Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Brazilian jeitinho constitutes an emic hierarchical personality trait related to problem-solving strategies, including creativity, breaking rules, and corruption. This manuscript provides a historical perspective of the Brazilian culture, describing how colonization might have impacted how many Brazilians deal with adversities and everyday situations. Additionally, we present research on Brazilian jeitinho and indicate how widely known conceptions of malandragem, or crafty jeitinho, possibly affect the validity of self-reported big-five personality tests. Finally, we advocate for the integration of anchoring vignettes and self-enhancement measures within personality assessments to mitigate the bias introduced by the Brazilian jeitinho on personality item responses.

Keywords

personality assessment anchoring vignettes self-enhancement

Daniel is a 41-year-old man who holds a deep passion for soccer. He used to cheat on tests during elementary school and attempted to bribe school employees in high school to access exams in advance. His reputation for cheating on tests and soccer games was well-known, and occasionally, he was referred to as Malandro (i.e., cunning) by his classmates. Despite reprimands from teachers, he maintained a tendency to leverage connections and offer favors in exchange for personal gain. He is highly competitive as a soccer player, studying game regulations for potential advantages, and using tactics such as provocation and fouls to aid his team. He often causes severe injuries to opponents during the games to avoid goals but always claims that he never intended to harm anyone. While generally indifferent to coworkers’ issues, he shows genuine concern for his teammates’ health problems or obstacles affecting their play, often offering support, including financial assistance. This vignette describes a man who uses Brazilian jeitinho (e.g., crafty jeitinho or jeitinho malandro) to succeed. Given these behavior patterns, how would Daniel score on a personality test? Would he endorse agreeableness items like “I usually help others without expecting anything in return”? Would he endorse conscientiousness items like “I am highly motivated and hardworking in pursuing my goals”? Does he perceive these as relevant characteristics for success in life?

Brazilian jeitinho is a genuine personality trait related to problem-solving strategies that comprise creativity, breaking rules, and corruption (Barbosa, 2006; DaMatta, 1997; Ferreira et al., 2012; Rodrigues et al., 2011). Previous research scientifically investigated the expression of Brazilian jeitinho and developed valid and reliable measures to evaluate it (Ferreira et al., 2012; Miura et al., 2019). Although the concept is widely known in Brazil, its impact on psychological assessments, especially self-reported personality tests, is still unclear. This is a significant omission, given that most psychological assessments rely on such tests. This paper investigates the historical origins and contemporary implications of the Brazilian jeitinho, examining its potential influence on the validity of personality tests. We begin by offering a comprehensive historical portrayal of Brazilian colonization, shedding light on how colonizers perceived indigenous populations, enslaved people, and immigrants. This historical context underscores the adversarial nature of the colonization process, which necessitated the development of strategies for interaction with colonizers. Subsequently, the paper explores the figure of the “Malandro” (i.e., cunning) and outlines the tactics employed to achieve gains within Brazilian society. Furthermore, it delves into current research on the Brazilian jeitinho, investigating its behavioral patterns, cultural conceptions, and their influence on personality assessments. The paper concludes by proposing approaches to investigate and mitigate the impact of these influences on personality evaluations.

Brazilian jeitinho roots: A brief and subversive history of Brazil

Indigenous Brazil

Before Brazil was discovered (or invaded) by Portuguese colonizers in 1500, it was inhabited by diverse indigenous peoples (i.e., the Tupinambás). Culturally, the indigenous population valued harmony with nature and did not prioritize the accumulation of goods and wealth (Ribeiro, 1995). The term “indigenous people” was coined by colonizers to group the Tupinambás with other colonized populations and were often incorrectly stereotyped with negative traits like laziness, stupidity, and naivety (Maestri, 2013). The Portuguese operated under the ideology of Christian supremacy to justify invasions and genocides and promote the belief that Brazilian indigenous populations, like other native groups globally, existed in a state of sin and could only attain salvation from eternal suffering through conversion to Christianity (Ribeiro, 1995). According to Ribeiro, Iberian colonizers, supported by the Vatican, were given unchecked authority to invade, convert, and enslave the colonized people. This led to the death of those who resisted, and cultivated a culture of animosity, contempt, and disdain within the colonizers’ system.

The indigenous resistance against European colonization was multifaceted, including warfare, alliances among groups, tactics of evasion and passive resistance, cultural preservation, and uprisings targeting colonial settlements (da Cunha, 1992). Indigenous peoples frequently fought to safeguard their lands, cultural identities, and ways of life, actively resisting colonial imposition through armed conflict, strategic alliances, avoidance of direct contact, cultural preservation, and occasional rebellions (Ribeiro, 1995). We believe that indigenous resistance required the development of empathy, cooperation, and cordiality among the groups to survive and succeed.

Slavery in Brazil

Slavery persisted in Brazil from the 16th to the 19th centuries, with Brazil being the last country in the Americas to abolish it (Mamigonian, 2017). The abolition of slavery did not lead to significant improvements for the Black population, which was left to fend for themselves without proper work opportunities and a dignified life (Nascimento, 2016). According to the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE, 2000), at least 4 million men, women, and children were forcibly taken from homes in Africa to live as enslaved people in Brazil.

Upon arrival, slavers subjected enslaved people to physical examinations, including scrutiny of their bodies, teeth, and other attributes, subsequently assigning them to different forms of enforced labor based on their physical characteristics (Ribeiro, 1995). Enslaved men typically endured arduous work on sugarcane and coffee plantations, while women were forced to toil in their masters’ households, frequently experiencing sexual violence (Nascimento, 2016; Ribeiro, 1995).

Similar to the Brazilian indigenous population, Black enslaved people employed various forms of resistance and rebellion, including escape to establish hidden autonomous communities known as quilombos, sabotaging equipment and routines, and preserving cultural traditions as a means of defiance against colonial dominance (Karasch, 2000; Reis, 1996). Simultaneously, capoeira emerged among enslaved people during the colonial era, serving as a form of covert self-defense and resistance, blending martial arts, dance, music, and a communication tool to coordinate escape plans and resistance efforts (Assunção, 2005). Enslaved Africans also resisted by blending their African-rooted religions with Catholicism, adapting Catholic saints to represent their orixás (e.g., African deities). This allowed them to secretly maintain a connection to their cultural roots despite Jesuit prohibitions (Schwarcz & Starling, 2015).

In sum, these examples illustrate the development of strategies used to circumvent the laws and social structures imposed by colonizers, using creative self-preservation strategies to achieve collective goals (e.g., using capoeira to maintain good physical shape and combat skills and cultivating faith and values by representing orixás with Catholic saints). Up to now, the figure of the Malandro (i.e., cunning) is often portrayed in Brazilian cinema and music as a resourceful Black capoeirista (i.e., capoeira fighter), adorned with accessories such as Candomblé necklaces that symbolize his spiritual connection with orixás.

Historians and sociologists believe that the end of slavery marked the moment when “free men” could either continue working long hours under unhygienic conditions and receive low wages or choose informal activities without a boss (Oliveira, 2011). As such, Malandro may have emerged at this time as someone who exercises their freedom by rejecting formal employment and unexpectedly moving within privileged social spaces, using cunning to survive.

The colonization process

Formal educational institutions such as schools and universities were not deemed essential priorities by the Portuguese and Catholic missionaries that colonized Brazil. Consequently, the indigenous populations and enslaved Africans were not provided with formal instruction in reading and writing and instead were catechized and guided to establish a relationship with the Christian God through the intervention of priests within the Church (Schwarcz & Starling, 2015). Later, during the era of slavery in Brazil, individuals of African and Indigenous descent were systematically denied educational opportunities and land ownership, regardless of their financial capabilities. Land ownership continued to be concentrated among a few privileged families, exacerbating significant societal disparities and inequalities in Brazil.

The aristocratic European elite implemented a patriarchal family structure where the patriarch had full control over individuals and property (Freyre, 1963). To Freyre, this authority extended from family dynamics to the governance of the entire country. The predominantly male-centered, paternalistic, hierarchical social and institutional structures were counterbalanced by a preference for informal and affectionate social connections (Amado & Brasil, 1991; Motta, 1997). These historical conditions favored intimate and informal relationships across various hierarchical levels (Ferreira et al., 2012). The inequalities faced by Indigenous people and Afro-Brazilians were further exacerbated by the Brazilian government’s facilitation of the migration of new European settlers, predominantly Germans, Italians, and Japanese. This involved subsidizing travel expenses, providing land, and offering substantial financial assistance. Simultaneously, efforts to establish educational institutions primarily targeted these newly arrived, predominantly white settlers, neglecting comparable support for Afro-Brazilian and Indigenous communities (Schwarcz & Starling, 2015). Table 1 shows significant historical events in Brazil, juxtaposed against a comparably wealthy and well-known colonized nation in America, the United States of America. It demonstrates that despite Brazil’s earlier colonial settlements, its journey to independence, abolition of slavery, and establishment of universities occurred considerably later.

Table 1.

Historical Events in Brazil and The United States of America.

Historical Event/Context	Brazil	USA
Country of main colonizers	Portugal	England
First colonizer settlement	1532	1607
Independence	1822/1825	1776
Slavery	1520 until 1888	1619^a until 1865
Higher education institution	1827 (law faculties)	1636 (Harvard University)
Higher education institution	1912 (first university, University of Paraná.)	1636 (Harvard University)
Religion of colonizers	Catholic	Protestant
First Synagogue	1636 (Recife)	1654 (New York City)
Land ownership	Portuguese Royal Family, their selected representatives who owned the land for life (i.e., Captaincies of Brazil) and Catholic Church	Settlers could occupy land, and if they could safeguard/protect it, they would become the owner

^aAlthough 1619 is considered an official landmark for the beginning of slavery in the New World, the practice already existed, including with other people. (Stevenson, 2020).

In sum, the lack of proper law and norm regulations (de Holanda, 1995), the common dissociation between formal law and social practices (Zimmermann, 2009), and the preference for close and casual connections spanning diverse hierarchical levels (Ferreira et al., 2012) may have been some of the main factors contributing to the development of the Brazilian jeitinho as a strategy to circumvent laws.

An overview of Brazil’s demographic, political, and economic situation

Brazil is a continental country well known for its geographical, ethnic, economic, and cultural differences. Geographically, Brazil is composed of five geopolitical regions: North, Northeast, Midwest, Southeast, and South, each with distinct socioeconomic indicators (Lins et al., 2009). Ethnically, the Brazilian population is classified into five categories according to self-declaration: White, Black, mixed race (i.e., Pardos), Asian, and Indigenous (Siqueira et al., 2022). Economically, Brazil is known for its high levels of inequality.

Approximately 80% of the highest incomes belong to individuals of White ethnicity, while those self-identifying as Afro-descendant comprise 76.0% of the bottom 10% income bracket. This significant income discrepancy illustrates the systematic exclusion of wealth and authority for Afro-descendant Brazilians, who account for a substantial proportion (53.6%) of the population (IBGE, 2008). A pronounced schism exists between the White middle-class populations inhabiting affluent urban areas like Rio de Janeiro and São Paulo and those of African descent who often reside in favelas far from accessible public services (Leivas & dos Santos, 2018). Notwithstanding prevalent social disparities, Brazil’s national identity embodies a blend of racial and cultural diversity, influenced by indigenous groups, Portuguese settlers, enslaved African descendants, and immigrants from diverse global origins.

This cultural amalgamation is seen throughout Brazilian gastronomy, religious practices, customs, and art (Leivas & dos Santos, 2018; Pravaz, 2008). There are many examples of social and historical expressions of dissatisfaction and disdain with the Portuguese colonial system among Brazilians, include malandragem and the Brazilian jeitinho. These are cultural behaviors specific to Brazil, and are employed to solve problems by relying on personal connections and occasionally disregarding societal norms, rules, or laws (Pilati & Fischer, 2022).

Perceptions about the “typical” Brazilian and Malandragem

Colonizers often depicted people from the tropics as primitive and lazy (Scheyerl & Siqueira, 2008). The earliest portrayal of Brazilians by a foreigner dates back to the 16th century in El Rei Dom Manuel’s account by Pero Vaz de Caminha, where indigenous individuals were depicted as savage Indians (Dias, 1992). Subsequently, in the 17th century, Brazilians were depicted as rough and exotic. In the 18th century, they were characterized as cheerful yet lazy (De Holanda et al., 1995). In the 19th century, Malandro appeared as a crafty character against a backdrop of prejudice from Portuguese elites who perceived Brazilians as lazy and enslaved, particularly after the Portuguese royal family’s arrival in colonial Brazil. Internationally, the Malandro image was popularized by Joe Carioca or Zé Carioca, a fictional parrot character created by Walt Disney, embodying a tropical bon vivant (Scheyerl & Siqueira, 2008) who possesses a friendly, talkative, warm personality, skilled in both soccer and samba, with hints of a roguish temperament (Schwarcz & Starling, 2015).

The Malandro is also adaptable in social interactions and knows how to navigating corrupt laws and authorities to achieve personal gain. The phenotype of Malandro is expressed in the Brazilian mulatto, who overcomes prejudice by using charm to bend social rules. The “good Malandro” presents himself as someone who excels at everything (Glücksberg, 2018) and is described in numerous songs for his prowess in romantic relationships, adeptness at deceit, and skill in overcoming obstacles (Oliven, 2011). Brazilian musicians often glorify this figure, portraying the Malandro as a man in a suit, clogs, a neck scarf, and a hat, armed with a razor blade in his pocket, prepared to confront any challenge.

Initially depicted as capoeira fighters seeking advantages in public squares, the Malandro evolved to include individuals who occupy influential administrative and political positions, wielding significant decision-making power (DaMatta, 1984). Conversely, the otário or mané (i.e., sucker) represents the antithesis of the Malandro, striving to adhere to rules but often finding himself in unfavorable circumstances (Rodrigues, 2018). For example, while the otário or mané is highly bureaucratic and may be inefficient in executing complex processes, the Malandro will look for ways to simplify processes by contacting friends or close colleagues who might help.

In the perception of Brazilians, malandragem embodies the behaviors and attitudes typical of the Malandro. It serves as a tool against corrupt politics (Fischer et al., 2014), and is used to subvert various laws and regulations (Gomes, 2004). This trait is inherent in Brazilian soccer culture (Uehara et al., 2021). For instance, Brazilian soccer players often utilize malandragem to be awarded a penalty kick by deliberately seeking contact with an opponent’s leg, dramatically falling to the ground, and persuading the referee to call a penalty.

The culture of malandragem emerged during the colonization period when colonial Brazil received “the scum of Portugal,” including criminals, prostitutes, murderers, thieves, convicted prisoners, and anyone considered an outcast (Carvalho-Filho, 2004). Since then, the attempt to circumvent the practices of the inherited Portuguese bureaucratic system, which were perceived to be exploitative, inefficient, and outdated, seem integrated into the Brazilian population. In this context, malandragem has become a part of the Brazilian national identity (DaMatta, 1997).

Nowadays, social and cross-cultural psychologists conceptualize malandragem as a cultural script that aims to take advantage of others and constitutes part of a broader cultural Brazilian behavioral syndrome called jeitinho brasileiro (Brazilian jeitinho: Miura et al., 2019; Pilati & Fischer, 2022). In other words, malandragem embodies something morally reprehensible, akin to corruption, using deceitful methods for personal gains (Barlach, 2020; Rodrigues, 2018), and comprises a facet of Brazilian jeitinho (Miura et al., 2019). While malandragem is usually motivated by harmful intentions to succeed, the Brazilian jeitinho is believed to have positive intentions to find solutions creatively.

The history of personality psychology in Brazil

The beginning of personality psychology in Brazil involved case studies (Uchoa, 1947), clinical group examinations (Bucher & Romankiewicz, 1979), and theoretical papers (Cordeiro, 1981) within the psychoanalytic framework. Projective tests (e.g., Rorschach, Pfister) were commonly employed (Bucher et al., 1981) to evaluate dysfunctional aspects of personality, and were aimed at establishing connections with psychopathological processes (Loreto, 1981). In this context, European and North American Personality theories (e.g., Psychoanalysis, Analytical Psychology, Behaviorism, Humanistic Theory, Trait Theory, and Social Cognitive Theory) were included in instructional materials (Pasquali, 1990) and taught in Psychology Courses. The distinguished psychometricians Luiz Pasquali and Claudio S. Hutz played an essential role in the spread of personality theories and assessment throughout Brazil by adapting and developing many objective psychometric tests.

The first study that supported the Big Five in the country used personality markers (e.g., adjectives) to evaluate personality traits (e.g., Openness, Conscientiousness, Extroversion, Agreeableness, and Neuroticism) in university students (Hutz et al., 1998). Using an exploratory factor analysis, the authors found the five expected factors of personality correlated with other relevant psychological constructs. Since then, personality assessment has predominantly relied on self-reported big-five-based personality inventories. The development of Big Five markers for personality assessment (Hutz et al., 1998) was followed by the development and adaptation of many personality tests (Gouveia et al., 2021; Nunes et al., 2010; Rocha et al., 2022). Such endeavors enabled researchers and practitioners to evaluate the Big Five in clinical, educational, and organizational contexts (Hutz et al., 2013; Monteiro et al., 2015; Zanon et al., 2019). These studies used a top-down approach (i.e., applying existing theory to Brazilian culture) to find support for the etic, or universal, nature of the Big Five personality traits. Specifically, they repeatedly demonstrated the utility of the Big Five model in Brazilian samples and provided robust evidence for the model in a non-WEIRD (i.e., Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic) country. Overall, they supported the use of self-report tests to evaluate personality.

Investigated through a bottom-up approach by anthropologists, sociologists, and, more recently, psychologists, Brazilian jeitinho constitutes another relevant psychological construct for personality researchers (Ferreira et al., 2012). However, this construct has received little attention in Brazilian psychological research and is not yet taught in most Psychology courses in Brazil. Jeitinho represents an emic aspect of personality (i.e., personality traits within a specific cultural or social context) and is conceptualized to have developed out of the need for people to navigate disadvantaged socioeconomic situations throughout history (Pilati & Fischer, 2022).

Brazilian jeitinho

Brazilian jeitinho may have emerged as a strategy to obtain gains in a highly hierarchical, bureaucratic, and patriarchal system that favored informal and close relationships (Ferreira et al., 2012; Zimmermann, 2009). Throughout history, indigenous people, Black enslaved people, and European immigrants used creativity and cunning actions to survive and secure concessions (e.g., vital supplies, rest, tools, housing, and land [for the European immigrants]) from the Portuguese elite. The allocation of these provisions lacked proper regulation and fairness in terms of social justice, often leading to preferences being established in a seemingly arbitrary, yet intentional, manner (Barbosa, 2006; DaMatta, 1984). This corrupt system appears to have favored individuals who were charming, empathetic, and warm as they gained advantages and concessions within hierarchical social relationships. The effectiveness of this type of approach was so significant in the Brazilian context that it has endured to the present day, with recent evidence (Ferreira et al., 2012; Miura et al., 2019) finding moderate associations between Brazilian jeitinho and traits like extroversion and agreeableness. This suggests that more sociable people are more likely to manifest jeitinho traits in everyday situations.

To date, we are unaware of any epidemiological study addressing the prevalence of jeitinho in the Brazilian population. However, in an investigation with participants from the five Brazilian macro-regions (N = 1259), Pilati and Fischer (2022) provide evidence that it is present in these locations. They also found that women report more friendly behaviors and identify more examples of jeitinho malandro (e.g., corruption, breaking social norms, etc.) in Brazil than men. Moreover, the authors found that older, married, and highly educated participants generally reported fewer behaviors associated with corruption and breaking social norms. In a smaller sample from Rio de Janeiro (N = 329), Ferreira et al. (2012) verified that participants with higher extroversion scores and income reported breaking more social norms.

Although other colonies in Latin America, Africa, and Asia also underwent colonial exploitative systems and developed idiosyncratic emic behaviors to survive and obtain advantages (e.g., Simpatia and Guanxi), there is unclear if they had the same impact on the population’s personality elsewhere. Simpatia, for example, characterizes a preference for warm and emotionally positive interactions, avoiding overt conflict (Acevedo et al., 2020), and is found across various Latin American cultures (Triandis et al., 1984). While sharing similarities with the Brazilian jeitinho, Simpatia differs by not having a goal-oriented, problem-solving, focus (Pilati & Fischer, 2022). Guanxi, in China, is based on emotional relations, trust, and reciprocity (Chen et al., 2009). It implies a strong notion of deference and subordination to the hierarchy in medium and long-term relationships (Chen et al., 2009; Hwang, 1987). Brazilian jeitinho differs from Guanxi because it does not rely on pre-established relationships and does not aim for solid and long-lasting connections (Ferreira et al., 2012).

The jeitinho constitutes an emic personality trait rooted in Brazilian culture that includes problem-solving strategies in which individuals break social norms or even resort to corruption (Ferreira et al., 2012; Rodrigues et al., 2011). The jeitinho arises in unforeseen situations or when individuals face barriers to their goals, leading them to employ informal and unconventional mechanisms to resolve them (Barbosa, 2006; Smith et al., 2012). For example, consider an employee, Roberto, who is facing a slow, bureaucratic, process within his company. To expedite this, Roberto reaches out to personal contacts within the organization, requesting them to prioritize his task over others’. This favor is asked with the rationale that it holds personal significance for Roberto, and to ensure compliance, he might subtly imply reciprocal assistance in the future by highlighting that everyone needs support at some time in their lives. These processes are usually conducted with affection, charm, and flexibility by the ones who request the favor.

Creativity, flexibility in circumventing rules, cunning, and a willingness to deceive constitute the components of the jeitinho culture (Barbosa, 2006; DaMatta, 1997). Other examples of Brazilian jeitinho include an individual parking his car in a prohibited area under the justification of quickly entering a market, an individual taking advantage of an acquaintance to jump ahead in line, and improvising a birthday gift because they lack time or resources to purchase one.

Two psychological studies explored the conceptualization of the Brazilian jeitinho by interviewing Brazilian participants who revealed critical themes associated with the jeitinho: friendliness, harm to others, cunning, disregard for social norms, innovation, power relations, and compensation (Rodrigues et al., 2011). According to the participants, the jeitinho can have positive or negative connotations and requires personal skills such as friendliness, creativity, and innovation. Furthermore, the jeitinho can harm others or the common good, and challenge hierarchies and bureaucracies that hinder individuals from achieving their goals (Rodrigues et al., 2011).

To investigate the dimensionality of Brazilian jeitinho, Ferreira et al. (2012) developed a questionnaire initially consisting of 53 scenarios, which participants evaluated. The final version of the questionnaire, comprising 21 scenarios, revealed three factors related to Brazilian jeitinho: Corruption (i.e., ways of solving a problem through illicit means), Creativity (i.e., the use of problem-solving strategies without harming others or violating social norms), and Breaking of Social Norms (i.e., bypassing standard social rules to achieve individual goals [Ferreira et al., 2012]). Correlations were found between the Corruption and Creativity factors (r = .12), the Corruption and Breaking of Social Norms factors (r = .65), and the Breaking of Social Norms and Creativity factors (r = .46). The researchers further investigated the interaction of sociodemographic factors, personality traits, and moral attitudes with each of the three identified dimensions using regression analysis. Scores on the Creativity factor were related to higher levels of education (β = −.15, p < .01). Higher extraversion (β = .12, p < .001), higher reported income (β = .13, p < .001), and lower levels of agreeableness (β = −.20, p < .001) were linked to higher levels of the Breaking Social Norms factor. The Corruption factor was also inversely related to agreeableness (β = −.19, p < .001) but was predicted by higher moral disengagement (β = .21, p < .001).

In a more comprehensive attempt to understand the Brazilian jeitinho dimensions, Miura et al. (2019) conducted four studies. First, they identified a two-factor structure of jeitinho composed of jeitinho simpático (i.e., friendly jeitinho) and jeitinho malandro (i.e., crafty jeitinho). While the dimension of jeitinho simpático (i.e., Roberto’s previous example) reflected the tendency of individuals to seek positive social interactions and find creative and conflict-free solutions to adversity, jeitinho malandro (i.e., Daniel’s previous example) was characterized by fraud and deceit (Miura et al., 2019). The associations between both dimensions of jeitinho and other variables (i.e., values, personality factors, and moral attitudes) indicated that the most relationship-oriented or creative individuals were expected to endorse the jeitinho simpático behaviors and people who tend to pursue personal gratification or those who adhere less to social conformity support the jeitinho malandro behaviors. Regarding the associations of jeitinho dimensions with values, jeitinho simpático was positively associated with benevolence (r = .45, p < .01), which is the tendency to care about the well-being of others; stimulation (r = .38, p < .01), which refers to novelty seeking and motivation to change; and self-direction (r = .37, p < .01), which is found in people who value independence (Miura et al., 2019). On the other hand, the dimension of jeitinho malandro was positively correlated with hedonism (r = .26, p < .01), which is sensual gratification seeking; and negatively correlated with conformity (r = −.35, p < .01) and security values (r = −.26, p < .01), due to the antisocial implications of the dimension. Results indicated that both dimensions of jeitinho were associated with Big Five personality factors: jeitinho simpático was positively associated with openness to experience (β = .38, p < .01) and agreeableness (β = .41, p < .01) while jeitinho malandro showed a negative relationship with conscientiousness (β = −.32, p < .01, [Miura et al., 2019]).

From a developmental perspective, jeitinho appears to be primarily acquired from parents. A study investigating the parent-child relationship in the transmission of values and characteristics associated with the Brazilian jeitinho revealed moderate correlations between parental factors like breaking of social norms (ICC = .50, p < .001) and corruption (ICC = .50, p < .001) with antisocial behaviors in their children (Sousa, 2020). Specifically, parental factors such as breaking social norms and corruption accounted for approximately 30% of the variance in children’s antisocial scores. These findings underscore the significant role of parenting in shaping children’s jeitinho traits.

Recent research using multi-group confirmatory factor analysis revealed that Brazilians from different geographical areas respond similarly to measures of jeitinho simpático and jeitinho malandro (Pilati & Fischer, 2022). Moreover, this study found no significant differences in Brazilian jeitinho across participants from the country’s five geographical regions. Considering the significant cultural and socioeconomic differences among Brazilian geographical regions (IBGE, 2008), these results support the hypothesis that Brazilian jeitinho constitutes a culture-specific personality trait—a cluster of behaviors recognized by people in a specific historical, social, and cultural context, that is commonly understood to improve communication among society members (Pilati & Fischer, 2022).

Jeitinho and the dark tetrad traits of personality

Jeitinho shares similarities with The Dark Tetrad traits (e.g., narcissism, Machiavellism, psychopathy, and sadism; Mededovic & Petrovic, 2015; Paulhus, 2014). Jetinho represents an emic concept found in Brazil, while the Dark Tetrad refers to an etic set of malevolent and socially undesirable personality traits found worldwide (Ramos-Vera et al., 2023). The Dark Tetrad is characterized by the exploitation of others for personal gain, emotional detachment, and difficulty maintaining meaningful interpersonal bonds and connections (Paulhus, 2014; Paulhus & Williams, 2002). While narcissism encompasses characteristics such as grandiosity, dominance, and feelings of superiority, psychopathy is characterized by high impulsivity, a pursuit of intense emotions, and low empathy (Noronha et al., 2022).Machiavellianism is characterized by a strong inclination toward manipulation and the use of strategies to achieve personal objectives, often without regard for others’ well-being (Paulhus & Williams, 2002). Similarly, sadism is characterized by a tendency to enjoy causing distress, physical or emotional harm, or discomfort in others, often accompanied by a lack of empathy or concern for the suffering of the victim (Paulhus, 2014).

Although jeitinho malandro shares more similarities with the Dark Tetrad (especially Machiavellianism) than jeitinho simpático, jeitinho does not include a sense of superiority, impulsivity to act, or the use of harsh and highly structured strategies to obtain gains—characteristics present in the Dark Tetrad traits. Jeitinho usually relies on a warm and more affectionate approach (i.e., implementing sympathy, charm, and persuasion) toward others to achieve goals (Farias & Pilati, 2021). Despite an individual being aware that they might be partaking in something ethically questionable (especially in the case of jeitinho malandro), such as circumventing a rule or providing an advantage to someone else, an individual may not feel exploited because they sympathize with the proposer due to their perception of fairness or justice in the proposition. This happens because most Brazilian people endorse jeitinho to a certain degree (Pilati & Fischer, 2022; Rodrigues et al., 2011).

Brazilian jeitinho and its implications for personality assessment

Brazilian jeitinho is a hierarchical personality trait composed of two subfacets (jeitinho simpático and jeitinho malandro) that are distinctly related with other relevant constructs (e.g., values, personality factors, and moral attitudes). Given that the personality trait is widespread in Brazil (Pilati & Fischer, 2022), we believe that it might be associated with benefits and drawbacks for Brazilian society as a whole. Jeitinho simpático, for example, is likely to enhance work, educational, and family relationships, making them more fluid and enjoyable. More specifically, it might constitute an efficient strategy for resolving conflicts, promoting trust, and creating a positive and supportive environment in both personal and professional settings. Evidence suggests that more positive and emotionally engaged communication can improve health, enhance well-being, and lead to greater fulfillment (Pitts & Socha, 2013). On the other hand, jeitinho malandro is likely to impact society negatively. Adopting antisocial and exploitative practices lead to social inequality, impair social mobility, and diminish a sense of community–all of which contribute to a less stable and harmonious society (Oliveira & Moisés, 2023). This may promote a culture of corruption across various spheres of society, particularly in politics.

In addition to constituting an emic personality dimension, which significantly influences the expression of behaviors and social practices, it is likely that Brazilian jeitinho also impacts the assessment of etic personality constructs. More specifically, we believe that jeitinho malandro introduces relevant factors to consider in general personality assessments in Brazil.

The self-reported personality tests used in Brazil were either adapted from WEIRD countries (Rocha et al., 2022) or developed by creating items that were similar to traditional personality inventories (i.e., imposed etic). Although test adaptation and development follow rigorous procedures to ensure content validity (e.g., focal groups, expert evaluations, and pilot research) and proper psychometric properties, we are unaware of studies that addressed the impact of jeitinho on the social desirability of personality items. For this reason, we advocate that emic and etic approaches are essential to ensure more validity in personality assessment.

Personality assessment in Brazil

Psychological test development in Brazil involves rigorous evaluation of psychometric properties by psychometricians. Specifically, validity and reliability evidence is examined and normative scores are assessed for their applicability to the Brazilian population before tests are permitted to be sold on the market. This anonymous review process, where reviewers remain unaware of the authors and vice versa, can span several months and concludes only when authors provide all required empirical evidence. The Federal Counsel of Psychology mandates this meticulous procedure to ensure minimal quality standards for instruments used in psychological assessments (Reppold et al., 2018).

Why jeitinho matters?

Many Brazilians view the act of taking advantage of others as an act of intelligence (Rocha et al., 2022), and the belief that success is easier achieved through corruption rather than through diligence and hard work (Resende & Porto, 2020) suggests that many people might have a distinct interpretation of personality items. Because jeitinho represents a culturally-specific construct observed across the five major geographical regions (Pilati & Fischer, 2022), jeitinho malandro (Miura et al., 2019) may impact the social desirability of traditional personality items. For example, items related to prosocial behaviors might actually be viewed as less socially desirable, while items related to selfishness and breaking social norms might be more positively perceived.

We believe that agreeableness and conscientiousness are the personality factors more influenced by jeitinho malandro because people who are more likely to endorse these items (e.g., those that endorse fraudulent or deceitful behaviors; [Miura et al., 2019]) might not believe that being hardworking, empathetic, and respectful are important characteristics to solve everyday problems and achieve success in life (Rocha et al., 2022). More specifically, agreeableness items like “I use to help others”, “I trust people”, and “I forgive others who harmed me” might be interpreted as undesirable characteristics that indicate weakness or inadequacy. Similarly, a reverse-keyed conscientiousness item like “If I find money laying around, I’ll keep it to myself” might have double meaning in Brazil. While some people would believe that giving the money back is the right thing to do, others may believe that finding money is lucky (Rocha et al., 2022) and no one other than the owner is trustable enough to receive his money back. Other conscientiousness items like “I respect authorities”, “I always keep my promises”, and “I use to follow the rules” might be considered silly or nonadaptive within the context of jeitinho malandro. Although the moralistic view inherited from Catholicism indicates that these are desirable characteristics, the historically shaped subversive perspective suggests that these characteristics might be unnecessary or inadequate (Smith et al., 2023). This perspective in interpreting items might introduce substantial errors in their variances that could threaten the validity of personality inventories by biasing factor loadings and factor means. Although the impact of jeitinho malandro on the psychometric properties of personality inventories in Brazil is still unknown, we believe this constitutes a worthwhile endeavor for future research.

Possible ways to investigate it

A first step to investigate how jeitinho malandro may impact responses to agreeableness and conscientiousness items might be to ask people with high and low scores of jeitinho malandro how valuable agreeableness and conscientiousness traits are for people in general. We would expect significant differences between high and low endorsers of jeitinho malandro, which would suggest that the item relevance is distinctly perceived by these groups.

A second step is to incorporate anchoring vignettes (Hopkins & King, 2010) into personality assessments that describe examples of jeitinho malandro and ask participants to judge how acceptable or relevant they consider this behavior while keeping in mind how society works. Specifying that participants should respond in terms of how society works allows the respondents to be less implicated in the morality of the judgments and may allow for less biased responses about attitudes toward prosocial and diligent behaviors. These results can be used to adjust the raw scores of personality items. For example, someone who considers it highly acceptable and important for societal success to manipulate results to favor a friend, bribe someone to accelerate a time-consuming process, or offer favors to compensate for some gains is unlikely to endorse altruistic items in a genuine way. However, they might endorse such items if they note this would produce a more favorable result for someone else. We might “adjust” the answer in these cases by recoding it to the symmetrical opposite response (see Hopkins & King, 2010, for more details).

Anchoring vignettes are commonly utilized in political sciences to enhance group comparability when evaluating attitudes and preferences in self-report questionnaires (King & Wand, 2007). This method recognizes the existence of different response styles (RS) and counteracts their impact on responses to questionnaire items. It achieves this by introducing concise hypothetical descriptions (vignettes) of individuals that systematically differ in the underlying characteristics mirrored in the inventory. Survey participants are then asked to assess the individuals described in the vignettes using an item similar to those used for their self-report, employing the same response format and rating scale. Previous research on response styles (e.g., acquiescence, disaquiescence, and others) of socioemotional skills in adolescents in Brazil used anchoring vignettes and found gains in the reliability of conscientiousness and openness factors (Primi et al., 2016).

Alternative strategies to control impression management in personality assessment caused by people with high scores of jeitinho malandro might be the inclusion of self-enhancement measures like the Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding (Paulhus, 1988) and the Miscellaneous Index Bias (Paulhus & Reid, 1991). These scales, not yet available in Portuguese, include unrealistic and narcissistic statements (e.g., “I am always honest with myself” and “When I criticize someone, it is only for their own good”) that purposefully exaggerate one’s confidence and sense of control to identify whether an individual is trying to present themselves favorably (Paulhus & Reid, 1991). These measures can be used to identify people who are explicitly trying to produce a positive impression. Similarly, the over-claiming technique (Paulhus et al., 2003) could be used, in which participants are presented with concepts, ideas, or information that are either factual or invented, and are evaluated on the number of invented items that participants claim as real. For example, we might ask participants whether they are familiar with famous literature writers by presenting names such as Edgar Allan Poe and Machado de Assis (real writers), and John Paul Byrnier (invented name) to investigate a participants tendency to claim knowledge about invented items. Paulhus et al. (2003) detail the pros and cons of computing indices of self-enhancement using false claims, or by combining false and true claims, and suggest this technique is promising in the context of evaluation. Because someone with high scores on jeitinho malandro is likely to positively bias his/her presentation, we believe it is likely that such a person might over-claim invented items compared with someone with low scores on jeitinho malandro. However, these conjectures require evidence. We hope these, and other, strategies are used in future research to better understand the impact of jeitinho malandro on participant responses to personality items.

Conclusion

Practices developed over time to navigate bureaucracy and unfairness (i.e., Brazilian jeitinho) are still used to deal with everyday situations. This review sheds light on the origin and conceptualization of Brazilian jeitinho and how it might impact personality assessment. Although not endorsed by all Brazilians, we believe that the concept of jeitinho malandro (crafty jeitinho) is widely understood in Brazilian culture and could impact the social desirability of self-reported personality items. Agreeableness and conscientiousness items with positive social desirability are likely to be interpreted as undesirable or irrelevant characteristics to succeed within the context of jeitinho—which might distort the accuracy of personality assessments and hinder the genuine understanding of personality traits in Brazil.

Supplemental Material

Supplemental Material - Brazilian jeitinho: Historical development, current research, and its impact on personality assessment

Supplemental Material for Brazilian jeitinho: Historical development, current research, and its impact on personality assessment by Cristian Zanon, Jéssica Vargas da Luz, Taís Bopp da Silva, and Marlos A. de Lima in Personality Science.

Supplemental Material

Supplemental Material - Brazilian jeitinho: Historical development, current research, and its impact on personality assessment

Footnotes

Author note

This paper is part of the bundle Personality Science Around the World. Friedrich M. Götz was the handling editor.

Acknowledgements

We want to extend our heartfelt gratitude to Friedrich M. Götz (invited guest editor) and the two anonymous reviewers who generously offered us very clever suggestions. Additionally, we express our sincere appreciation to Patrick J. Heath, whose comprehensive review of the entire paper and insightful comments greatly enhanced its quality.

Author contributions

Cristian Zanon: Conceptualization; Project administration; Resources; Supervision; Writing - original draft; and Writing - review & editing.

Jéssica V. da Luz: Resources; Writing - original draft; and Writing - review & editing.

Marlos A. de Lima: Resources; Writing - original draft; and Writing - review & editing.

Taís B. da Silva: Resources; Writing - original draft; and Writing - review & editing.

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) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iDs

Jéssica Vargas da Luz

Taís Bopp da Silva

Marlos A. de Lima

Data accessibility statement

Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analyzed during the current study.

Supplemental Material

Supplemental material for this article is available online. Depending on the article type, these usually include a Transparency Checklist, a Transparent Peer Review File, and optional materials from the authors.

Notes

Not applicable.

References

Acevedo

A. M.

Herrera

Shenhav

Yim

I. S.

Campos

(2020). Measurement of a latino cultural value: The simpatia scale. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 26(4), 419–425. https://doi.org/10.1037/cdp0000324

Miura

M. A.

Pilati

Lemos Milfont

Cristina Ferreira

Fischer

(2019). Between simpatia and malandragem: Brazilian jeitinho as an individual difference variable. PLoS One, 14(4), Article e0214929. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0214929

Amado

Brasil

H. V.

(1991). Organizational behaviors and cultural context: The Brazilian “jeitinho”. International Studies of Management & Organization, 21(3), 38–61. https://doi.org/10.1080/00208825.1991.11656561

Assunção

M. R.

(2005). Capoeira: The history of an Afro-Brazilian martial art. Routledge. https://www.routledge.com/Capoeira-The-History-of-an-Afro-Brazilian-Martial-Art/Assuncao/p/book/9780714680866

Barbosa

(2006). O jeitinho brasileiro: A arte de ser mais igual do que os outros [The Brazilian jeitinho: The art of being more equal than others]. Elsevier. https://books.google.com.br/books/about/O_jeitinho_brasileiro.html?hl=pt-BR&id=1RcsAAAAYAAJ&redir_esc=y

Barlach

(2020). O jeitinho brasileiro: Entre a criatividade e a corrupção . A percepção dos estrangeiros sobre o Brasil [The Brazilian way: Between creativity and corruption. The perception of foreigners about Brazil]. Brazilian Journal of Development, 6(11), 86772–86777. https://doi.org/10.34117/bjdv6n11-196

Bucher

R. E.

Romankiewicz

(1979). A personalidade do alcoólatra: Variáveis sócio-culturais, psicopatológicas e psicodinâmicas. [The personality of alcoholics: Socio-cultural, psychopathological and psychodynamical variables]. Arquivos de Neuro-Psiquiatria, 37(3), 255–266. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0004-282X1979000300004

Bucher

R. E.

Romankiewicz

Targino

P. D.

(1981). Aspectos psicológicos e psicodinâmicos do diabético [Psychological and psychodynamic aspects of the diabetic patient]. Acta Psiquiatrica y Psicologica de America Latina, 27(2), 117–123.

Carvalho-Filho

L. F.

(2004). Impunidade no Brasil: Colônia e Império. Estudos Avançados, 18(51), 181–194. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-40142004000200011

10.

Chen

Friedman

Fang

(2009). Supervisor-subordinate guanxi: Developing a three-dimensional model and scale. Management and Organization Review, 5(3), 375–399. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1740-8784.2009.00153.x

11.

Cordeiro

M. A.

(1981). Regressão narcísica e suicídio [Narcissism regression and suicide]. Revista Brasileira de Psicanalise, 15(2), 145–158.

12.

da Cunha

M. C.

(Ed.), (1992). Legislação Indigenista no século XIX: Uma compilação (1808-1889) [Indigenous legislation in the 19th century: A compilation (1808-1889)]. Edusp. https://books.google.com.br/books/about/Legisla%C3%A7%C3%A3o_indigenista_no_s%C3%A9culo_XIX.html?id=TAhOAAAAMAAJ&redir_esc=y

13.

DaMatta

(1984). O que faz o brasil, Brasil? (Vol. 7) [What makes brasil, Brazil?]. Rocco. https://books.google.com.br/books/about/O_que_faz_o_brasil_Brasil.html?id=2yIsAAAAYAAJ&redir_esc=y#:∼:text=Em_seu_%C3%ADmpeto_de_analisar,que_faz_o_brasil%2C_Brasil%3F

14.

DaMatta

(1997). Carnavais, malandros e heróis: Para uma sociologia do dilema brasileiro [Carnivals, rogues and heroes: An interpretation of the Brazilian dilemma]. Rocco. https://www.google.com.br/books/edition/Carnavais_malandros_e_her%C3%B3is/wYX10Uf7bsYC?hl=pt-BR&gbpv=1&dq=Carnavais,+malandros+e+her%C3%B3is&printsec=frontco

15.

de Holanda

S. B.

(1995). Raízes do Brasil (26th ed.). Companhia das Letras. [Roots of Brazil]. https://www.google.com.br/books/edition/Ra%C3%ADzes_do_Brasil/6gwrAQAAMAAJ?hl=pt-BR&gbpv=1&bsq=Ra%C3%ADzes+do+Brasil+(Vol.+1)&dq=Ra%C3%ADzes+do+Brasil+(Vol.+1)&printsec=frontcover[

16.

Dias

E. M.

(1992). Brazil’s birth certificate: The letter of Pero Vaz de Caminha. Pacific Coast Philology, 27(1/2), 10. https://doi.org/10.2307/1316707

17.

Farias

Pilati

(2021). Do advertising pieces that portray Brazilian jeitinho influence dishonest behavior? Psico-USF, 26(2), 345–356. https://doi.org/10.1590/1413-82712021260212

18.

Ferreira

M. C.

Fischer

Porto

J. B.

Pilati

Milfont

T. L.

(2012). Unraveling the mystery of Brazilian jeitinho: A cultural exploration of social norms. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38(3), 331–344. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167211427148

19.

Fischer

Ferreira

M. C.

Milfont

Pilati

(2014). Culture of corruption? The effects of priming corruption images in a high corruption context. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 45(10), 1594–1605. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022114548874

20.

Freyre

(1963). Casa grande & senzala [The big house and the slave quarters] (12th ed.). University of Brasilia. https://www.google.com/searchq=casa+grande+e+senzala&oq=CASA+GRANDE+E+SENZALA&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUqBwgAEAAYjwIyBwgAEAAYjwIyBwgBEC4YgAQyDAgCEEUYORjjAhiABDIHCAMQABiABDIHCAQQABiABDIHCAUQLhiABDIHCAYQABiABDIHCAcQABiABDIHCAgQABiABDIHCAkQABiABNIBCDY1MzRqMGo0qAIAsAIA&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-siAKbGX_rx0kjCnU6rUbvmlCcr37ERIqyY7iZC_jaOQVxjxoaltXHIjku5CzlR2ZphAwGDYSbgoH9ALXJaGYSDF-HEEN9OESxr-5VchJ1EzlyHlHC42H6lT75N5d0nXmtKN_SkCLsePqLb&ictx=1&ved=2ahUKEwjS7MT56PaEAxWOqpUCHZyaB20QyNoBKAB6BAgVEAA

21.

Glücksberg

(2018). A dialética da malandragem no fenótipo da moral do brasileiro. Revista internacional de apoyo a la inclusión, logopedia, sociedad y multiculturalidad, 4(3), 96–108. https://doi.org/10.17561/riai.v4.n3.5

22.

Gomes

T. d. M.

(2004). Gente do samba: malandragem e identidade nacional no final da Primeira República. Topoi, 5(9), 171–198. https://doi.org/10.1590/2237-101X005009007

23.

Gouveia

V. V.

Carvalho

R. A. R.

Vasconcelos O

I. C.

Pereira

G, M.

Milfont

Lins

H. C. G.

Santos

Medeiros

E. D.

Silva

S. A. K.

Pereira

M. R.

Moura

A. J.

Medeiros

C. T.

Silva

N. B.

Gouveia

(2021). A short version of the Big Five Inventory (BFI-20): Evidence on construct validity. Revista Interamericana de Psicologia/Interamerican Journal of Psychology, 55(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.30849/ripijp.v55i1.1312

24.

Hopkins

King

(2010). Improving anchoring vignettes: Designing surveys to correct interpersonal incomparability. Public Opinion Quarterly, 74(2), 201–222. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfq011

25.

Hutz

C. S.

Nunes

C. H. S. S.

Silveira

A. D.

Serra

Anton

Wieczorek

L. S.

(1998). O desenvolvimento de marcadores para a avaliação da personalidade no modelo dos Cinco Grandes Fatores [The development of the Big Five markers for personality assessment in Brazil]. Psicologia: Reflexão e Crítica, 11(2), 395–409. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0102-79721998000200015

26.

Hutz

C. S.

Zanon

Brum Neto

(2013). Adverse working conditions and mental illness in poultry slaughterhouses in Southern Brazil. Psicologia: Reflexão e Crítica, 26(2), 296–304. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0102-79722013000200009

27.

Hwang

(1987). Face and favor: The Chinese power game. American Journal of Sociology, 92(4), 944–974. https://doi.org/10.1086/228588

28.

Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística [IBGE] . (2000). Brasil: 500 anos de povoamento [Brazil: 500 years of settlement]. https://biblioteca.ibge.gov.br/visualizacao/livros/liv6687.pdf

29.

Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística [IBGE] . (2008). Síntese de indicadores sociais: Uma análise das condições de vida da população brasileira (Vol. 23) [Synthesis of social indicators: An analysis of the living conditions of the Brazilian population]. https://www.tce.pr.gov.br/contasdogoverno/2009/educacao/indic_sociais2008.pdf

30.

Karasch

M. C.

(2000). The slave life in Rio de Janeiro (pp. 1808–1850). Companhia das Letras. https://wwwo.companhiadasletras.com.br/livro/9788535900286/a-vida-dos-escravos-no-rio-de-janeiro-1808-1850

31.

King

Wand

(2007). Comparing incomparable survey responses: Evaluating and selecting anchoring vignettes. Political Analysis, 15(1), 46–66. https://doi.org/10.1093/pan/mpl011

32.

Leivas

P. H. S.

dos Santos

A. M. A.

(2018). Horizontal inequality and ethnic diversity in Brazil: Patterns, trends, and their impacts on institutions. Oxford Development Studies, 46(3), 348–362. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600818.2017.1394450

33.

Lins

T. C.

Vieira

R. G.

Abreu

B. S.

Grattapaglia

Pereira

R. W.

(2009). Genetic composition of Brazilian population samples based on a set of twenty-eight ancestry informative SNPs. American Journal of Human Biology: The Official Journal of the Human Biology Council, 22(2), 187–192. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajhb.20976

34.

Loreto

V. M.

(1981). Personalidade e patologia mental [Personality and mental disorder]. Jornal Brasileiro de Psiquiatria, 30(5), 439–442.

35.

Maestri

(2013). Os senhores do litoral: Conquista portuguesa e agonia Tupinambá no litoral brasílico (século 16) [The lords of the coast: Portuguese conquest and Tupinambá agony on the Brazilian coast (16th century)] (3rd ed.). Editora UFRGS. https://books.google.com.br/books/about/Os_senhores_do_litoral.html?id=FtegoAEACAAJ&redir_esc=y

36.

Mamigonian

(2017). Africanos livres: A abolição do tráfico de escravos no Brasil [Free Africans: The abolition of the slave trade in Brazil]. Companhia das Letras. https://www.google.com/search?q=Africanos+livres:+a+aboli%C3%A7%C3%A3o+do+tr%C3%A1fico+de+escravos+no+Brasil&oq=Africanos+livres%3A+a+aboli%C3%A7%C3%A3o+do+tr%C3%A1fico+de+escravos+no+Brasil&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOTIGCAEQRRhAMgYIAhBFGDvSAQgyMzkwajBqOagCALACAA&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&si=AKbGX_p4pyeyr1FGV3SWZkER8f4EXjNtVt73HM0W1zrh_bOa_pB650NKXsrWvQ1P8JByGeMTDcoNIg7PtqFladJmYqAy6w0tpIUdchtXA-TKqyE_AKNDNoRmZmX8Hjgq3lMlIHQke4VlrPPN9_ztrYuSEWlEgYNNWXFQ--3GylfRURlO7VJ6YMg%3D&ictx=1&ved=2ahUKEwiMsJDMuPaEAxV1qZUCHYStAnsQyNoBKAB6BAgVEAA.

37.

Međedović

Petrović

(2015). The Dark Tetrad: Structural properties and location in the personality space. Journal of Individual Differences, 36(4), 228–236. https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-0001/a000179

38.

Monteiro

R. P.

Gouveia

R. S. V.

Patrick

C. J.

Carvalho

H. W. de

Medeiros

E. D.

Pimentel

C. E.

Gouveia

V. V.

(2015). A psicopatia no contexto dos cinco grandes fatores. Psico, 46(4), 461–471. https://doi.org/10.15448/1980-8623.2015.4.20314

39.

Motta

F. C. P.

(1997). Cultura e organizações no Brasil [Culture and organizations in Brazil]. In Motta

F. C.

Caldas

(Eds.), Cultura organizacional e cultura brasileira [Organizational culture and Brazilian culture] (pp. 25–37). https://pesquisa-eaesp.fgv.br/sites/gvpesquisa.fgv.br/files/publicacoes/P00159_1.pdf

40.

Nascimento

(2016). O Genocídio do negro brasileiro: Processo de um racismo mascarado [The genocide of black Brazilians: Process of masked racism]. https://books.google.com.br/books/about/O_Genoc%C3%ADdio_do_negro_brasileiro.html?id=8KFBDgAAQBAJ&source=kp_book_description&redir_esc=y

41.

Noronha

A. P. P.

Barros

L. de O.

Bonfá-Araujo

(2022). Tríade Sombria baseada em um modelo de virtudes da psicologia positiva [Dark Triad based on a virtue model of positive psychology]. Avaliação Psicológica, 21(2), 246–250. https://doi.org/10.15689/ap.2022.2102.20388.12

42.

Nunes

C. H. S.

Hutz

C. S.

Nunes

M. O.

(2010). Bateria fatorial de personalidade – manual técnico [Personality factors battery - technical manual]. Casa do Psicólogo.

43.

Oliveira

E. N. d.

Moisés

J. A.

(2023). Corruption in the perception of Brazilian society: Persistence and resilience. Opinião Pública, 29(2), 270–303. https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-01912023292270, https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/op/article/view/8674542

44.

Oliveira

S. R. d.

(2011). De mendigos e malandros: Chico Buarque, Bertolt Brecht, John Gay – uma leitura transcultural. In: Of beggars and rogues: Chico Buarque, Bertolt Brecht, John Gay – a transcultural reading] (2nd ed.). CRV.

45.

Oliven

R. G.

(2011). The imaginary of Brazilian popular music. Vibrant: Virtual Brazilian Anthropology, 8(1), 170–207. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1809-43412011000100007

46.

Pasquali

(1990). Os tipos humanos: A teoria da personalidade [Human types: the theory of personality]. Editora Vozes.

47.

Paulhus

D. L.

(1988). Assessing self-deception and impression management in self-reports: The balanced inventory of desirable responding. University of British Columbia. Unpublished manual.

48.

Paulhus

D. L.

(2014). Toward a taxonomy of dark personalities. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 23(6), 421–426. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721414547737

49.

Paulhus

D. L.

Harms

P. D.

Bruce

M. N.

Lysy

D. C.

(2003). The over-claiming technique: Measuring self-enhancement independent of ability. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(4), 890–904. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.84.4.890

50.

Paulhus

D. L.

Reid

D. B.

(1991). Enhancement and denial in socially desirable responding. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60(2), 307–317. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.60.2.307

51.

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. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-6566(02)00505-6

52.

Pilati

Fischer

(2022). An exploration of within-cultural differences of a culture-specific syndrome: The case of Brazilian jeitinho. Cross-Cultural Research, 56(5), 423–444. https://doi.org/10.1177/10693971221086818

53.

Pitts

M. J.

Socha

T. J.

(Eds.), (2013). Positive communication in health and wellness. Peter Lang Publishing. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2012-30817-000

54.

Pravaz

(2008). Hybridity Brazilian style: Samba, carnaval, and the myth of “racial democracy” in Rio de Janeiro. Identities: Global Studies in Power and Culture, 15(1), 80–102. https://doi.org/10.1080/10702890701801841

55.

Primi

Zanon

Santos

De Fruyt

John

O. P.

(2016). Anchoring vignettes: Can they make adolescent self-reports of social-emotional skills more reliable, discriminant, and criterion-valid? European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 32(1), 39–51. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000336

56.

Ramos-Vera

O’Diana

A. G.

Villena

A. S.

Bonfá-Araujo

Barros

L. d. O.

Noronha

A. P. P.

Gómez-Acosta

Sierra-Barón

Gerymski

Ogundokun

R. O.

Babatunde

A. N.

Abdulahi

A. T.

Adeniyi

E. A.

(2023). Dark and light triad: A cross-cultural comparison of network analysis in 5 countries. Personality and Individual Differences, 215, 112377. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2023.112377

57.

Reis

J. J.

(1996). Quilombos e revoltas escravas no Brasil [Quilombos and slave revolts in Brazil]. Revista USP, 28(1), 14–39. https://doi.org/10.11606/issn.2316-9036.v0i28p14-39

58.

Reppold

C. T.

Serafini

A. J.

Gurgel

L. G.

Magnan

E. d. S.

Damion

Kaiser

Almeida

L. d. S.

(2018). Análise de manuais de testes psicológicos aprovados pelo Satepsi para avaliação de adultos. [Analysis of manuals of psychological tests approved by Satepsi for adult assessment]. Psicologia: Teoria e Prática, 20(3), 100–120. https://doi.org/10.5935/1980-6906/psicologia.v20n3p100-120

59.

Resende

M. M.

Porto

J. B.

(2020). Brazilian jeitinho and moral identity: Impact on ethical behaviour at work. Trends in Psychology, 28(1), 148–164. https://doi.org/10.9788/s43076-019-00006-1

60.

Ribeiro

(1995). O povo brasileiro: A formação e o sentido do Brasil [The Brazilian people: the formation and meaning of Brazil]. Companhia de Bolso. https://www.google.com.br/books/edition/O_Povo_Brasileiro/0phkBQAAQBAJ?hl=pt-BR&gbpv=1&dq=O+povo+brasileiro&printsec=frontcover

61.

Rocha

A. M.

Zanon

Roberts

B. W.

(2022). Measuring conscientiousness in Brazil and disentangling its relationships with subjective well-being, and academic involvement. Current Psychology, 42, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-022-03552-7

62.

Rodrigues

J. C.

(2018). Revisitando a malandragem. ALCEU, 18(37), 6–15. https://doi.org/10.46391/ALCEU.v19.ed37.2018.89

63.

Rodrigues

Milfont

Ferreira

M. C.

Porto

Fischer

(2011). Brazilian jeitinho: Understanding and explaining an indigenous psychological construct. Interamerican Journal of Psychology, 45(1), 29–38. https://doi.org/10.30849/rip/ijp.v45i1.134

64.

Scheyerl

Siqueira

(2008). O Brasil pelo olhar do outro: representações de estrangeiros sobre os brasileiros de hoje. Trabalhos em Lingüística Aplicada, 47(2), 375–391. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-18132008000200007

65.

Schwarcz

L. M.

Starling

H. M.

(2015). Brasil: Uma biografia [Brazil: A biography]. Companhia das Letras. https://www.companhiadasletras.com.br/livro/9788535925661/brasil-uma-biografia

66.

Siqueira

T. S.

de Souza

E. K. G.

Martins-Filho

P. R.

Silva

J. R. S.

Gurgel

R. Q.

Cuevas

L. E.

Santos

V. S.

(2022). Clinical characteristics and risk factors for maternal deaths due to COVID-19 in Brazil: A nationwide population-based cohort study. Journal of Travel Medicine, 29(3), taab199. https://doi.org/10.1093/jtm/taab199

67.

Smith

P. B.

Huang

H. J.

Harb

Torres

(2012). How distinctive are indigenous ways of achieving influence? A comparative study of guanxi, wasta, jeitinho, and “pulling strings”. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 43(1), 135–150. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022110381430

68.

Smith

P. B.

Milfont

T. L.

Hauck Filho

(2023). Social psychological studies of Latin American cultures with particular reference to Brazil. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 5(4), 141–153. https://doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1182

69.

Sousa

M. M. M.

(2020). Valores humanos e jeitinho brasileiro: Uma análise da transmissão de pais para filhos [Human values and the Brazilian jeitinho: An analysis of transmission from parents to children]. Universidade Federal do Ceará. Programa de Pós-Graduação em Psicologia.

70.

Stevenson

(2020). They called her Angela. Journal of African American History, 105(4), 673–693. https://doi.org/10.1086/710998

71.

Triandis

H. C.

Marín

Lisansky

Betancourt

(1984). Simpatía as a cultural script of Hispanics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47(6), 1363–1375. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.47.6.1363

72.

Uchoa

D. M.

(1947). Mitomania como defesa num caso de personalidade histérica. Arquivos de Neuro-Psiquiatria, 5(3), 299–309. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0004-282X1947000300007

73.

Uehara

Button

Saunders

Araújo

Falcous

Davids

(2021). Malandragem and ginga: Socio-cultural constraints on the development of expertise and skills in Brazilian football. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching, 16(3), 622–635. https://doi.org/10.1177/1747954120976271

74.

Zanon

Araujo

Hutz

C. S.

(2019). The relevance of the Big Five model to students' adaptation to the academic environment personality and academic experiences. Psico, 50(4), Article e31599. https://doi.org/10.15448/1980-8623.2019.4.31599

75.

Zimmermann

(2009). Law and society in Brazil: The prevailing perceptions of law in Brazilian society. International Journal of Private Law, 2(1), 15–30. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJPL.2009.021510

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.36 MB

0.12 MB

Brazilian jeitinho : Historical development,current research,and its impact on personality assessment

Abstract

Keywords

Brazilian jeitinho roots: A brief and subversive history of Brazil

Indigenous Brazil

Slavery in Brazil

The colonization process

An overview of Brazil’s demographic, political, and economic situation

Perceptions about the “typical” Brazilian and Malandragem

The history of personality psychology in Brazil

Brazilian jeitinho

Jeitinho and the dark tetrad traits of personality

Brazilian jeitinho and its implications for personality assessment

Personality assessment in Brazil

Why jeitinho matters?

Possible ways to investigate it

Conclusion

Supplemental Material

Supplemental Material - Brazilian jeitinho: Historical development, current research, and its impact on personality assessment

Supplemental Material

Supplemental Material - Brazilian jeitinho: Historical development, current research, and its impact on personality assessment

Footnotes

Author note

Acknowledgements

Author contributions

Declaration of conflicting interests

Funding

ORCID iDs

Data accessibility statement

Supplemental Material

Notes

References

Supplementary Material