Dark tetrad traits in politicians and voter behavior: Joe Biden and Donald Trump in the 2020 presidential election

IF 2.6 2区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL
Monika Prusik
{"title":"Dark tetrad traits in politicians and voter behavior: Joe Biden and Donald Trump in the 2020 presidential election","authors":"Monika Prusik","doi":"10.1016/j.jrp.2024.104568","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>While the erosion of democracy is often tied to specific political figures, not many studies have examined how perceived aversive personality traits in politicians relate to voter behavior. In our study (<em>N</em> = 456), we investigated how dark tetrad traits (DTTs) − subclinical Machiavellianism, narcissism, psychopathy, and sadism − observed in presidential candidates Biden and Trump related to potential voters’ willingness to support them. Both candidates were perceived as exhibiting significant DTT levels, except Biden showed average everyday sadism. Trump was seen as higher on most DTTs compared to Biden, except for Machiavellianism. Trump was predominantly characterized as narcissistic, sadistic, psychopathic, and Machiavellian, while Biden was viewed as mostly Machiavellian, narcissistic, and psychopathic. Perceptions correlated with political orientation, showing ingroup favoritism. Democrats attributed dark triad traits—especially narcissism, psychopathy, and sadism—more to Trump than Biden, whereas Republicans viewed them more homogeneously. Importantly, DTT attributions associated with voting willingness accounted for substantial variance. However, this relationship was nuanced: political favoritism impacted results, with e.g. Trump’s narcissism increasing Republican’s but decreasing Democrat’s voting intention towards him; trait severity mattered, with lighter narcissism and Machiavellianism more accepted than darker psychopathy and sadism; asymmetry existed, with Biden’s narcissism viewed positively regardless of political orientation but in Trump’s case it did not; and an opponent effect occurred where DTTs mattered more as seen in un unfavored candidate. The modified SD4 scale proved psychometrically sound for measuring politician DTTs. The findings underscore the importance of investigating such traits in politicians, especially during 2024—a global election year.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48406,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Research in Personality","volume":"115 ","pages":"Article 104568"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Research in Personality","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0092656624001168","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

While the erosion of democracy is often tied to specific political figures, not many studies have examined how perceived aversive personality traits in politicians relate to voter behavior. In our study (N = 456), we investigated how dark tetrad traits (DTTs) − subclinical Machiavellianism, narcissism, psychopathy, and sadism − observed in presidential candidates Biden and Trump related to potential voters’ willingness to support them. Both candidates were perceived as exhibiting significant DTT levels, except Biden showed average everyday sadism. Trump was seen as higher on most DTTs compared to Biden, except for Machiavellianism. Trump was predominantly characterized as narcissistic, sadistic, psychopathic, and Machiavellian, while Biden was viewed as mostly Machiavellian, narcissistic, and psychopathic. Perceptions correlated with political orientation, showing ingroup favoritism. Democrats attributed dark triad traits—especially narcissism, psychopathy, and sadism—more to Trump than Biden, whereas Republicans viewed them more homogeneously. Importantly, DTT attributions associated with voting willingness accounted for substantial variance. However, this relationship was nuanced: political favoritism impacted results, with e.g. Trump’s narcissism increasing Republican’s but decreasing Democrat’s voting intention towards him; trait severity mattered, with lighter narcissism and Machiavellianism more accepted than darker psychopathy and sadism; asymmetry existed, with Biden’s narcissism viewed positively regardless of political orientation but in Trump’s case it did not; and an opponent effect occurred where DTTs mattered more as seen in un unfavored candidate. The modified SD4 scale proved psychometrically sound for measuring politician DTTs. The findings underscore the importance of investigating such traits in politicians, especially during 2024—a global election year.
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
6.10%
发文量
102
审稿时长
67 days
期刊介绍: Emphasizing experimental and descriptive research, the Journal of Research in Personality presents articles that examine important issues in the field of personality and in related fields basic to the understanding of personality. The subject matter includes treatments of genetic, physiological, motivational, learning, perceptual, cognitive, and social processes of both normal and abnormal kinds in human and animal subjects. Features: • Papers that present integrated sets of studies that address significant theoretical issues relating to personality. • Theoretical papers and critical reviews of current experimental and methodological interest. • Single, well-designed studies of an innovative nature. • Brief reports, including replication or null result studies of previously reported findings, or a well-designed studies addressing questions of limited scope.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信