The Associations Between Social Rank Uncertainty,Machiavellianism,and Dominance: From a Life History Perspective

Abstract

This study used the life history (LH) theory to investigate how environmental cues are associated with Machiavellianism. A total of 252 undergraduate students completed self-report measures of social rank uncertainty, Machiavellianism, fast LH strategy, and dominance. The results indicated that Machiavellianism was related to a fast LH strategy. Furthermore, a fast LH strategy mediated an association between social rank uncertainty and Machiavellianism. Finally, Machiavellianism was positively associated with dominance. These findings may enhance our understanding of the evolutionary origin of Machiavellianism.

Keywords

Machiavellianism life history fast strategy social rank certainty dominance

Machiavellianism has been described as a manipulative and exploitative personality trait (Christie & Geis, 1970). It has its roots in the dark side of personality (Jonason, Li, & Buss, 2010). Existing research has grouped Machiavellianism with narcissism and psychopathy; together, these traits are known as the “dark triad” (Paulhus & Williams, 2002). Research on the dark triad traits has suggested that, depending on the environmental conditions, Machiavellianism can be an adaptive strategy. However, there has been little research on the role of specific environmental cues in Machiavellianism. Furthermore, the nature of the adaptive outcomes of Machiavellianism under specific environmental conditions remains unclear. This study aimed to examine the pattern of associations between environmental factors, Machiavellianism, and its adaptive consequence using the framework of life history (LH) theory.

An LH theory describes how individuals make adaptive trade-offs with respect to growth, development, and reproduction in response to environmental challenges across the life span (Chen, 2017b; Del Giudice, Gangestad, & Kaplan, 2015; West-Eberhard, 2003). An individual’s LH strategy for managing resources depends on the harshness and uncertainty of the environment (Ellis, Figueredo, Brumbach, & Schlomer, 2009). LH strategies are considered to form a continuum, ranging from slow to fast (Figueredo et al., 2006; Griskevicius et al., 2013). Faster LH strategies arise in harsh and unpredictable environmental conditions where earlier maturation, production of more offspring, and lower parental investment are adaptive. In particular, harsh and unpredictable conditions produce a variety of fast LH strategy–relevant behavioral and psychological outcomes such as impulsivity, procrastination, and antisocial behaviors (Chang & Lu, 2018; Chen, 2018; Chen & Kruger, 2017; Chen & Qu, 2017; Del Giudice, 2014; Griskevicius, Tybur, Delton, & Robertson, 2011; Hurst & Kavanagh, 2017). Slower LH strategies arise in predictable, more favorable environments where later reproduction, higher quality of offspring, and higher parental investment are adaptive. Some behavioral and psychological constructs such as risk avoidance, future time perspective, and positive developmental outcomes are considered slow LH strategies (e.g., Chen, 2017a; Chen & Chang, 2016; Chen, Wiium, & Dimitrova, 2018; Griskevicius et al., 2011).

As one of the dark triad traits, Machiavellianism has been considered as a fast LH strategy (Figueredo et al., 2005). Machiavellianism embodied a fast LH strategy that was characterized by short-term goals and immediate gratification (Figueredo et al., 2006; Jonason, Koenig, & Tost, 2010). People with high levels of Machiavellianism tended to use a variety of social tactics (e.g., seduction and hardball) to manipulate others for personal interests (Jonason & Webster, 2012). In addition, characteristics associated with Machiavellianism, such as exploitation and selfishness, were identified as components of a fast LH strategy (Jonason, Koenig, et al., 2010; McDonald, Donnellan, & Navarrete, 2012; Reynolds & McCrea, 2015).

An LH theory also suggests that personality traits may be adaptive tactics to optimize resource allocation and to solve evolutionarily fit challenges, which are induced by main social and environmental tasks (Chen, Shi, & Sun, 2017; Del Giudice et al., 2015). Human personality traits may have been shaped by natural selection to respond to different environmental conditions (Buss, 1991; Figueredo et al., 2006; Nettle, 2006). Unfortunately, little is known about the specific environmental conditions in which Machiavellianism is used as a fast LH strategy.

According to LH theory, Machiavellianism may be an LH strategy, which is induced by unfavorable environmental factors. For example, recent research has shown that childhood maltreatment (Láng & Lénárd, 2015) and an unpredictable childhood environment (e.g., “Things were often chaotic in my house”; Jonason, Icho, & Ireland, 2016) are associated with Machiavellianism in adulthood. An unpredictable early childhood environment may promote Machiavellianism and correlated behaviors (Jonason et al., 2016). In addition to the early environmental conditions and experiences, the perception of future environmental condition may activate the LH psychological mechanisms (Davis & Werre, 2008). For example, if the future is perceived as uncertain, future outcomes may be “discounted,” which may in turn lead to use of fast LH strategies such as procrastination (Chen & Kruger, 2017). For another example, the life expectancy in communities was associated with the rates of homicide, which was seen as a fast LH strategies (Wilson & Daly, 1997). The same logic may be applied to Machiavellianism: The perception of future environmental uncertainty may encourage individuals to adopt Machiavellianism as a fast LH strategy. It would be interesting to know what specific future environmental uncertainties prompt individuals to display Machiavellian behaviors.

An individual’s social rank is reflective of his or her resource-holding power and social skills (de Waal, 1986; Zuroff, Fournier, Patall, & Leybman, 2010b). Stable social rank in a group may allowed individuals to maximize their benefits of resources acquisition while minimizing the costs associated with direct competition (Cummins, 2005). The extant literature suggests that Machiavellianism occurs when individuals lack control over social rank–relevant environment (Láng & Lénárd, 2015). The perception of loss of control originates from a perception of environmental uncertainty (Mittal & Griskevicius, 2014). Given that Machiavellianism is a strategy for gaining control of resources and social dominance through manipulation of other people (Láng & Lénárd, 2015), the uncertainties that trigger it may be related to social status and resources. In other words, individuals may use Machiavellian strategies, such as deception or manipulation, to cope with the uncertain future for social status. In addition, LH research commonly involves testing whether a particular LH strategy mediates a relationship between an environmental condition and personality. For instance, slow LH strategy was shown to mediate associations between environmental uncertainty and the Big Five personality traits (Chen et al., 2017). Similarly, we predicted that slow LH strategy would mediate associations between social rank certainty and Machiavellianism.

Furthermore, we predicted that in the context of uncertainty about social status, Machiavellianism—characterized by cold-blooded self-enhancement—would be a successful strategy for exploiting social resources (Buss & Duntley, 2008; Zuroff, Fournier, Patall, & Leybman, 2010a). This prediction was derived from resource control theory (Hawley, 2003). This theory suggested that Machiavellianism might have an evolutionary function as a means of acquiring social dominance. The extant literature provides some evidence that Machiavellianism and social dominance are associated in several different cultures (Chen & Chang, 2012; Hawley, 2003). Machiavellian individuals seek personal gains at the expense of other people’s well-being. In doing so, they are successful in controlling their environment and other people and, ultimately, in enhancing their social dominance (Jonason, Koenig, et al., 2010).

In this research, we sought to test the hypothesis that Machiavellianism is a condition-dependent LH strategy in response to the environment of social rank uncertainty within the LH framework. First, we predicted that Machiavellianism would be positively associated with a fast LH strategy. Second, we predicted that fast LH strategy would mediate the association between social rank uncertainty and Machiavellianism. Third, we predicted that, under conditions of social rank uncertainty, Machiavellian individuals would be more likely to display social dominance.

Method

Participants and Procedure

Participants were 252 Chinese college students (33.73% men, 66.27% women; M age = 19.77 years, standard deviation [SD] = 1.13). They were recruited from psychology courses and participated in exchange for partial course credit. Participants were asked to complete an online survey to which they were given a link.

Measures

Machiavellianism

Machiavellianism was measured using the Mach-IV Scale (Christie & Geis, 1970), which consists of 20 items assessing Machiavellian attitudes (e.g., “The best way to handle people is tell them what they want to hear”; “Anyone who trusts anyone else is asking for trouble”). Responses are given using a 5-point Likert-type scale (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree). As suggested by Dahling, Whitaker, and Levy (2009), 3 problematic items (“All in all, it is better to be humble and honest than to be important and dishonest,” “People suffering from incurable diseases should have the choice of being put painlessly to death,” and “Most people forget more easily the death of their parents than the loss of their property.”) were removed in the present study. A composite score was computed by averaging the scores for the 17 items. In this study, Cronbach’s α was .68.

Slow LH strategy

The Mini-K scale was used to assess individuals’ slow LH strategies (Figueredo et al., 2006). It consists of 20 items (e.g., “I often make plans in advance” and “I avoid taking risks”). Participants responded to items using a 7-point Likert-type scale (1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree). Previous research indicated that this scale score was positively linked to slow LH strategies when measured by other LH instruments or by environmental conditions theoretically relevant to slow LH strategies (Chen & Qu, 2017; Figueredo et al., 2014; Olderbak, Gladden, Wolf, & Figueredo, 2014). A composite score was computed by averaging the scores for the 20 items. By following one reviewer’s suggestion, we recoded LH scores, so that high scores indicate a fast LH strategy. In this study, Cronbach’s α was .83.

Social rank uncertainty

Participants completed the social rank subscale of the Environmental Unpredictability Scale (Davis & Werre, 2008). Participants were asked to evaluate their chances of attaining a high social rank in the future. It consists of 5 items (e.g., “I will have a happy family life” and “I will be in good health most of the time”) preceded by a stem: “What are the chances you will…?” Responses are given on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 = very low to 5 = very high. The item scores were reverse coded and then averaged to yield a composite score; higher scores indicate a greater degree of social rank uncertainty. In this study, Cronbach’s α was .77.

Dominance

Dominance was assessed using the Resource Control Strategy Inventory (Hawley, 2006), which has commonly been used to assess individuals’ social dominance including obtaining desired roles, possessions, or attention (Chen & Chang, 2012; Hawley, Little, & Card, 2008). It consists of 10 items (e.g., “I am the center of attention when with friends” and “I am successful at getting the things that I and others value”). Participants rated how true each item was for them on a 7-point scale ranging from 1 = not at all true to 7 = completely true. Cronbach’s α was .86 in the current sample.

Analytic strategy

Path analyses were used to test the associations among social rank uncertainty, Machiavellianism, fast LH strategy, and dominance. We followed current practices for mediation analyses (Hayes, 2013), using Model 6 in the PROCESS macro for SPSS. Two control variables, age and sex, were entered into the path analyses. Point estimates of the indirect effects and the 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were obtained using bootstrapping with 10,000 bootstrap samples. A mediation effect is considered statistically significant if the 95% CI does not contain 0.

Results

All means, SDs, and correlations among variables are presented in Table 1. Social rank uncertainty was positively correlated to Machiavellianism and fast LH strategy but negatively correlated to dominance. Machiavellianism was positively correlated to both fast LH strategy and dominance. Fast LH strategy was negatively related to dominance. Lastly, for demographic variables, there was only one statistically significant association. That is, age was positively related to dominance.

Table 1.

Descriptive Statistics and Correlations of Variables.

Variables	1	2	3	4	5	6
1. Social rank uncertainty	—
2. Machiavellianism	.21***	—
3. Fast life history strategy	.40***	.25***	—
4. Dominance	−.26***	.13*	−.21**	—
5. Age	−.02	.01	.07	.13*	—
6. Gender	.11	.12	.08	.02	.11	—
M	2.10	2.87	2.95	4.13	19.77	1.13
SD	.57	.36	.67	.82	.34	.47
Minimum	1.00	2.06	1.45	1.60	17.00	0
Maximum	4.00	4.00	4.95	6.10	23.00	1

Note. Gender was coded as 0 = women and 1 = men. SD = standard deviation.

*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

Path analyses were used to test the associations among social rank uncertainty, Machiavellianism, fast LH strategy, and dominance. First, as shown in Figure 1, Machiavellianism was positively associated with a fast LH strategy. This finding supports the first hypothesis, namely, that Machiavellianism was a fast LH strategy. Second, the association between social rank uncertainty and Machiavellianism was fully mediated by fast LH strategy. This finding supports the second hypothesis that slow LH strategy mediated the association between social rank uncertainty and Machiavellianism. Lastly, the third hypothesis, which was that Machiavellianism would be associated with dominance, was also supported by the model.

Figure 1.

The model depicting the associations among the study variables. The path coefficients are unstandardized. Dotted lines = nonsignificant paths. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

The significance of indirect effects of social rank certainty was assessed using the bootstrap estimation procedure. The indirect effects and their associated 95% CIs are shown in Table 2. As predicted, the indirect effects for the hypothesized paths (i.e., social rank uncertainty → fast LH strategy → dominance; social rank uncertainty → fast LH strategy → Machiavellianism → dominance) were significant.

Table 2.

Bootstrapping Indirect Effects and 95% Confidence Interval (CIs) for the Path Models.

Model Pathways	Point Estimate	95% CIs [Lower, Upper]
Social rank uncertainty → fast life history (LH) strategy → dominance	−.106	[−.190, −.039]
Social rank uncertainty → fast LH strategy → Machiavellianism → dominance	.025	[.007, .061]
Social rank uncertainty → Machiavellianism → dominance	.040	[−.003, .108]

Discussion

The goal of the present study was to examine the associations among social rank uncertainty, Machiavellianism, fast LH strategy, and dominance. First, our results indicated that Machiavellianism was related to fast LH strategy. They extend previous research as they indicated that there was an association between social rank uncertainty and Machiavellianism that was mediated by fast LH strategy. Lastly, in the context of social rank uncertainty, Machiavellianism was positively associated with dominance.

This study highlights the adaptive significance of Machiavellianism from an LH perspective. Consistent with previous studies (Figueredo et al., 2005; Jonason, Koenig, et al., 2010; McDonald et al., 2012), we found that Machiavellianism was positively associated with fast LH strategy; it may represent a fast LH strategy.

Furthermore, LH theory emphasizes LH strategy may be affected by environmental factors such as uncertainty. Previous research has indicated that environmental uncertainty might influence the dark triad traits including Machiavellianism (Jonason et al., 2016). In the present study, we specify the environmental uncertainty by focusing on social rank domain. Our findings are consistent with the premise that social rank uncertainty suggests to individuals that they are likely to lack of control over their social status in the future. This information activates a fast LH mind-set and then leads to adopt manipulative behavioral tactics that may enhance their chances of acquiring social dominance. It follows that Machiavellianism may represent an adaptive response to this particular environmental challenge. In the context of social rank uncertainty, Machiavellian individuals may adopt a fast LH strategy in order to attain social dominance.

To our knowledge, this study is the first to reveal relationships among social rank certainty, Machiavellianism, fast LH strategy, and dominance. The findings reported here are novel and important for several reasons. First, this study goes beyond existing literature by exploring Machiavellianism as correlates of social rank uncertainty. Second, this study provides a mediation insight into the explanation of the mechanisms by which social rank uncertainty plays roles on Machiavellianism.

Several limitations of this study must be acknowledged. First, we relied exclusively on self-report data for all the study variables. Relying on a single informant method necessarily limits what we know about other persons’ perceptions. For example, an individual’s rating of his or her dominance may be different from that of other people. Future studies should include peers’ reports or observations from others.

Second, the study was based on a small sample of university students. Machiavellianism is commonly found in the workplace and bureaucracy. Future studies should expand the sample size and explore this issue in workplace and bureaucracy contexts.

Third, although psychometric measures of Mini-K are frequently used to assess the LH strategies in previous research, their validity has been questioned (Copping, Campbell, & Muncer, 2014; see also Figueredo et al., 2015, for a response). Future studies should include other LH strategy measures (e.g., the High K Strategy Scale; Giosan, 2006) to replicate our findings. In addition, given the heritability of LH strategy (Figueredo, Vásquez, Brumbach, & Schneider, 2004) and the potential role of early childhood environments on LH strategy (e.g., Belsky, Houts, & Fearon, 2010; Chen et al., 2017; Griskevicius, Delton, Robertson, & Tybur, 2011), it may be possible that social rank uncertainty may interact with genetic and early childhood factors to influence LH strategies. Future research should include both participants’ early childhood environments and their parents’ LH strategy to directly test these possible association patterns.

Lastly, interpretations of Machiavellianism may vary between cultures. For example, a Machiavellian strategy that threatens collectivism may be not socially accepted in peer groups in China (Chen & Chang, 2012). Further research examining cultural similarities and differences in the pattern of association we have identified is necessary. In addition, some studies (e.g., Jonason, Koenig, et al., 2010) have indicated that Machiavellianism, as assessed by the relevant dark triad subscale, is not associated with a fast LH strategy. Future research that includes multiple assessments of variables may increase internal validity of the research.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: The Research Fund of the School of Social Development and Public Policy at Fudan University.

ORCID iD

Bin-Bin Chen

References

Belsky

Houts

R. M.

Fearon

R. M. P.

(2010). Infant attachment security and the timing of puberty: Testing an evolutionary hypothesis. Psychological Science, 21, 1195–1201.

Buss

D. M.

(1991). Evolutionary personality psychology. Annual Review of Psychology, 42, 459–491.

Buss

D. M.

Duntley

J. D.

(2008). Adaptations for exploitation. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 12, 53–62.

Chang

H. J.

(2018). Resource and extrinsic risk in defining fast life histories of rural Chinese left-behind children. Evolution and Human Behavior, 39, 59–66.

Chen

B.-B.

(2017a). Insecure attachment, resource control, and unrestricted sociosexuality: From a life history perspective. Personality and Individual Differences, 105, 213–217.

Chen

B.-B.

(2017b). The life history model of the insurance hypothesis. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 40, e111.

Chen

B.-B.

(2018). An evolutionary life history approach to understanding greed. Personality and Individual Differences, 127, 74–78.

Chen

B.-B.

Chang

(2012). Are “Machiavellian” Chinese children well-adapted in the peer group? The relationship between resource acquisition strategies and social functioning and status. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 15, 122–131.

Chen

B.-B.

Chang

(2016). Procrastination as a fast life history strategy. Evolutionary Psychology, 14, 1–5.

10.

Chen

B.-B.

Kruger

(2017). Future orientation as a mediator between perceived environmental cues in likelihood of future success and procrastination. Personality and Individual Differences, 108, 128–132.

11.

Chen

B.-B.

(2017). Life history strategies and procrastination: The role of environmental unpredictability. Personality and Individual Differences, 117, 23–29.

12.

Chen

B.B.

Shi

Sun

(2017). Life history strategy as a mediator between childhood environmental unpredictability and adulthood personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 111, 215–219.

13.

Chen

B.-B.

Wiium

Dimitrova

. (2018). A life history approach to understanding developmental assets among Chinese adolescents. Child Youth Care Forum, 1–15. Advance online publication. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10566-017-9433-y.

14.

Christie

Geis

F. L.

(1970). Studies in Machiavellianism. New York, NY: Academic Press.

15.

Copping

L. T.

Campbell

Muncer

(2014). Psychometrics and life history strategy: The structure and validity of the High K Strategy Scale. Evolutionary Psychology, 12, 200–222.

16.

Cummins

(2005). Dominance, status, and social hierarchies. In Buss

D. M.

(Ed.), The handbook of evolutionary psychology (pp. 676–697). New York, NY: Wiley.

17.

Dahling

G. J.

Whitaker

B. G.

Levy

P. E.

(2009). The development and validation of a new Machiavellianism scale. Journal of Management, 35, 219–257.

18.

Davis

Werre

(2008). A longitudinal study of the effects of uncertainty on reproductive behaviors. Human Nature, 19, 426–452.

19.

de Waal

F. B. M.

(1986). The integration of dominance and social bonding in primates. Quarterly Review of Biology, 61, 459–479.

20.

Del Giudice

(2014). An evolutionary life history framework for psychopathology. Psychological Inquiry, 25, 261–300.

21.

Del Giudice

Gangestad

S. W.

Kaplan

H. S.

(2015). Life history theory and evolutionary psychology. In Buss

D. M.

(Ed.), The handbook of evolutionary psychology (Vol. 1, 2nd ed., pp. 88–114). New York, NY: Wiley.

22.

Ellis

B. J.

Figueredo

A. J.

Brumbach

B. H.

Schlomer

G. L.

(2009). Fundamental dimensions of environmental risk: The impact of harsh versus unpredictable environments on the evolution and development of life history strategies. Human Nature, 20, 204–268.

23.

Figueredo

A. J.

de Baca

T. C.

Black

C. J.

Garcia

R. A.

Fernandes

H. B. F.

Wolf

P. S. A.

, & Woodley of Menia, M. A. (2015). Methodologically sound: Evaluating the psychometric approach to the assessment of human life history [Reply to Copping, Campbell, and Muncer, 2014]. Evolutionary Psychology, 13, 299–338.

24.

Figueredo

A. J.

Vásquez

Brumbach

B. H.

Schneider

S. M. R.

(2004). The heritability of life history strategy: The K-factor, covitality, and personality. Social Biology, 51, 121–143.

25.

Figueredo

A. J.

Vásquez

Brumbach

B. H.

Schneider

S. M. R.

Sefcek

J. A.

Tal

I. R.

… Jacobs

W. J.

(2006). Consilience and life history theory: From genes to brain to reproductive strategy. Developmental Review, 26, 243–275.

26.

Figueredo

A. J.

Vásquez

Brumbach

B. H.

Sefcek

J. A.

Kirsner

B. R.

Jacobs

W. J.

(2005). The K-factor: Individual differences in life history strategy. Personality and Individual Differences, 39, 1349–1360.

27.

Figueredo

A. J.

Wolf

P. S. A.

Olderbak

S. G.

Gladden

P. R.

Fernandes

H. B. F.

Wenner

… Rushton

J. P

. (2014). The psychometric assessment of human life history strategy: A meta-analytic construct validation. Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences, 8, 148–185.

28.

Giosan

(2006). High-K strategy scale: A measure of the high-K independent criterion of fitness. Evolutionary Psychology, 4, 394–405.

29.

Griskevicius

Ackerman

J. M.

Cantú

S. M.

Delton

A. W.

Robertson

T. E.

Simpson

J. A.

… Tybur

J. M

. (2013). When the economy falters do people spend or save? Responses to resource scarcity depend on childhood environments. Psychological Science, 24, 197–205.

30.

Griskevicius

Delton

A. W.

Robertson

T. E.

Tybur

J. M.

(2011). Environmental contingency in life history strategies: The influence of mortality and socioeconomic status on reproductive timing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100, 241–254.

31.

Griskevicius

Tybur

J. M.

Delton

A. W.

Robertson

T. E.

(2011). The influence of mortality and socioeconomic status on risk and delayed rewards: A life history theory approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100, 1015–1026.

32.

Hawley

P. H.

(2003). Prosocial and coercive configurations of resource control in early adolescence: A case for the well-adapted Machiavellian. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 49, 279–310.

33.

Hawley

P. H.

(2006). Resource control strategies inventory (rev. ed.). Lawrence: University of Kansas.

34.

Hawley

P. H.

Little

T. D.

Card

N. A.

(2008). The myth of the alpha male: A new look at dominance-related beliefs and behaviors among adolescent males and females. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 32, 76–88.

35.

Hayes

A. F.

(2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

36.

Hurst

J. E.

Kavanagh

P. S.

(2017). Life history strategies and psychopathology: The faster the life strategies, the more symptoms of psychopathology. Evolution and Human Behavior, 38, 1–8.

37.

Jonason

P. K.

Icho

Ireland

(2016). Resources, harshness, and unpredictability: The socioeconomic conditions associated with the dark triad traits. Evolutionary Psychology, 14, 1–11.

38.

Jonason

P. K.

Koenig

Tost

(2010). Living a fast life: The dark triad and life history theory. Human Nature, 21, 428–442.

39.

Jonason

P. K.

N. P.

Buss

D. M.

(2010). The costs and benefits of the dark triad: Implications for mate poaching and mate retention tactics. Personality and Individual Differences, 48, 373–378.

40.

Jonason

P. K.

Webster

G. D.

(2012). A protean approach to social influence: Dark triad personalities and social influence tactics. Personality and Individual Differences, 52, 521–526.

41.

Láng

Lénárd

(2015). The relation between memories of childhood psychological maltreatment and Machiavellianism. Personality and Individual Differences, 77, 81–85.

42.

McDonald

M. M.

Donnellan

M. B.

Navarrete

C. D.

(2012). A life history approach to understanding the dark triad. Personality and Individual Differences, 52, 601–605.

43.

Mittal

Griskevicius

(2014). Sense of control under uncertainty depends on people’s childhood environment: A life history theory approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 107, 621–637.

44.

Nettle

(2006). The evolution of personality variation in humans and other animals. American Psychologist, 61, 622–631.

45.

Olderbak

Gladden

Wolf

P. S. A.

Figueredo

A. J.

(2014). Comparison of life history strategy measures. Personality and Individual Differences, 58, 82–88.

46.

Paulhus

D. L.

Williams

K. M.

(2002). The dark triad of personality: Narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy. Journal of Research in Personality, 36, 556–563.

47.

Reynolds

J. J.

McCrea

S. M.

(2015). Exploitative and deceptive resource acquisition strategies: The role of life history strategy and life history contingencies. Evolutionary Psychology, 13, 1–21.

48.

West-Eberhard

M. J.

(2003). Developmental plasticity and evolution. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

49.

Wilson

Daly

(1997). Life expectancy, economic inequality, homicide, and reproductive timing in Chicago neighbourhoods. British Medical Journal, 314, 1271–1274.

50.

Zuroff

D. C.

Fournier

M. A.

Patall

E. A.

Leybman

M. J.

(2010a). Steps toward an evolutionary personality psychology: Individual differences in the social rank domain. Canadian Psychology, 51, 58–66.

51.

Zuroff

D. C.

Fournier

M. A.

Patall

E. A.

Leybman

M. J.

(2010b). Steps toward an evolutionary personality psychology: Individual differences in the social rank domain. Canadian Psychology, 51, 58–66.