic relations of Italy. Author of military-theoretical works. A supporter of strong state power, for the strengthening of which he allowed the use of any means, which he expressed in the famous treatise "The Sovereign", written in 1513, and published only in 1532, five years after the death of Niccolò Machiavelli. In this book, Niccolo Machiavelli advises those in power to disregard the norms of public morality in order to achieve their own goals. The Sovereign is replete with numerous references to the need to use all sorts of tricks - flattery, deceit, cruelty in the political struggle. The essence of Niccolò Machiavelli's advice, in the treatise The Sovereign, boils down to the need to seize and retain as much power as possible by any available means, while remaining virtuous in the eyes of his subordinates.
The main quote of Niccolo Machiavelli: “Everything is yours. Enemies - the law.
"The end justifies the means" - often attributed to Niccolò Machiavelli, but according to other sources, this quote could belong to both Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) and Ignatius de Loyola.
Since ancient times, individual individuals have sought to know the mechanisms of influence on people that play an overwhelming role in the communicative process, having unraveled the essence of the phenomena of influence, persuasion and suggestion. Suggestion has always occupied an important place in the arsenal of means to achieve power, and was actively used by experienced politicians and other manipulators in the implementation of their intentions. A special place among other methods of suggestion is occupied by manipulation - a hidden psychological impact on the interlocutor, aimed at inducing the latter to achieve the goal indirectly invested by the manipulator (according to E.L. Dotsenko, 1997).
The manipulator wins not by force, but by cunning and endurance. Its task is to force a person to do something necessary, but in such a way that it seems to a person that he himself decided to do it, and he made this decision not under the threat of punishment, but of his own free will. In fact, he acts under the influence of those thoughts and feelings that the manipulator could evoke in him, affecting the "strings of the soul" that are significant for the addressee, or motives: guilt, fear, anger.
We can become victims of manipulators because of the desire to be “good”, gentle, courteous, delicate, considerate, forgetting that it is impossible to be good to everyone. This desire is often based on the “stereotype of an outcast”: if I am rude, they will condemn me, I must “be good,” then they will accept me. Manipulators feel our fear of condemnation very subtly and skillfully use it.
The main features of manipulation are:
Feeling uncomfortable, internal struggle. You do not want to do something, say something, and it is inconvenient to refuse, otherwise you will “look bad”;
Violation of ethics, awareness of danger, verbal and non-verbal signs of manipulation. Violation of the rules of ethics is an undeniable sign of manipulation;
Feelings of guilt or danger. You have become “owed” to someone, or dependent on some circumstance, which was not there before meeting this person;
Manipulator gestures that speak of his insincerity, secrecy, doubts, superiority, threat;
A certain unusual behavior of the manipulator is excessive excitement or ostentatious indifference.
In the 1980s, organizational psychologists became interested in Machiavellianism. Countless studies have been conducted on samples of those involved in business and marketing or who lead teams. They convincingly proved that Machiavellianism is connected with the external, i.e. external locus of control. One of the reasons for the connection between Machiavellianism and externality is the desire for the Immediate achievement of the desired goal. Since internal tactics at work - hard work, perseverance, etc. - cannot lead to quick results, Machiavellians resort to manipulation and deceit - any tactics, including lying and ingratitude, are good if they help to survive and succeed.
Based on the fact that Machiavellians have an external locus of control, it is assumed that a number of characteristics are associated with Machiavellianism that show positive links with the locus of control - achievement motivation, a prosperous self-concept, self-confidence, level of moral development, job satisfaction, etc. . Accordingly, the connections of Machiavellianism with these characteristics will be negative. In addition, it is important: the higher the Machiavellianism, the lower the benevolence and consciousness.
The study of the level of Machiavellianism depending on the intellectual characteristics is rare and does not allow drawing definite conclusions. With large assumptions, it can be assumed that there is a weak relationship between Machiavellianism and the level of intelligence.
A negative relationship was obtained between Machiavellianism and emotional intelligence, as well as with many other characteristics related to the definition of non-verbal and, especially, emotional components of social interaction.
As a result of the theoretical analysis of Machiavellianism, it is concluded that there is a connection between Machiavellianism and social success, namely:
The higher the level of Machiavellianism, the lower the social success;
The lower the level of Machiavellianism, the higher the social success.
A person who uses manipulation becomes limited in his behavior, is a hostage of his own communication techniques with others, and relies on the predictability of others. At the first time of communication with manipulators, it may seem that they have really achieved success, but this is just an illusion. At the first signs of awareness of manipulation, we begin to doubt their success, and a little later we notice the helplessness of the manipulator, especially without a victim.
How to spot a Machiavellian?
The Mach-V scale, in fact, allows you to measure and identify an individual's propensity for manipulation, moreover, a personal propensity that is difficult to detect by other psychodiagnostic methods. Very IMPORTANT: the use of psychodiagnostic techniques by non-specialists can lead to unreliable results and cause direct or indirect damage to the subject.
To whom it will be necessary, I will provide the Mach-V scale, for reference, but not for use.
Protection in the organization from the Machiavellians
When the Machiavellian sees the situation as uncertain, with a minimal amount of written rules governing the behavior of employees at work, they begin to aggressively manifest their Machiavellian tendencies. In highly structured situations where behavior is tightly controlled, Machiavellians "hibernate." Therefore, if you are building an enterprise, adhering to the concept of Torii Y, it is necessary to weed out specialists with a penchant for Machiavellianism “on the way”. The concept of Torii X allows you not to worry too much about Machiavellian tendencies - carefully written job descriptions, a detailed KPI scale for each position and tight control, make the costs / losses for weeding out specialists on the Mach-V scale ineffective.
Ladies and gentlemen! I'm ready to justify my opinion.
How can you accurately point to a person and say that he has the features of Machiavellianism? Is it possible?
Before you start pointing your fingers at people and claiming that each of them has Machiavellian features, you need to understand what Machiavellianism is.
According to the Oxford English Dictionary, Machiavellianism is the use of cunning and duplicity in statesmanship or general conduct. Now let's explore the meaning of this term in more detail. A Machiavellian is someone who focuses solely on their own interests and manipulates, deceives, and uses others to achieve their own personal goals. They seem to be great people, but they are not.
Machiavellian traits to watch out for
Interestingly, Machiavellianism is an integral part of the dark triad, that is, three negative personality traits. In addition to the mentioned trait, this includes narcissism and psychopathy. Why do people call it the dark triad? Well, because these traits are associated and associated with bad, dark intentions. If someone has these qualities, he is more likely to commit bad deeds.
If someone has the traits of Machiavellianism described below, at least one of them, this person is capable of committing a crime that can cause general social unrest. Despite this, such people are more likely to get leadership positions in society. Here are some of the main features of Machiavellianism.
People may have mental disorders
No one is there to scare you, but it is well known that Machiavellianism is highly correlated with psychopathy. Could this mean that this person is going to kill you? No. But this means that he has a low level of empathy mixed with a high level of impulsivity.
Thus, this is not a good combination for both adults and children today. If you notice any mental abnormalities in a person, try to stay away from him.
These are two-faced people
Webster's dictionary has a clear explanation of this term. So, duplicity is contradictory double thoughts, words or actions. Such people refute the true intentions of others with their deceitful words or actions to suit their own interests. In other words, you don't really know what these people's true intentions are because they keep telling you one thing and doing something completely different.
Focus solely on your own well-being
Yes, we are all animals, so it is quite normal that everyone is selfish and focused on their own well being to some extent. You can't call someone a Machiavellian just because they take care of themselves. However, there is a moment when this goes beyond the permissible. Machiavellians believe that in order to move forward, they must constantly deceive everyone.
Can be tactful
If they disclose information to you, they do so for a reason. And usually because it is beneficial for them. And if you feel like you haven't been given all the information you need, know there's a reason for that. After all, they never tell you something just for you to know.
They constantly manipulate and control
They study the people around them, they know very well how to make everything revolve around them. That's why they are successful. You may not even see their manipulation. This will continue until you realize that you are completely dependent on them. They simply use your talents, skills and abilities to achieve their goals.
There are no barriers for them.
For them, life is one big game. Sex partner (if they have one), co-workers, friends - every single person has been artfully chosen to contribute to their game. But it is worth noting that these people do not only play for power, they always want more.
These are daffodils
Yes, that's right. These people only care about themselves. They sit high on a pedestal and feel extremely important. Yes, self-interest and unhealthy ambitions are one thing, but they are on a completely different level because they are thought to be the most important people on this planet. Such individuals use others, and as soon as they achieve what they want, they immediately delete them from their lives.
The ends justify the means
They don't care how they earned the promotion and took over as CEO. The most important thing is that they managed to do it. All the dirty work they had to do to get this position is over. They did everything they thought they should have done. Otherwise, they would not have achieved what they now have. Such people do not see anything wrong with their actions, because in the end they achieved their goal.
These people don't need psychologists
Mostly because they don't see anything wrong with their actions. In their opinion, they are doing everything right, and there is no need to visit a therapist, since such individuals believe that people in general are dishonest and unreliable. Usually, if they seek help from a psychologist, it is because family members, friends, or a court decision prompted them to do so. But this does not mean that therapy will help them, because they do not need it. They think very differently, and in this case they were forced to visit a doctor.
They are masters at captivating people.
They are very charming. If such people behaved in any other way, you would not pay attention to them. But they know how to make people worship, respect and fear them. Although they may not have the skills of seduction, it does not matter, because they have charm. As soon as they need something from you, they turn on all their charm, make you believe that you are some kind of special person for them.
These people are "toxic"
If you are reading this because you believe there is someone in your social circle with Machiavellian traits, there is only one thing you can do and that is remove them from your life.
Yes, it sounds rude. Know that these people don't change because they don't see the problem. The only thing you can do is cut them out of your life. Believe me, they will quickly find a replacement for you.
Now that you know what the most common Machiavellian traits are, it's time to open your eyes and see if anyone in your environment has these qualities. Or, even worse, maybe you have them?
a socially oriented form of marital interaction, which postulates (due to the historically patriarchal-Christian image of the Russian family) the duty of the family and the presence of children.
Way of self-improvement + family as a system + emotion. This semantic model can be attributed to one of the relatively young types, as it combines not external, socially determined, but internally oriented indicators and parameters of personal development.
Family as a way to meet the needs 1 family as an extension of the family. This model is predominantly of a totrebtelian nature, where even the birth of children and the transition of marital relations to a fundamentally qualitatively new stage of their development is of a grave (consumer) nature, not associated with personal development and improvement of relationships
Family as a system + as an emotion + as a way to meet needs. This model apparently reflects the intentionality of a young family, where in an updated form
there are those semantic components that are most characteristic of the psychological climate of today's youth.
Bibliographic list
1. Abulkhanova-Slavskaya K A. Strategy of life. - M .: Thought, 1491 - 29 ° s.
2. Galperin P.Ya. Semantic patterns of behavior underlying higher nervous activity W Psychology. Issue. III - Tbilisi, 1945 -S. 79-99.
3. Dmitruk Yu.Yu. Identification of a person in a married couple as a factor in the subjective well-being of family relationships: Abstract of the thesis. diss. ... cand. psychol. Sciences. - M., 2004.
4. Leontiev A.N. Activity. Consciousness. Personality // Selected Works. At 2. -M., 1983.
5. Nalimov V.V. Spontaneity of consciousness - M .: Thought, 1989 - 420 p.
6. Chudnovsky V.E. The meaning of life: the problem of relative emancipation from "external" and "internal" ff Psychological journal. - 1995. - V. 16-No. 2. -FROM. 15-26.
A.O. Ruslin
MACHIAVELISM OF THE PERSON AND UNDERSTANDING MANSHULATIVE BEHAVIOR1
In modern society, the manipulation of consciousness manifests itself both at the level of public (Kara Murza, 2001; Grachev, Melnik, 2002; Aronson, Pratkanig 2003), and individual consciousness (Dotsenko, 2003; Margolina, Ryum-shina, 1999; Chaldini, 2002; Gegen , 2005). In this regard, understanding the manipulative plays a significant role.
The most important aspect of the problem is the study of the relationship between the psychological characteristics of the individual and the nature of his understanding of the manipulative situation, during which the manipulator, in order to achieve the goal, with the help of hidden, distracting maneuvers, turns the communication partner from an equal subject into an object of manipulation. Understanding includes
■ The article was written with the support of the Russian Humanitarian Science Foundation (grant 07-06-000133a)
evaluation points. There are initially different types of understanding: some justify and accept the behavior of the manipulator, which is based on the unconditional acceptance of communication with another person as a soulless thing, turning it into an object of manipulation - this is “Understanding-acceptance”, while others, on the contrary, consider such a thing unacceptable behavior - "Understanding-rejection".
An empirical study is described below, the purpose of which was to try to identify the relationship between a person's personal characteristics and the specifics of understanding manipulative behavior in communication. We do not study direct behavior: nor do we make predictions about the predictability of behavior based on our research. We can only assume that, understanding the situation in a certain way, according to the type of "understanding-acceptance" or "understanding-rejection"
nie”, the subject will be inclined to act in a similar way, becoming a participant in the situation of manipulation, because “in narrative psychology, scientists draw an analogy between the understanding of the text and the person’s understanding of himself, his own behavior and the events of his life” D6. With. 220].
"The impact of any objectively" "stimulating situation" depends on the personal and subjective meaning attached to it by a person. In order to successfully predict the behavior of a certain person, we must be able to take into account how he himself interprets this situation, understands it as a whole.
Three main hypotheses have been formulated:
1. Subjects with high scores in Machiavellianism, rigidity and low scores in life-meaning orientation and communicative orientation, and understanding-acceptance of manipulative behavior will justify the manipulative behavior; and vice versa.
2. There are gender differences in understanding situations of manipulative behavior: men have a higher level of Machiavellianism and to a greater extent than women will justify manipulative behavior, i.e. by type of understanding-acceptance.
3 Machiavellians*, regardless of gender, have a more pronounced manipulative orientation in communication. Non-Machiavellian, a more pronounced conformal alterocentric orientation in communication.
Methodology
The experiments were carried out in Samara.
The tested students of Samara universities of humanitarian and technical profile were 89 women and 87 men. In total, the study involved 176 people (men and women) aged 16 to 28 (M=18.26: S10=*.327).
Research procedure. First, the subjects were asked to complete four questionnaires: Mak-scale (Znakov, 2001); personality rigidity questionnaire (Practical..., 1984); the methodology of meaningful life orientations (Leontiev, 2000); questionnaire "Orientation of the personality in communication" (Bratchenko, 1997).
a text describing the behavior of a woman with a pronounced Machiavellian personality type who, through manipulative methods, prevented her son from becoming an artist (Sheldon, 2002), with a standardized set of questions.
To justify the choice of this situation, I will consider the content structure of the manipulative situation.
Firstly, numerous personal characteristics of the heroine revealed in the course of the text, such as: purposefulness, competitiveness, subject-oriented orientation, selfishness, courage, ambition. dominance, intelligence, lack of empathy, honesty and accuracy in perceiving and understanding self and others, emotional coldness syndrome, subtle effective use of flattery, bribery and intimidation, disbelief that the son can be trusted, in his independence and willpower, problem-oriented , and not on the interlocutor, the manipulation of the son for personal purposes, contrary to his own interests, prove that the heroine of the situation is a typical example of a Machiavellian personality. In addition, the story describes the cognitive, motivational and behavioral characteristics of the Gepoini, which is the basis for Machiavellianism as a psychological syndrome.
Secondly, this situation is manipulative, since the main character of the story skillfully manipulated others for personal gain. She had a psychological impact that her son did not realize, forcing him to act in accordance with her goals, hiding her true intentions, with the help of false distractions she achieved her goal.
It was assumed that the subjects, differing in gender, level of Machiavellianism, meaningfulness of life, intent in communication, rigidity, would understand the situation of manipulation in different ways and, accordingly, would respond differently to the questions.
In the psychology of understanding, the technique of posing questions is considered a reliable indicator of the comprehensibility of facts, events, and phenomena to a person. At the same time, questions should correspond to the structure of the object of understanding, i.e. in our case, situations of manipulation (Lange.
With this in mind, when planning the study, we assumed that as a result of analyzing the possible behaviors of all participants in the manipulation, the subject develops a holistic understanding of the analyzed situation. The main methodological technique was to encourage the subject to take different role positions. For this purpose, after reading the text, the subjects were asked questions of four categories.
Establishing questions are direct questions relating to the facts and explicitly presented in the text (Who is Kate? Who did Kate see Tony in the future?). Interpretive questions - when answering them, the subject must interpret the facts: make inferences about the possible causes of the events described in the text (What was most important for Kate in life? Why did Kate not approve of Tony's choice to become an artist?). Identification questions that require the understanding person to mentally put himself in the place of the participants in the manipulation situation (Whose way of thinking and behavior, Kate or Tony, is more in line with your own? Do you think Kate has the right to interfere in the fate of her son if she thinks that acts for his good/). Questions for empathy - the answers to them reveal the attitude of the subject to the personality traits and behavior of the participants in the moral choice situation (How would you behave in Kate's place, would you interfere with your son's desire to become an artist? Whom do you sympathize with in this situation, Kate or Tony?). When processing the answers of the subjects to questions to the text situation, the method of content analysis was used. The content analysis scheme included 4 blocks of categories: Machiavellian personality characteristics, Machiavellian style of interaction; non-Machiavellian personality characteristics, non-Machiavellian style of interaction.
Results and its discussion
Quantitative and qualitative analysis of the results was carried out in several directions: the search for gender and personality differences, as well as the determination of the psychological characteristics of the subjects who answered eight questions. To identify statistically significant differences between
the average data of these groups of subjects were used nonparametric criteria Kolmogorov - Smirnov and Mann - Whitney.
Quantitative analysis of answers to questions
The answers of the subjects to questions about the situation in most cases refer to the type of "understanding-manipulation ¿-rejection" of manipulative behavior.
The binomial criterion shows a statistically significant predominance of responses to the questions: about role positions*. Keith, the observed proportions differ significantly from 0.5 and are 0.13 for the non-Machiavellian role and 0.87 for the Machiavellian (p<О,001); о ценностных ориенчациях Кейт, 0,86 для макиавеи-листских ценностей и 0,14 для немакиавелли-стских (р<0,001); об оценке испытуемым права Кейт вмешиваться в судьбу сына, 0,25 для испытуемых считающих что Кейт имеет право вмешиваться в судьбу сына и 0,75 для тех, кто считает, «то она не имеет право вмешиваться (р<0,001); об образе мыслей испытуемого, 0,26 для испытуемых, чей их образ мысли и стиль поведения соответствуют Кейт и 0.74 для соответствующих Тони (р<0.001); о поведении испытуемого в подооной ситуации, 0.88 не стали бы препятствовать сыну в его желании стать художником и 0.12 стали бы препятствовать (р<0,001); о симпатиях испытуемого. 0,19 испытуемых симпатизируют Кейт и 0,81 симпатизируют Тони (р<0.001). Не обнаружено статистически достоверных отличий ответов на вопрос и личности Кейт: 53 для испытуемых положительно оценили личность Кейт и 47 отрицательно (р=0,589).
To identify specific features of the understanding of the manipulative situation by different groups of subjects, a more detailed analysis of the data obtained is necessary, focusing on the individual variables used in the experiment.
Types of understanding: understanding-acceptance and understanding-rejection of manipulative behavior
Compare the results) 07 subjects with the type of understanding - rejection of manipulative behavior and 50 subjects with the type of understanding-acceptance.
107 have less than 50 scores on the Mac scale (p<0.01; М=73,83 и М=80,90); количество макиавеллистски^ ответов на вопросы к тексту (о<0,00); М~1,84и М^4,42) и, соответствен-
Bulletin of KSU im. ON THE. Nekrasov. 200v Volume 13
but, more reviews of non-Machiavellian (p<0,001; М=4,19 и М=1,62). Также у них выше показатели по конформной направленности в оощении (р < 0,02; М = 4,05 и М = 3,34). Испытуемые, дающие положительные и отрицательные ответы на вопросы к текстовой ситуации, не различаются ни по признакам пола, ни по другим личностным особенностям.
Consequently, subjects who approve and accept manipulative behavior have more pronounced Machiavellian attitudes and beliefs than those who reject such behavior. In communication, they tend to refuse equality in communication in favor of the interlocutor, they are guided by submission to the power of authority, by an “objective” position for themselves, by uncritical “agreement” (avoiding opposition). there is no desire for real understanding and the desire to be understood, they are aimed at imitation, reactive communication, they are ready to “adjust” to the interlocutor.
I will analyze the answers to the questions to the text.
First, consider the data of 107 subjects of the first group, which are characterized by disapproval of the worldview and personality traits of the heroine. "Evil, proud woman"; “A narcissistic woman who, apart from her company and work, did not see anything, neither the interests of her son, nor any nasty things that she did to achieve her goals”; "A powerful man who owns a large company, listening only to himself"; “A self-confident woman, accustomed to her influence and powerful position in society, that everything can be bought for money, even the possible happiness of her son, his vocation”; "Persistent, insincere, proud"; "A powerful woman who imagined that she could decide fate for others"; “A selfish woman obsessed with her company. Intoxicated with power and might”; "Egoist, limited woman."
Now let's look at the data of 50 subjects of the second group, who, while answering questions, on the contrary, positively assessed Kate's personality: "Business woman"; “An ordinary woman who got a large company, but she is also strong, because. to manage a company, you need a lot of strength, as well as the mind ":" She is a purposeful and powerful woman ": "A strong powerful woman": "A woman with a strong character, grip, vitality"; "Talently-
you businessman. She is a life leader. She is used to managing everything and everyone, does not tolerate views that are opposite to her "," Powerful, smart woman "" Purposeful, business-like, strong-willed, cunning, insidious woman "; principled ";" Purposeful, characteristic, with a fighting spirit woman, somewhat power-hungry "; "Rich, powerful woman."
Sex differences
The sample consisted of 90 women and 86 men, and the following statistically significant differences were found between their results.
Men have a higher indicator of conformal orientation in communication than women (p<0,01; М=4,14 и М-3,57). Характерно, что мужчины и женщины, не различаются ни по уровню макиавеллизма, ни по другим личностным особенностям.
Machiavellian personality
Comparative analysis of polar groups of subjects on the Mac scale: 48 people from the lower quartile (scores 44-67) and 49 from the upper quartile (85101). Weak Machiavellians have higher scores on social desirability (p<0,1; М=5,13 и М-4,02); общий показатель по смыс-ложизненным ориентациям (р<0,01; М= 108,31 и М=97,65) и другие показатели по осмысленности жизни; альтероцентрическая направленность в обшении (р<0,05; М 1,40 и М^2,59). Однако у них ниже показатели по манипулятив-ной направленности в общении (р<0.025; М=4 40 и М=6,24). Обнаружены различия и в типе понимания манчпулятивной ситуации. Сла-бовыраженные макиавеллисты имеют больше немакиавеллистских отьегов на вопросы к тексту (р<0,25; М=3,73 и М=2,78) и меньше макиа-веллистских ответов (р<0,05; М=2,33 и М=3,10).
Therefore, according to the results of the experiment, we can say that subjects with higher scores on the Machiavellian scale, when understanding the situation of manipulation in communication, are more likely than weakly expressed Machiavellians to answer questions of the type of understanding-acceptance of manipulative behavior, and vice versa, weakly expressed Machiavellians are more likely to respond according to the type of understanding-rejection. In addition, weakly expressed Machiavellians have a more pronounced orientation towards
socially desirable responses. They are prone to a pre-volitional “centration” on the interlocutor, oriented towards his goals, needs, etc. and blatant sacrifice of one's own interests, chains, the desire to understand the needs of another in order to fully satisfy them, but are indifferent to understanding oneself on his part, strive to promote the development of the interlocutor even to the detriment of one's own development and well-being. Weakly expressed Machiavellians are more convinced that a person can manage his own life, has the freedom to choose to build his life, in general, their life is more meaningful. Strongly expressed Machiavellians are focused on using the interlocutor and all communication for their own purposes, to obtain various kinds of benefits, they treat the interlocutor as a means, the object of their manipulations, they strive to understand (“calculate”) the neighbor in order to obtain the necessary information, in combination with their own secrecy, insincerity, they are guided by development and even "creativity" (cunning) in communication, but one-sided - only for themselves, at the expense of another.
Rigidity of personality
Now I will compare the results of 52 subjects with low rates of rigidity (less than 16) and 53 with high rates (more than 22).
52 have less than 53 indicators on social desirability (p<0,001, М= 13.54 и М=23,83); общему показателю смысложиз-ненных ориентаций (р<0,01; М=104,4 и М= 106,3) и конформной направленности личности в общении (р<0,03; М=4.08 и М=3,58).
Therefore, subjects with lower rigidity scores are less likely than higher scorers to give socially desirable responses, and they also have a lower overall life meaningfulness score. Subjects with higher rates of rigidity tend to refuse equality in communication in favor of the interlocutor, are oriented towards submission to the power of authority, towards an “objective” position for themselves, are oriented towards uncritical “agreement” (avoiding opposition), there is no desire for a real understanding
mania and desire to be understood, aimed at imitation, reactive communication, ready to "adjust" to the interlocutor.
Social Desirability Scale from the Rigidity Questionnaire
The “lower” have higher scores on the Mac-scale (p< 0,005; М = 80,31 и М = 71,45) и манипудятивной направленности в общении (pcO.ÖOl; М=^,96 и М=4,51).
However, they have lower indicators on the questionnaire of meaningful life orientations. Characteristically, there are differences only in terms of the actual meaning-of-life orientations of goals in life, saturation of life and satisfaction with self-realization, and no differences were found in two aspects of the locus of control. According to the integral indicator of meaningful life orientations (р< 0.01; М = 9ч,65 и М = 109,58), по целям СЖО (р < 0,025; М = 30.40 и М = 34,11), по процессу СЖО (р <0,01; М =30.40 и М = 33,43) и по результату СЖО (р<:0,02; М-25,21 и М-27,25).
Also, according to the scales of personality orientation in communication: "Alterocentricity" p<0,001; М=2,5 и М=4,06) и «Конформности» (р< 0,03; М-3,25 иМ-4,11)
Consequently, subjects with low scores in social desirability have more pronounced Machiavellian attitudes and beliefs than subjects with high scores; to the means, the object of their manipulations, they strive to understand (“calculate”) the interlocutor in order to obtain the necessary information, in combination with their own secrecy, insincerity, they are guided by development and even “creativity” (cunning) in communication, but one-sided - only for themselves , at the expense of another. However, their life is less meaningful, they are less satisfied with the lived part of life, they perceive the process of life itself as less interesting, emotionally rich and meaningful, they are less expressed in life.
goals in the future that give life meaning, direction, and time perspective. Subjects with low scores in social desirability are less inclined than those with high scores to voluntarily "center" on the interlocutor, focus on his goals, needs, etc. and disinterestedly sacrifice their interests, chains, less desire to understand the needs of another with a shoal of their most complete satisfaction, and are not indifferent to understanding themselves on his part, do not seek to contribute to the development of the interlocutor and to the detriment of their own development and well-being. Also, they are not inclined to abandon equality in communication in favor of the interlocutor, orientation towards submission to the power of authority, towards an “objective” position for themselves, orientation towards uncritical “consent” (avoiding opposition), to the lack of desire for real understanding and the desire to be understood, focus on imitation, reactive communication, readiness to "adjust" to the interlocutor.
So, all three hypotheses put forward in the study were quantitatively confirmed only partially, but the most important thing is that the specificity of understanding is directly related to the personality properties of the understanding subject. Understanding - the acceptance of manipulative behavior is associated with a high level of Machiavellianism, manipulative and conformal orientation in communication, low indicators of life meaningfulness
Bibliographic list
1. Aronson E., Pratkanis E.R. The Age of Propaganda: Mechanisms of Persuasion, Everyday Use and Abuse. - St. Petersburg: Prime - EUROZNAK, 2003.
2. Bratchenko S L. Diagnostics of personality-developing potential - a methodological guide for school psychologists. - Pskov: Publishing house of the Pskov regional institute for advanced training of educators, 1997. - S. 34-62.
3. Gegen N. Psychology of manipulation and submission. - St. Petersburg: Peter, 2005.
4. Grachev G.V., Melnik I.K. Manip) 1iro-vanie personality. - M.: Eksmo Publishing House, 2003.
5. Dotsenko E.JI. Psychology of manipulation: phenomena, mechanisms and protection. - M.: "Chero" together with the publishing house "Urayt", 20i0.
6. Signs VV Methodology for the study of Machiavellian personality. - M Sense, 2001.
7. Znakos V.V. Psychology of understanding. Problems and prospects. - M.: Publishing House "Institute of Psychology of the Russian Academy of Sciences", 2005.
8 Kara■ Murza SG Manipulation of Consciousness. - M.: Publishing House of EKSMO-Press, 2001.
9. Leontiev D.A. Meaningful Orientation Test (SJO). - M.: Meaning, 2000.
10. Margolina E.L., Ryumshina L.I. Manipulation as a psychological phenomenon // Applied Psychology. 1999 - No. 4. - S. 65-74.
Ш Workshop on psychodiagnostics: Differential psychodiagnostics / Ed. V.V. Stolin, A.G. Shmeleva - M., 1984
12. Ross L., Nisbett R. Person and situation: Prospects for social psychology. - M.: Aspect Press, 1994.
13. Cialdini R. Psychology of influence - St. Petersburg: Piteo, 2002.
14 Sheldon S Schemer - M.: ACT. 2001.
15. Lange G. Verstehen in der
Psychodiagnostic.
Rorschach Tests.
