Can individuals accurately identify high Machiavellians as low cooperative based on facial appearance? The moderating role of target gender and raters' Machiavellianism

IF 3.5 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL Personality and Individual Differences Pub Date : 2024-09-14 DOI:10.1016/j.paid.2024.112880
Wenjian Fan , Yaoguo Geng , Yalin Gao , Qian Sun , Qianyun Gao , Yongfang Liu
{"title":"Can individuals accurately identify high Machiavellians as low cooperative based on facial appearance? The moderating role of target gender and raters' Machiavellianism","authors":"Wenjian Fan ,&nbsp;Yaoguo Geng ,&nbsp;Yalin Gao ,&nbsp;Qian Sun ,&nbsp;Qianyun Gao ,&nbsp;Yongfang Liu","doi":"10.1016/j.paid.2024.112880","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Accurate detection of counterpart cooperativeness is vital for human survival and development. However, whether people identify high Machiavellians, who intend to defect their counterparts in cooperative situations, as uncooperative is unknown. This study examined whether the general public could identify differences in cooperativeness between high and low Machiavellians based on their facial appearance, as well as the boundary conditions of this effect. Two experiments were conducted. Participants were asked to rate the cooperativeness of targets, including men and women with high and low Machiavellianism, shown on real facial photos created in a preliminary experiment (Experiments 1 and 2), and report their own Machiavellianism level (Experiment 2). Results consistently showed that the participants identified high Machiavellians as less cooperative than low Machiavellians. Moreover, we also identified two theoretical moderators: the effect only existed when the targets were male but not when they were female, and the effect was stronger when the raters were low Machiavellians as opposed to high Machiavellians. This study advances the current understanding of cooperation detection by demonstrating that people could reliably identify the low levels of cooperativeness of high Machiavellians based on facial appearance cues, and by comprehensively testing its moderators.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48467,"journal":{"name":"Personality and Individual Differences","volume":"233 ","pages":"Article 112880"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Personality and Individual Differences","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886924003404","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Accurate detection of counterpart cooperativeness is vital for human survival and development. However, whether people identify high Machiavellians, who intend to defect their counterparts in cooperative situations, as uncooperative is unknown. This study examined whether the general public could identify differences in cooperativeness between high and low Machiavellians based on their facial appearance, as well as the boundary conditions of this effect. Two experiments were conducted. Participants were asked to rate the cooperativeness of targets, including men and women with high and low Machiavellianism, shown on real facial photos created in a preliminary experiment (Experiments 1 and 2), and report their own Machiavellianism level (Experiment 2). Results consistently showed that the participants identified high Machiavellians as less cooperative than low Machiavellians. Moreover, we also identified two theoretical moderators: the effect only existed when the targets were male but not when they were female, and the effect was stronger when the raters were low Machiavellians as opposed to high Machiavellians. This study advances the current understanding of cooperation detection by demonstrating that people could reliably identify the low levels of cooperativeness of high Machiavellians based on facial appearance cues, and by comprehensively testing its moderators.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
个体能否根据面部外观准确识别高马基雅维利主义者和低合作主义者?目标性别和评分者马基雅维利主义的调节作用
准确识别对手的合作性对人类的生存和发展至关重要。然而,人们是否会将在合作情况下有意背叛对方的高马基雅维利主义者识别为不合作的人,这一点尚不清楚。本研究考察了普通大众能否根据高马基雅维利主义者和低马基雅维利主义者的面部外观来识别他们之间合作性的差异,以及这种效应的边界条件。研究进行了两项实验。参与者被要求对初步实验中制作的真实面部照片上的目标(包括马基雅维利主义程度高和低的男性和女性)的合作性进行评分(实验 1 和 2),并报告自己的马基雅维利主义程度(实验 2)。结果一致显示,参与者认为高马基雅维利主义者比低马基雅维利主义者更不合作。此外,我们还发现了两个理论调节因素:只有当研究对象为男性时才存在这种效应,而当研究对象为女性时则不存在;当评价者为低马基雅维利主义者而非高马基雅维利主义者时,这种效应更强。本研究通过证明人们可以根据面部外观线索可靠地识别出高马基雅维利主义者的低合作水平,并全面测试了其调节因素,从而推进了目前对合作检测的理解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.50
自引率
4.70%
发文量
577
审稿时长
41 days
期刊介绍: Personality and Individual Differences is devoted to the publication of articles (experimental, theoretical, review) which aim to integrate as far as possible the major factors of personality with empirical paradigms from experimental, physiological, animal, clinical, educational, criminological or industrial psychology or to seek an explanation for the causes and major determinants of individual differences in concepts derived from these disciplines. The editors are concerned with both genetic and environmental causes, and they are particularly interested in possible interaction effects.
期刊最新文献
Personality traits and their role in intimate partner violence recidivism: A 15-year follow-up study within a prison sample Navigating the pitfalls of incivility: The role of resilience in job search behavior Subjectivity in creative self beliefs: A Q-sort analysis Developing a novel parental phubbing scale of mother and father forms for adolescents in Türkiye: A validity and reliability study Clusters of borderline personality disorder traits and functional life outcomes: A novel person-centered approach
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1