Abstract
A questionnaire study was conducted in which subjects described, and rated on several scales, incidents they recalled in which they had been either `synthetically benevolent' or `malevolent' when trying to influence others. `Synthetic benevolence' is a positive or prosocial act that is not what it appears to be, whilst `synthetic malevolence' is a negative or antisocial act that is not what it appears to be. As hypothesized, synthetic benevolence tended to be targeted to higher status, more powerful others while synthetic malevolence tended to be directed against lower status, less powerful others. Synthetic benevolence generally involved flattery, modelling and pretending, whereas synthetic malevolence involved threat, refusal and denial to a greater extent. The use of these two forms of concealment, synthetic benevolence and malevolence, as strategies of compliance-gaining influence and the implications for interpersonal relationships are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.