The Effects of Psychopathy and Machiavellianism on Cognitive Dissonance Ashley Anne Murray University of Texas at El Paso, [email protected]
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
University of Texas at El Paso DigitalCommons@UTEP Open Access Theses & Dissertations 2009-01-01 The effects of psychopathy and Machiavellianism on cognitive dissonance Ashley Anne Murray University of Texas at El Paso, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.utep.edu/open_etd Part of the Clinical Psychology Commons, Cognitive Psychology Commons, and the Personality and Social Contexts Commons Recommended Citation Murray, Ashley Anne, "The effects of psychopathy and Machiavellianism on cognitive dissonance" (2009). Open Access Theses & Dissertations. 317. https://digitalcommons.utep.edu/open_etd/317 This is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@UTEP. It has been accepted for inclusion in Open Access Theses & Dissertations by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@UTEP. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE EFFECTS OF PSYCHOPATHY AND MACHIAVELLIANISM ON COGNITIVE DISSONANCE ASHLEY ANNE MURRAY Department of Psychology APPROVED : ____________________________________ James M. Wood, Ph.D., Chair ____________________________________ Theodore V. Cooper, Ph.D. ____________________________________ Matthew H. Scullin, Ph.D. ____________________________________ Theodore R. Curry, Ph.D. ____________________________________ Patricia D.Witherspoon, Ph.D. Dean of the Graduate School Copyright By Ashley Anne Murray 2009 Dedications This thesis is dedicated to my parents for their continued encouragement and support. THE EFFECTS OF PSYCHOPATHY AND MACHIAVELLIANISM ON COGNITIVE DISSONANCE By ASHLEY ANNE MURRAY, B.A. THESIS Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of The University of Texas at El Paso in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS Department of Psychology THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT EL PASO May 2009 Acknowledgements I would like to thank Dr. James Wood for his wisdom, knowledge and patience in guiding me through this process. In addition, special thanks to Dr. Scott Lilienfeld for assisting as an outside consultant and lending his expertise in psychopathy research to this project. v Abstract Psychopathic traits include a lack of guilt, a lack of remorse, callousness and antisocial behaviors such as impulsivity and aggression. The current study examined the effects of psychopathic traits as measured by the Psychopathic Personality Inventory – Revised: Short Form (PPI-R: SF; Lilienfeld & Widows, 2005) and the Levenson Primary and Secondary Psychopathy Scales (LPSP; Levenson, Kiehl, & Fitzpatrick, 1995), and of Machiavellianism (MACH), as measured by the MACH-IV (Christie & Geis, 1970), on cognitive dissonance in a sample of 164 participants. The induced compliance paradigm of cognitive dissonance was implemented by instructing each participant to complete a boring task inspired by the seminal cognitive dissonance experiment by Festinger and Carlsmith (1959). Afterward, feelings of guilt and psychological unease were induced by asking the participant to mislead a second participant (actually a confederate) by telling him that the task was enjoyable. Participants’ level of guilt over telling the lie was experimentally manipulated. Half of the participants were directly and firmly instructed to tell the lie (low perceived choice, low guilt condition), whereas the other half of the participants were politely requested, but not instructed, to tell the lie (high perceived choice, high guilt condition). As predicted, participants low in psychopathy (as measured by the PPI-R: SF and LPSP) exhibited the classic cognitive dissonance effect, whereas participants high in psychopathy did not exhibit the effect. Results for MACH were not significant. The implications of these results are important for cognitive dissonance research because they point to a subset of the population (psychopaths) possibly confounding results of past studies on cognitive dissonance. In addition, the results point to definitive cognitive differences between individuals with varying levels of psychopathy. vi Table of Contents Dedication…………………………………………………………………………………...……iii Acknowledgements…………………………………………………………………...…………...v Abstract……………………………………………………………………………………...…....vi Table of Contents………………………………………………………………………………...vii List of Tables……………………………………………………………………………………..ix List of Figures……………………………………………………………………………………..x Chapter 1: Introduction……………………………………………………………………………1 1.1 Cognitive Dissonance…………………………………………………………………1 1.2 Justification for the Current Study’s Procedural Design……………………………...7 1.3 Cooper’s New Look Theory of Cognitive Dissonance………………………………10 1.4 Psychopathy Effects on Cognitive Dissonance………………………………………12 1.5 Machiavellianism…………………………………………………………………….20 1.6 Machiavellianism and Cognitive Dissonance………………………………………..23 1.7 Hypotheses of the Present Study……………………………………………………..29 Chapter 2: Methods………………………………………………………………………………32 Chapter 3: Results………………………………………………………………………………..41 3.1 Confirmatory Analyses………………………………………………………………44 3.2 Exploratory Analyses.………………………………………………………………..55 Chapter 4: Discussion……………………………………………………………………………76 4.1 Classic Cognitive Dissonance Effect………………………………………………..76 4.2 Psychopathy and Cognitive Dissonance…………………………………………….78 4.3 Machiavellianism and Cognitive Dissonance……………………………………….88 4.4 Psychopathy Incrementally Predicting Abacus Task Enjoyment (Over MACH)…...90 vii 4.5 Additional Exploratory Analyses……………………………………………………91 Limitations and Future Directions……………………………………………………………….94 Conclusions………………………………………………………………………………………99 References………………………………………………………………………………………100 Appendix A……………………………………………………………………………………..107 Appendix B……………………………………………………………………………………..110 Appendix C……………………………………………………………………………………..114 Appendix D……………………………………………………………………………………..116 Appendix E……………………………………………………………………………………..121 Appendix F……………………………………………………………………………………...123 Appendix G……………………………………………………………………………………..129 Appendix H……………………………………………………………………………………..133 Curriculum Vita………………………………………………………………………………...134 viii List of Tables Table 1: Descriptive Information for the Psychopathy and Machiavellianism Predictors and Dependent Variable................................……………………………………..………….43 Table 2: Multiple Regression Results. Criterion is Self-Reported Enjoyment of the Abacus Tasks. Predictors are the PPI-R: SF, LPSP, and MACH-IV Total Scores and Subscales. Each Row Represents Results From One Multiple Regression……………………..…...50 Table 3: Hierarchical Multiple Regression Results: Level of Psychopathy (PPI-R:SF) Incrementally Predicting Abacus Task Enjoyment Above Level of Machiavellianism…54 Table 4: Hierarchical Multiple Regression Results: Level of Psychopathy (LPSP) Incrementally Predicting Abacus Task Enjoyment Above Level of Machiavellianism…………..…….55 Table 5: Hierarchical Multiple Regression Results: Level of Machiavellianism Incrementally Predicting Abacus Enjoyment Over Level of Psychopathy (PPI-R: SF).……………….56 Table 6: Hierarchical Multiple Regression Results: Level of Machiavellianism Incrementally Predicting Abacus Enjoyment Over Level of Psychopathy (LPSP)………………….….57 Table 7: Correlations Between the Total Scores of the Psychopathy and Machiavellianism Measures…………………………………………………………………………………62 Table 8: Correlations Between the PPI-R: SF, LPSP, MACH-IV, Their Factors and Subscales..65 Table 9: Multiple Regression Results. Criterion is Self-Reported Guilt After Misleading the Confederate. Predictors are the PPI-R: SF, LPSP, and MACH-IV Total Scores and Subscales. Each Row Represents Results From One Multiple Regression……………...69 Table 10: Factor Solutions Between PPI-R: SF, LPSP, and MACH-IV Total Score……………70 Table 11: Factor Loadings of Total Item Factor Analysis……………………………………….72 Table 12: Factor Loadings of the Psychopathy and MACH Measures Subscales……………….75 Table 13: Interactions of Psychopathy Subscales and Factor Scales with Choice Condition by the Two Factor (Cognitive or Behavioral) Psychopathy Solution Demonstrated by Past Research (Self-Reported Enjoyment as Criterion)………………………………………86 ix List of Figures Figure 1: Main Effect for Mean Task Enjoyment Across Choice Conditions…………………...45 Figure 2: Relationship of PPI-R: SF Total Scores to Reported Level of Task Enjoyment – Low Choice to Lie Condition Only……………………………………………………………47 Figure 3: Relationship of PPI-R: SF Total Scores to Reported Level of Task Enjoyment – High Choice to Lie Condition Only……………………………………………………………47 Figure 4: Relationship of LPSP Total Scores to Reported Level of Task Enjoyment – Low Choice to Lie Condition Only……………………………………………………………49 Figure 5: Relationship of LPSP Total Scores to Reported Level of Task Enjoyment – High Choice to Lie Condition Only……………………………………………………………49 Figure 6: Relationship of MACH-IV Total Scores to Reported Level of Task Enjoyment – Low Choice to Lie Condition Only……………………………………………………………52 Figure 7: Relationship of MACH-IV Total Scores to Reported Level of Task Enjoyment – High Choice to Lie Condition Only……………………………………………………………52 x Chapter 1: Introduction Psychopathy is a personality construct that has demonstrated negative consequences for society. For example, individuals with psychopathy are overrepresented in prison populations and commit more violent crimes (Hare, 1996). Though psychopathy is represented in approximately one to five percent of the population, it is represented in 15-25% of prison populations (Hare, 1996). To date, there is no identifiable treatment for psychopathy and no definitive understanding of the causes or etiology of this construct.