How you think about trust, leverage, and the truth when interests collide. A Machiavellian pattern is a style of expectation, not a job description.
About this test
Christie and Geis built the MACH-IV to capture a Machiavellian worldview: a skeptical view of human motives, tactics that treat frankness as optional, and a morality that bends toward advantage. Later work places it beside narcissism and psychopathy traits in a 'dark triad,' while noting that the three are not the same. These items are original paraphrases of the views, tactics, and morality clusters. Agreeing with a realist item is not evidence that you cheat, and disagreeing is not evidence that you are naive.
Question 1 of 11
What this test asks
Most people are looking out for themselves first, and the rest is decoration.
It is naive to expect people to keep faith once their interests move.
I assume good faith until someone shows me otherwise.
Goodwill is often a tactic, so I give trust slowly.
If a softer story will get cooperation, I will tell the softer story.
I decide how frank to be only after I have sized up what the other person wants.
I would rather lose a negotiation than hide a fact the other person needs.
In a conflict, the useful question is who holds the leverage, not who is owed the truth.
Cutting a corner is reasonable when the rule is mostly about appearances.
People who show their real hopes too early put themselves at a disadvantage.
Honesty is worth a real cost, even when a lie would end the meeting faster.
Coach
Ask about a skill
Log in to use the coach. A crisis message still gets resources.