Mach-IV: Evidence of Structural, Discriminant and Predictive Validity with Argentinian Students


  • Anabel Belaus Universidad Nacional de Córdoba
  • Débora Jeanette Mola Universidad Nacional de Córdoba
  • Pablo Correa Universidad Nacional de Córdoba
  • Cecilia Reyna Universidad Nacional de Córdoba


Machiavellians are defined as self-interested and manipulative people, who use others as mere means for their ends. The Mach-IV scale consists of 20 items measuring different aspects of Machiavellianism. In this study, we investigate the psychometric properties of the Mach-IV Scale with Argentinian university students. First, we translated and adapted the Mach-IV Scale to the target culture. Second, we evaluated the structure and internal consistency of the scale. Third, we examined the correlation between Mach-IV and Social Value Orientation (SVO), and between the Mach-IV scale and decisions and expectations in a Dictator Game (DG), both in its “give” and “take” versions. None of the structures evaluated showed good indexes of fit. We opted for the original one-factor structure but without items 19 and 20. Assuming such a structure, we observed negative correlations between the Mach-IV scale and SVO, and between the Mach-IV scale and cooperation in the DG. Materials, data, and scripts are available at

Palabras clave:

Machiavellianism, Psychometry, Cooperation, Social Value Orientation, Dictator Game


Ahmed, S. M. S. & Stewart, R. A. (1981). Factor analysis of the Machiavellian Scale. Social Behavior and Personality, 9(1), 113-115.

Albayay, J., Villarroel-Gruner, P., Bascour-Sandoval, C., Parma, V., & Gálvez-García, G. (2019). Psychometric properties of the Spanish version of the Edinburgh Handedness Inventory in a sample of Chilean undergraduates. Brain and Cognition, 137, 103618. https://doi-org/10.1016/j.bandc.2019.103618

American Psychological Association. (2017). Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct. Retrieved from

Bardsley, N. (2008). Dictator game giving: Altruism or artefact? Experimental Economics, 11(2), 122-133.

Bereczkei, T. & Czibor, A. (2014). Personality and situational factors differently influence high Mach and low Mach persons’ decisions in a social dilemma game. Personality and Individual Differences, 64(1), 168-173.

Bereczkei, T., Papp, P., Kincses, P., Bodrogi, B., Perlaki, G., Orsi, G., & Deak, A. (2015). The neural basis of the Machiavellians’ decision making in fair and unfair situations. Brain and Cognition, 98(1), 53-64.

Bicchieri, C. (2006). The grammar of society. Cambridge University Press.

Böckler, A., Tusche, A., & Singer, T. (2016). The structure of human prosociality: Differentiating altruistically motivated, norm motivated, strategically motivated, and self-reported prosocial behavior. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 7(6), 530-541.

Bollen, K. A. (1989). A new incremental fit index for general structural equation models. Sociological Methods & Research, 17(3), 303-316.

Brewer, G., Bennett, C., Davidson, L., Ireen, A., Phipps, A. J., Stewart-Wilkes, D., & Wilson, B. (2018). Dark triad traits and romantic relationship attachment, accommodation, and control. Personality and Individual Differences, 120, 202-208.

Camerer, C. F. (2003). Behavioral game theory: Experiments in strategic interaction. New York, New York: Princeton University Press

Cappelen, A. W., Nielsen, U. H., Sørensen, E. Ø., Tungodden, B., & Tyran, J. R. (2013). Give and take in dictator games. Economics Letters, 118(2), 280-283.

Castille, C. M., Buckner, J. E., & Thoroughgood, C. N. (2018). Prosocial citizens without a moral compass? Examining the relationship between Machiavellianism and unethical pro-organizational behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 149, 919-930.

Christie, R. & Geis, F.L. (1970). Studies in Machiavellianism. New York, New York: Academic Press.

Christie, R. & Lehman, S. (1970). The structure of Machiavellian orientations. In R. Christie & F. Geis (Eds.), Studies in Machiavellianism (pp. 359-387). New York, New York: Academic Press.

Clemente, M., Padilla-Racero, D., & Espinosa, P. (2020). The dark triad and the detection of parental judicial manipulators. Development of a judicial manipulation scale. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(8), 2843.

Cohen, R. J. & Swerdlik, M. E. (2010). Psychological testing and assessment: An introduction to tests and measurement (7th ed.). McGraw-Hill.

Corral, S. & Calvete, E. (2000). Machiavellianism: Dimensionality of the Mach IV and its relation to self-monitoring in a Spanish sample. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 3(1), 3-13.

Czibor, A. & Bereczkei, T. (2012). Machiavellian people’s success results from monitoring their partners. Personality and Individual Differences, 53(3), 202-206.

Czibor, A., Vincze, O., & Bereczkei, T. (2014). Feelings and motives underlying Machiavellian behavioural strategies; narrative reports in a social dilemma situation. International Journal of Psychology, 49(6), 519-524.

Dalhing, J., Whitaker, B., & Levy, P. (2009). The development and validation of a new Machiavellianism scale. Journal of Management, 35(2), 219-257.

Espírito-Santo, H., Pires, C. F., Garcia, I. Q., Daniel, F., Silva, A. G. D., & Fazio, R. L. (2017). Preliminary validation of the Portuguese Edinburgh Handedness Inventory in an adult sample. Applied Neuropsychology: Adult, 24(3), 275-287.

Esteves-Pereira, M., Azeredo, A., Moreira, D., Almeida, F., & Brandão, I. (2020). Mach-IV (test of Machiavellianism): Psychometric properties and normative data from the Portuguese population. European Psychiatry, 63(S1).

Fehr, B., Samson, D., & Paulhus, D. L. (1992). The construct of Machiavellianism: Twenty years later. In C. D. Spielberger & J. M. Butcher (Eds.), Advances in Personality Assessment. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Erlbaum.

Fehr, E. & Schneider, F. (2010). Eyes are on us, but nobody cares: are eye cues relevant for strong reciprocity? Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 277(1686), 1315-1323.

Forsythe, R., Horowitz, J. L., Savin, N. E., & Sefton, M. (1994). Fairness in simple bargaining experiments. Games and Economic Behavior, 6(3), 347-369.

Furukawa, R., Driessnack, M., & Colclough, Y. (2014). A committee approach maintaining cultural originality in translation. Applied Nursing Research, 27(2), 144-146.

George, D. & Mallery, M. P. (2001). SPSS for Windows step by step: A simple guide and reference. Boston, Massachusetts: Allyn & Bacon.

Hu, L. T. & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1-55.

Hunter, J. E., Gerbing, D. W., & Boster, F. J. (1982). Machiavellian beliefs and personality: Construct invalidity of the Machiavellianism dimension. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43(6), 1293-1305.

Jones, D. N. & Paulhus, D. L. (2009). Machiavellianism. In M. R. Leary & R. H. Hoyle (Eds.), Handbook of Individual Differences in Social Behavior (pp. 93-108). New York, New York: Guilford Press.

Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J. L., & Thaler, R. (1986). Fairness as a constraint on profit seeking: Entitlements in the market. The American Economic Review, 76(4), 728-741.

Kelley, K. (2007). Methods for the behavioral, educational, and social sciences: An R Package. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 979-984.

Korkmaz, S., Goksuluk, D., & Zararsiz, G. (2014). MVN: An R Package for Assessing Multivariate Normality. The R Journal, 6(2), 151-162. Retrieved from

Kunda, Z. (1990). The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 108(3), 480-498.

Lee, H., Kim, S., Kim, H., & Ko, Y. (2018). Encoding differences in posed negative emotional expressions between prosocials and proselfs. Current Psychology, 1(1), 1-12.

Meyer, H. D. (1992). Norms and self-interest in ultimatum bargaining: The prince’s prudence. Journal of Economic Psychology, 13(1), 215-232.

Monaghan, C., Bizumic, B., & Sellbom, M. (2016). The role of Machiavellian views and tactics in psychopathology. Personality and Individual Differences, 94(1), 72-81.

Monteiro, R. P., Coelho, G. L. H., Cavalcanti, T. M., Grangeiro, A. S. M., & Gouveia, V. V. (2022). The ends justify the means? Psychometric parameters of the MACH-IV, the two-dimensional MACH-IV and the trimmed MACH in Brazil. Current Psychology, 41, 4088-4097.

Murphy, R. O., Ackermann, K. A., & Handgraaf, M. J. J. (2011). Measuring social value orientation. Judgment and Decision Making, 6(8), 771–781.

Muthén, L. & Muthén, B. (1998–2010). Mplus user’s guide (6th ed.). Los Angeles, California: Muthén & Muthén.

National Law on the Protection of Personal Data #25326. (2000). Retrieved from

Pailing, A., Boon, J., & Egan, V. (2014). Personality, the dark triad and violence. Personality and Individual Differences, 67, 81-86.

Panitz, E. (1989). Psychometric investigation of the Mach IV scale measuring Machiavellianism. Psychological Reports, 64(3), 963-968.

Paulhus, D. L. (2014). Toward a taxonomy of dark personalities. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 23, 421–426.

Paulhus, D. L. & Williams, K. M. (2002). The dark triad of personality: Narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy. Journal of Research in Personality, 36(6), 556-563.

Qadir, F. & Khalid, A. (2017). Linguistic validation and psychometric properties of the Urdu version of MACH IV scale among Pakistani women. Journal of Behavioural Sciences, 27(1), 57-74.

Rauthmann, J. F. (2013). Investigating the MACH–IV with item response theory and proposing the trimmed MACH. Journal of Personality Assessment, 95(4), 388-397.

Rauthmann, J. F. & Will, T. (2011). Proposing a multidimensional Machiavellianism conceptualization. Social Behavior and Personality, 39(3), 391-403.

Reyna, C., Belaus, A., Mola, D., Ortiz, M. V., & Acosta, C. A. (2018). Social Values Orientation Measure Scale: Evidences of validity and reliability among Argentine undergraduate students. TPM-Testing, Psychometrics, Methodology in Applied Psychology, 25(1), 395-408.

Spitzer, M., Fischbacher, U., Herrnberger, B., Grön, G., & Fehr, E. (2007). The neural signature of social norm compliance. Neuron, 56(1), 185-196.

Steiger, J. H. (1990). Structural model evaluation and modification: An interval estimation approach. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25(2), 173-180.

Swaine-Verdier, A., Doward, L. C., Hagell, P., Thorsen, H., & McKenna, S. P. (2004). Adapting quality of life instruments. Value in Health, 7, S27-S30.

Szijjarto, L. & Bereczkei, T. (2014). The Machiavellians’ “cool syndrome”: They experience intensive feelings but have difficulties in expressing their emotions. Current Psychology, 34, 363-375.

Tabachnick, B. & Fidell, L. (2001). Using multivariate statistics (4 ed.). New York, New York: Harper & Row.

Van Lange, P. A. M., Otten, W., De Bruin, E. M. N., & Joireman, J. A. (1997). Development of prosocial, individualistic, and competitive orientations: Theory and preliminary evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73(4), 733-746.

Wilson, D. S., Near, D., & Miller, R. R. (1996). Machiavellianism: A synthesis of the evolutionary and psychological literatures. Psychological Bulletin, 119(2), 285-299.

Zhang, L. & Ortmann, A. (2016). Pro-social or anti-social, or both? A within-and between-subjects study of social preferences. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics, 62(1), 23-32.

Zhao, H., Zhang, H., & Xu, Y. (2016). Does the dark triad of personality predict corrupt intention? The mediating role of belief in good luck. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1-16.