Christian Blötner, Bojana M Dinić, Andrew Denovan, Neil Dagnall, Petar Krstić, Kostas A Papageorgiou, Cassidy Trahair, Rachel A Plouffe
{"title":"The Machiavellian Approach and Avoidance Questionnaire: Further Validation and Evidence of Cross-National Validity.","authors":"Christian Blötner, Bojana M Dinić, Andrew Denovan, Neil Dagnall, Petar Krstić, Kostas A Papageorgiou, Cassidy Trahair, Rachel A Plouffe","doi":"10.1080/00223891.2024.2431123","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Researchers on antagonistic personality traits debate about an appropriate measurement approach to Machiavellianism. One measure intended to resolve this discourse, the Machiavellian Approach and Avoidance Questionnaire (MAAQ), distinguishes motivational aspects of Machiavellianism (https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0001069). Machiavellian Approach reflects strategic striving for advantages (even at others' expense), and Machiavellian Avoidance encompasses misanthropically driven prevention of loss. Using two German samples (<i>n</i><sub>total</sub> = 1,583; 63% women), evidence from our first study confirmed assumed relations between both facets and disagreeableness, as well as Machiavellian approach with dominance seeking, and Machiavellian avoidance with mistrust. However, the nomological networks of Machiavellian approach and measures of subclinical psychopathy were almost identical in both samples. Thus, the MAAQ failed to sufficiently differentiate from subclinical psychopathy. In a second study, partial scalar cross-national invariance was established across samples from Germany, Canada, United Kingdom, and Serbia (<i>n</i><sub>total</sub> = 1,853). Thereby, participants from Germany scored lower in Machiavellian approach compared to other samples, lower in Machiavellian avoidance compared to samples from the United Kingdom and Canada, but higher compared to the Serbian sample. Overall, findings supported cross-national equivalence of the MAAQ but undermined construct validity.</p>","PeriodicalId":16707,"journal":{"name":"Journal of personality assessment","volume":" ","pages":"1-13"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of personality assessment","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2024.2431123","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Researchers on antagonistic personality traits debate about an appropriate measurement approach to Machiavellianism. One measure intended to resolve this discourse, the Machiavellian Approach and Avoidance Questionnaire (MAAQ), distinguishes motivational aspects of Machiavellianism (https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0001069). Machiavellian Approach reflects strategic striving for advantages (even at others' expense), and Machiavellian Avoidance encompasses misanthropically driven prevention of loss. Using two German samples (ntotal = 1,583; 63% women), evidence from our first study confirmed assumed relations between both facets and disagreeableness, as well as Machiavellian approach with dominance seeking, and Machiavellian avoidance with mistrust. However, the nomological networks of Machiavellian approach and measures of subclinical psychopathy were almost identical in both samples. Thus, the MAAQ failed to sufficiently differentiate from subclinical psychopathy. In a second study, partial scalar cross-national invariance was established across samples from Germany, Canada, United Kingdom, and Serbia (ntotal = 1,853). Thereby, participants from Germany scored lower in Machiavellian approach compared to other samples, lower in Machiavellian avoidance compared to samples from the United Kingdom and Canada, but higher compared to the Serbian sample. Overall, findings supported cross-national equivalence of the MAAQ but undermined construct validity.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Personality Assessment (JPA) primarily publishes articles dealing with the development, evaluation, refinement, and application of personality assessment methods. Desirable articles address empirical, theoretical, instructional, or professional aspects of using psychological tests, interview data, or the applied clinical assessment process. They also advance the measurement, description, or understanding of personality, psychopathology, and human behavior. JPA is broadly concerned with developing and using personality assessment methods in clinical, counseling, forensic, and health psychology settings; with the assessment process in applied clinical practice; with the assessment of people of all ages and cultures; and with both normal and abnormal personality functioning.