Personality and Individual Differences 72 (2015) 112–116

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Personality and Individual Differences
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/paidCompetition, autonomy, and prestige: Mechanisms throughwhich the Dark Triad predict job satisfaction q
Peter K. Jonason a,⇑, Serena Wee b, Norman P. Li bab

University of Western Sydney, Australia
Singapore Management University, Singapore

a r t i c l e

i n f oArticle history:
Received 14 December 2013
Received in revised form 14 August 2014
Accepted 18 August 2014

Keywords:
Narcissism
Psychopathy
Machiavellianism
Dark TriadJob satisfaction
Workplace climatea b s t r a c t
Organizational researchers increasingly recognize the need to consider the Dark Triad traits (i.e.,
psychopathy, Machiavellianism, and narcissism) when explaining undesirable work outcomes (e.g., counterproductive behaviors). However, little research has focused on the motivations of those who actually
hold the traits. In this study (N = 361) we examined how the Dark Triad traits predispose individuals toperceive situations as competitive, prestigious, and comprised of restrictions (i.e., autonomy) which
differentially predict job satisfaction. Individuals high on psychopathy and Machiavellianism perceived
their workplaces as competitive, whereas individuals high on narcissism perceived their workplaces asprestigious and with fewer restrictions. Sex differences in perceptions were fully mediated by psychopathy and Machiavellianism. We discuss our results from an Evolutionary Industrial/Organization Psychology framework.
Ó 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
In parallel with the public exposure of Enron, Lehman Brothers,
Worldcom, Freddie Mac, Bernie Madoff, and a host of other multibillion dollar fraud cases, attention has recently been drawn to therole of the Dark Triad traits (i.e., psychopathy, narcissism, andMachiavellianism; Paulhus & Williams, 2002) in Industrial/Organizational (I/O) Psychology (O’Boyle, Forsyth, Banks, & McDaniels,
2012; Spain, Harms, & Leberton, 2014). These traits are characterized by entitlement, superiority, dominance (i.e., narcissism), glibsocial charm, manipulativeness (i.e., Machiavellianism), callous
social attitudes, impulsivity, and interpersonal antagonism (i.e.,
psychopathy), and numerous research studies have accentuatedtheir deleterious role in the workplace (Boddy, 2010; Galperin,
Bennett, & Aquino, 2010; Rosenthal & Pittinsky, 2006). However,research on the Dark Triad traits has generally examined the negative consequences of such traits in the workplace—how ‘‘bad
apples’’ spoil the bushel for everyone else—this focus may have
led to an imbalance in our knowledge about the Dark Triad traits
in various domains including the workplace (Judge & LePine,q
This study was funded by a seed grant to the ﬁrst author from the University ofWestern Sydney.
⇑ Corresponding author. Address: School of Social Sciences and Psychology,
University of Western Sydney, Milperra, NSW 2214, Australia. Tel.: +61 (02) 9772
6447; fax: +61 (02) 9772 6757.
E-mail address: p.jonason@uws.edu.au (P.K. Jonason).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.08.026
0191-8869/Ó 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

2007, chap. 20). That is, we know virtually nothing about the speciﬁc tendencies and dispositions linked to the Dark Triad traits that
may motivate and allow such individuals to operate in the workplace (Jonason, Wee, Li, & Jackson, 2014).
This study examines the Dark Triad traits from the latter
perspective by examining the functional value of these traits inindividuals. Speciﬁcally, this study focused on how perceptions ofwork environments are associated with the Dark Triad traits. We
examined the congruence hypothesis that people who better ﬁt
the work environment will be more satisﬁed with the job(Kristof, 1996). This study contributes to the literature in at least
two ways. First, by focusing on the potential positive outcomesof Dark Triad traits, we extend the little research in this area
(Judge & LePine, 2007). Second, in contrast to the largely descriptive work that currently dominates research on the Dark Triad
traits; we articulate a view of the Dark Triad traits as evolved
psychological mechanisms that may be beneﬁcial in some circumstances (Jonason, Wee, & Li, 2014).
From an evolutionary perspective (Buss, 1995), traits that help
an individual survive and reproduce tend to confer more beneﬁts
than costs. These traits tend to motivate individuals to seek acceptance, approval, and popularity (i.e., to get along) and also to seek
power, status, and control (i.e., to get ahead; Hogan, 1983). But
getting along and getting ahead can be incompatible goals. Whilemost people seek an acceptable balance between these goals, thosehigh on the Dark Triad traits enact a strategy where they eschew

P.K. Jonason et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 72 (2015) 112–116

the former for the latter (Jonason, Slomski, & Partyka, 2012;
Jonason & Webster, 2012).
The Dark Triad traits may facilitate the effective and unremorseful exploitation of others for personal gain (Jonason &Krause, 2013; Jonason, Lyons, Bethell, & Ross, 2013). Such a
strategy may cost individuals through ostracism or retaliation.
However, the unique combination of traits may allow such individuals to operate undetected or otherwise unchallenged – forinstance, glib social charm and cunning may allow such individuals
to be particular adept at deceiving others and avoiding blame(Jonason, Slomski, et al., 2012; Jonason & Webster, 2012). Thus,
potential costs may be minimized at times and may be sufﬁciently
low or irregular to allow an exploitative strategy to be adaptive forsome individuals (Buss, 1995).
Underlying much of applied psychology is the presumptionthat job satisfaction results from a correspondence between theneeds of an individual and what is supplied by the workplace(Edwards, Caplan, & Van Harrison, 2001). When personality characteristics are taken to exemplify individual’s needs, and work
climate is taken to exemplify organizational supplies (Kristof,
1996), ﬁt would, by deﬁnition, imply a more satisﬁed individual(Edwards & Shipp, 2007). Because individuals high on the Dark
Triad traits seek power, control, and status, and generally shunacceptance, approval, and popularity, as a ﬁrst step toward
directly assessing the functional value of the Dark Triad traits
in the workplace, we test the overall hypothesis that individuals
high on one or more of the Dark Triad traits would tend to be
more satisﬁed in those environments that they perceive supply
them with opportunities to gain power, status, and control. Thus,in this study, we measured perceptions of the work climate(Brown, Cron, & Slocum, 1998; Hackman & Oldman, 1976)
related to power (i.e., competition), control (i.e., restrictions
placed on them), and status (i.e., prestige), and examined if individuals high on the Dark Triad traits were more satisﬁed in suchenvironments. Then we examine whether these perceptions predict job satisfaction.
Personality traits may systematically color the way individuals
perceive their world, including their workplace. The Dark Triad
traits should, therefore, be associated with unique patterns ofworkplace perceptions. First, narcissists are driven by the needs
to feel in control and prestigious (Raskin & Terry, 1988) but in mostworkplace environments they are likely to not fully satisfy thesedesires. These individuals may facultatively deceive themselvesin order to go work, thereby viewing their work as disproportionately low on restrictions and high in prestige. Second, psychopathy
may align individuals with jobs that lack much prestige; it appears
correlated with preferences for more hands-on and practical jobs
(Jonason, Wee, Li, Jackson, 2014). This may relate to a tendency
to more-or-less accurately perceive their jobs as low in prestige.
Third, psychopathy and Machiavellianism may orient individuals
to perceive their world as competitive (through disagreeableness;
Sibley & Duckitt, 2010). In psychopathy, this may be a functionof its characteristic aggressiveness (Jonason & Webster, 2010). In
Machiavellianism, this may be a function of its approach-orientation to power (Christie & Geis, 1970). Both may translate into
associations between the traits and people’s ratings of their workplace as competitive. Fourth, personality traits may create biases inperceptions which then translate into job outcomes like satisfaction and the frequency of which one considers quitting one’s job(Edwards et al., 2001; Kristof, 1996). Therefore, we test a Structural
Equation Model where the Dark Triad traits predict workplace perceptions which then predict job satisfaction/thoughts of quitting.
In addition to the above, we expect job satisfaction/thoughts ofquitting to be related to perceptions of (1) limited restrictions,(2) job prestige, and (3) limited competitiveness (Hackman &Oldman, 1976).

113

Not only should personality traits be correlated with particular
perceptions of one’s workplace, men and women may also differ on
at least one perceptual factor: workplace competitiveness. Evolutionary accounts of sex differences highlight that men can beneﬁt
more from competition than women can (Wilson & Daly, 1985),
something seen in sex differences in the Dark Triad traits(Jonason, Li, & Czarna, 2013). That is, because women (and all
mammalian females) bear the majority of the cost of reproduction(i.e., gestation, nursing, and rearing), they tend to be the reproductively more valuable sex and have a lower ceiling on the number ofoffspring they can have (Geary, 2010). In contrast, members of theless valuable sex (men, or more generally, male mammals) have amuch higher reproductive ceiling (limited only by the number of
viable female sexual partners) and stand to gain more from risktaking, and have evolved to be intrasexually competitive in orderto obtain access to the more valuable sex (Geary, 2010; Wilson &Daly, 1985). Therefore, it seems reasonable that men’s greater perceptions of competitiveness in the workplace may in part be
related to their greater alignment with the Dark Triad traits, whichenable an especially competitive mindset centered aroundachieving status. Therefore, we test a mediation model whereby
sex differences in perceptions of one’s workplace as competitive
were a function of individual differences in the Dark Triad traits.
Researchers have repeatedly highlighted the undesirable natureof the Dark Triad traits in the workplace (O’Boyle et al., 2012; Spainet al., 2014). This is implicitly motivated by company’s interests(i.e., the ‘‘bottom’’ line). However, this tendency to focus ongroup-level outcomes may be in error and creates an imbalancein what we understand about these traits (Jonason, Wee, Li,
2014; Jonason, Wee, Li, Jackson, 2014). Personality traits—especially the Dark Triad traits—may serve individuals more than they
serve groups (Jonason, Webster, Schmitt, Li, & Crysel, 2012). Where
personality traits align with group outcomes, that is all well andgood, but this should not be taken as evidence that focusing ongroup-level outcomes is best for understanding personality traits.
Understanding how personality traits function in individual’s lives
is an important area to examine for even the most socially undesirable personality traits. In this study, we provide unique evidence tounderstand the way the Dark Triad traits are linked to three
perceptions of workplace climate and how those perceptions
may be associated with job satisfaction.
2. Method
2.1. Participants and procedure
The sample was composed of 361 employed Americans (56%male), aged 23–67 years old (M = 33.70, SD = 9.82) with an average
tenure at their job of 58.63 months (SD = 59.33, Range = 1–518)
who were paid US$1 for their completion of a series of measures
advertised on MTurk. The average participant was employed fulltime (70%), making between US$25,000–$49,999/year (38%), andwere ranked as an employee (70%).1
2.2. Measures
The Dark Triad traits were measured with the Short Dark Triad(Jones & Paulhus, 2014). The measure is composed of 27 items
measuring Machiavellianism (e.g., ‘‘It’s not wise to tell yoursecrets.’’), psychopathy (e.g., ‘‘Payback needs to be quick andnasty.’’), and narcissism (e.g., ‘‘People see me as a natural leader.’’)where participants report their agreement with each statement
1
Data from Jonason, Wee, Li, Jackson (2014) was trimmed to remove missing datain the work-related variables in this study.

114

P.K. Jonason et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 72 (2015) 112–116

Table 1
Overall descriptive statistics and sex differences for the Dark Triad and job factors.
Mean (SD)tdOverall

Women

Men

Dark Triad
Psychopathy
Machiavellianism
Narcissism

2.02 (0.63)
3.03 (0.57)
2.69 (0.63)

1.84 (0.60)
2.88 (0.55)
2.60 (0.57)

2.18 (0.62)
3.15 (0.55)
2.77 (0.67)

5.18**
4.52**
2.53*

0.55
0.48
0.27

Job Factors
Autonomy
Prestige
CompetivenessJob satisfaction
Thinking of quitting

2.68 (1.06)
3.46 (0.73)
2.53 (0.79)
3.56 (1.09)
1.88 (1.03)

2.63 (1.02)
3.45 (0.76)
2.39 (0.76)
3.57 (1.16)
1.92 (1.09)

2.72 (1.09)
3.47 (0.70)
2.64 (0.79)
3.56 (1.05)
1.84 (0.98)

0.85
0.27
3.04**
0.08
0.70

0.09
0.03
0.32
0.01
0.07

Note: d is Cohen’s d for effect size.
*
p < .05.
**
p < .01.

(1 = strongly disagree; 5 = strongly agree). Items for each scale wereaveraged to create measures of Machiavellianism (Cronbach’s
a = .79), narcissism (a = .79), and psychopathy (a = .79).2
In order to measure prestige (Herrbach, Mignonac, & Gatignon,
2004) we asked participants (e.g., ‘‘People in my community thinkhighly of my organization.’’) about their agreement (1 = strongly
disagree; 5 = strongly agree) with six statements. We averaged
items together to create an index of perceptions of workplaceprestige (a = .84).
Workplace competitiveness (Mael & Ashforth, 1992) was
measured with eight items (e.g., ‘‘The competition at my company
is intense.’’). Again we inquired about agreement (1 = strongly disagree; 5 = strongly agree) with the statements. The corresponding
items were averaged to create an index of perceptions of workplace competitiveness (a = .88).
In order to measure autonomy, we used the Factual Autonomy
Scale (Spector & Fox, 2003) which has two parts, both measuring
the number of restrictions individuals feel are placed upon onthem in the workplace. The scale measures how often (1 = never;
6 = always) participants have to ask permission to do things liketake a lunch break or a vacation (7 items) and how often (1 = never;
6 = always) others at their jobs order them around (3 items). We
treated both parts as a single measure of the amount of restrictionsindividuals perceive at their work (a = .85).
Last, we measured ‘‘job satisfaction’’ with two single items. We
asked how satisﬁed individuals were with their jobs (1 = not at all;
5 = very much). We asked how often individuals contemplated
quitting their job (1 = not at all; 5 = very much). These items werecorrelated (r(360) = .62, p < .01). We treated these as independentmeasures of ‘‘job satisfaction’’ for more detail given this modest
correlation.3
3. Results
We replicated sex differences in the Dark Triad traits and foundmen rated their workplace as more competitive than women did(Table 1). We correlated the Dark Triad and perceptions of workplace climate using zero-order correlations and standard multiple
regression to control for the overlap of the three traits (Table 2).
Psychopathy was negatively linked to perceived company prestige
and positively correlated with competitiveness. On the other hand,
2
Psychopathy was correlated with narcissism (r(360) = .30, p < .01) and Machiavellianism (r(360) = .45, p < .01) and narcissism was correlated with Machiavellianism(r(360) = .14, p < .01).
3
Restrictions were correlated with prestige (r(360) = .16, p < .01) and competitiveness (r(360) = .11, p < .05). Competiveness and prestige were correlated(r(360) = .11, p < .05).

Machiavellianism was associated with perceived workplace competitiveness, less job satisfaction, and more frequently thinking
about quitting. Narcissism was linked to perceived prestige of one’s
company and reporting few workplace restrictions. Restrictions
was correlated with quitting thoughts (r(360) = .20, p < .01) andjob satisfaction (r(360) = .19, p < .01). Prestige was correlatedwith quitting thoughts (r(360) = .38, p < .01) and job satisfaction(r(360) = .48, p < .01). Competiveness was correlated with quitting
thoughts (r(360) = .18, p < .01) and job satisfaction (r(360) = .22,
p < .01).
In order to test for mediation, we ran a hierarchical multiple
regression with the sex of the participant in Step 1 and the three
Dark Triad traits in Step 2. We found evidence of full mediation(DR2 = .12, F(1, 356) = 15.90, p < .01) such that the direct path(b = .16, p < .01) for the sex of the participant became nonsigniﬁcant when the Dark Triad traits was added (b = .06). Thiseffect was localized to Machiavellianism (b = .23, p < .01) andpsychopathy (b = .17, p < .01).
In order to test whether job satisfaction/thoughts of quitting
were a function of a pairing of personality and the (perceived)
environment we created nine cross-products of each Dark Triad
trait and each work climate measure. No interactions weresigniﬁcant when we included the main effects in hierarchicalregressions. However, when we just included the interactions wefound a number of things. The interaction of Machiavellianismand perceptions of workplace competitiveness signiﬁcantly predicted job satisfaction (b = .27, p < .01) and thoughts of quitting(b = .30, p < .01). The interaction of Machiavellianism and autonomy signiﬁcantly predicted satisfaction (b = .30, p < .01) andthoughts of quitting (b = .41, p < .01). The interaction of narcissism
and perceptions of workplace prestige signiﬁcantly predicted satisfaction (b = .29, p < .01) and thoughts of quitting (b = .23, p < .01).
The interaction of Machiavellianism and workplace prestige

Table 2
Zero-order and standardized regression weights using the Dark Triad to predict job
factors.
Job Factorsr (b)Machiavellianism

Restrictions
Prestige
CompetivenessJob satisfaction
Thinking of quitting.10 (.11).14** ( .09)
.33** (.24**).15** ( .14*).14* (.16**)

Narcissism.10 ( .13*).12* (.18**).14** (.05).06 (.09).06 ( .08)

Psychopathy.03 (.02).16** ( .18**).30** (.18**).09 ( .06)
.03 ( .02)

Note: Correlations did not differ as a function of participant’s sex when p < .001.
*
p < .05.
**
p < .01.

115

P.K. Jonason et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 72 (2015) 112–116

signiﬁcantly predicted satisfaction (b = .14, p < .01). These results
partially support the person–situation ﬁt model of job satisfaction.
To better understand these associations we tested the aforementioned Structural Equation Model (including the signiﬁcant paths
only) where the Dark Triad traits predict perceptions of the workplace climate and those perceptions predict job satisfaction andrates of thinking about quitting. The resulting model (Fig. 1) provided a good ﬁt (v2(14) = 22.58, p < .01, v2/df = 1.61, NFI = .96,
CFI = .96, RMSEA = .04 [90% CI = .00, .07], p-closeness of ﬁt = .65),
suggesting the Dark Triad traits were indirectly linked to job satisfaction and rates of considering quitting through perceptions of
one’s work climate. Indeed, in two hierarchical multiple regressions accounting for job satisfaction and thoughts of quitting, theDark Triad traits (Step 2) accounted for no unique variance above
the workplace climate variables (Step 1).
4. Discussion
Studying the role of personality traits has a long history in I/O
psychology including studying the ‘‘darker’’ aspects of personality
variation (Hakstian, Farrell, & Tweed, 2002; Hogan & Kaiser,2005), however, when the darker aspects are studied research usually focuses on group-level outcomes (O’Boyle et al., 2012; Spainet al., 2014). We have provided some initial details about how
the Dark Triad traits might relate to individual-level workplaceoutcomes as a function of (perceived) workplace climate and job
satisfaction. Instead of assuming these traits are bad and studying
their dysfunction (O’Boyle et al., 2012), we have tried to provide aless biased assessment of the Dark Triad in the workplace throughan Evolutionary interpretation of Industrial/Organizational psychology (Jonason, Wee, Li, 2014; Jonason, Wee, Li, Jackson, 2014).
This study made a number of contributions. First, for the ﬁrst
time we have documented how scores on the Dark Triad traits
are related to three different workplace climate variables. We
assessed perceptions of workplace competitiveness, prestige, andautonomy (i.e., restrictions). Each of the Dark Triad traits had
unique links to these three factors. Machiavellianism and psychopathy were associated with perceiving their workplace as competitiveness. This link may be a function of the competitive orientation
those high on these traits have (Jonason, Li, & Teicher, 2010). Narcissism was linked to a feeling one worked at a prestigious job withfew restrictions. Narcissistic individuals are concerned with being
superior to others and prestigious (Raskin & Terry, 1988). In orderto get up and go to work every morning at a job that likely is limited in prestige and autonomy, those high on narcissism may

PERSONALITY
Narcissism.15

delude themselves into thinking their job is both prestigious andlight in restrictions. While it is possible those who are high in narcissism might systematically prefer such jobs (Jonason, Wee, Li,
Jackson, 2014), there is no reason (1) to think those people
disproportionately get those jobs or (2) that we disproportionately
sampled individuals who occupy autonomous and prestigious jobs.
Last, those high on psychopathy reported a feeling their job was
not all that prestigious. This may be a function of the types of jobs
they prefer and potentially inhabit. Those high in psychopathy
appear to prefer realistic and practical jobs (Jonason, Wee, Li,
Jackson, 2014). These jobs tend to not be characterized with large
amounts of prestige (e.g., construction work, electrician) as they
are laborer and blue-collar (and no collar) positions.
Second, we tested the fundamental presumption in I/O psychology that job satisfaction results from a correspondence between
the needs of an individual and what is supplied by the workplace(Kristof-Brown, Zimmerman, & Johnson, 2005). When personality
characteristics are taken to exemplify individual’s needs, and work
climate is taken to exemplify organizational supplies (Kristof,
1996), ﬁt would, by deﬁnition, imply a more satisﬁed individual(Edwards & Shipp, 2007). When those characterized by high ratesof Machiavellianism feel they are in highly prestigious and highly
autonomous jobs they are generally satisﬁed with their jobs. In
addition, those high on narcissism reported more job satisfaction
when they feel they are in prestigious jobs. However, in contrast
to this, when those high on Machiavellianism felt they were in acompetitive workplace they were generally dissatisﬁed with theirjobs. This may reveal that the positive beneﬁts of ﬁt for those highin the Dark Triad revolve around autonomy and prestige and notcompetitiveness. Competitiveness may be stressful for all individuals despite any disposition towards it they might have. Competiveness at its extremes may be deleterious for companies andgroups in that it undermines the mutualistic, long-term nature of
the groups thereby undermining the efﬁcacy of said group. The
competitive-minded person may actually prefer a less competitiveenvironment in order to enable job satisfaction but they may
simultaneously
andparadoxicallyperceive
competition
everywhere.
Third, sex differences in perceptions of workplace competitiveness (Hershcovis et al., 2007) might be facilitated by scores on the
Dark Triad. The Dark Triad traits might provide ‘‘competition colored glasses’’, biasing the perceptions of some men to see theirworld and their jobs in competitive terms; see opportunities foradvancement everywhere through their individualistic andcompetitive approach to social interactions (Jonason et al., 2010).

WORKPLACE CLIMATEJOB FACTORS-.12
Restrictions

.18
.30

Thoughts of quitting-.11
Psychopathy

.45

-.22

Prestige
.12

.46

.19
Competitiveness
Machiavellianism

-.11

-.56
Job Satisfaction

-.17

.24

χ2(14) = 22.58, p < .01, χ2/df = 1.61, NFI = .96, CFI = .96, RMSEA = .04 [90%CI = .00-.07], p-closeness of fit = .65
Fig. 1. Structural Equation Model to describe the relationships between the Dark Triad traits, perceptions of workplace climate, and job satisfaction/frequency of considering
quitting. All links signiﬁcant at p < .03.

116

P.K. Jonason et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 72 (2015) 112–116

This perception—however accurate it may be—may facilitate thefast life strategy those high in the Dark Triad embody (Jonason,
Webster, et al., 2012). This bias would prime individuals to compete leading to both positive and negative outcomes dependingon the situation. It is likely this bias is responsible for numerous
counterproductive workplace outcomes (O’Boyle et al., 2012;
Spain et al., 2014).
Fourth, we presented a Structural Equation Model to accountfor the way the Dark Triad might relate to job satisfaction (measured two ways). Although we initially reported links between
Machiavellianism and job satisfaction (Table 2), subsequent analyses conﬁrmed our contention that the Dark Triad are indirectly
related to job satisfaction through perceptions of workplaceautonomy, prestige, and competiveness. Increased autonomy andprestige were linked to more job satisfaction but competitivenesswas linked to less satisfaction. In this case personality traits likethe Dark Triad do not directly bear on individual-level workplaceoutcomes but they may facilitate a way of perceiving their work
environments that may facilitate or attenuate job satisfaction.
5. Limitations and conclusions
This study had a number of limitations. First, the measure of the
Dark Triad traits does not allow for the examination of lower-order
facets of narcissism and psychopathy (Jonason, Jones, & Lyons,2013). Such analyses will provide ﬁner grained nuance to the relationships reported here. Second, those high on the Dark Triad traits
tend to have negative views of job satisfaction, in part because of
their negative affect (O’Boyle et al., 2012). By failing to control
for negative affect, we may have limited our results. Third, we
relied on an internet sample. Future research would beneﬁt froma more focused study of employees in speciﬁc companies or ﬁelds.
Most work on the Dark Triad traits implicitly assumes they are
unequivocally bad, leading researchers to focus on group-level outcomes in the workplace (Jonason, Wee, Li, 2014). In contrast, byadopting an evolutionary paradigm (Buss, 1995) we have provided
individual-level detail about perceptual/cognitive biases linked to
the Dark Triad traits that may relate to workplace outcomes. We
encourage researchers to take a step back from their assumptions
about the Dark Triad traits to provide less biased detail about therole of these traits in I/O psychology.
References
Boddy, C. R. P. (2010). Corporate psychopaths and organizational type. Journal of
Public Affairs, 10, 300–312.
Brown, S. P., Cron, W. L., & Slocum, J. W. (1998). Effects of trait competitiveness andperceived intraorganizational competition on sales-person goal setting andperformance. Journal of Marketing, 62, 88–98.
Buss, D. M. (1995). Evolutionary psychology: A new paradigm for psychologicalscience. Psychological Inquiry, 6, 1–30.
Christie, R., & Geis, F. L. (1970). Studies in Machiavellianism. New York, NY: Academic
Press.
Edwards, J. R., Caplan, R. D., & Van Harrison, R. (2001). Person–environment ﬁttheory. In C. L. Cooper (Ed.), Theories of organizational stress (pp. 28–67). Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Edwards, J. R., & Shipp, A. J. (2007). The relationship between person–environmentﬁt and outcomes: An integrative theoretical framework. In C. Ostroff & T. A.
Judge (Eds.), Perspectives on organizational ﬁt (pp. 209–258). New York:
Lawrence Erlbaum.
Galperin, B. L., Bennett, R. J., & Aquino, K. (2010). Status differentiation and theprotean self: A social-cognitive model of unethical behavior in organizations.
Journal of Business Ethics, 98, 407–424.
Geary, D. C. (2010). Male, female: The evolution of human sex differences (2nd ed.).
Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Hackman, J. R., & Oldman, G. R. (1976). Motivation through the design of work: A
test of a theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16. 250–179.

Hakstian, R., Farrell, S., & Tweed, R. (2002). The assessment of counterproductive
tendencies by means of the California Psychological Inventory. International
Journal of Selection and Assessment, 10, 58–86.
Herrbach, O., Mignonac, K., & Gatignon, A. L. (2004). Exploring the role of perceived
external prestige in managers’ turnover intentions. International Journal of
Human Resource Management, 15, 1390–1407.
Hershcovis, M. S., Turner, N., Barling, J., Arnold, K. A., Dupré, K. E., Inness, M., et al.
(2007). Predicting workplace aggression: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 92, 228–238.
Hogan, R. (1983). A socioanalytic theory of personality. In M. M. Page (Ed.), 1982
Nebraska Symposium on Motivation (pp. 55–89). Lincoln: University of Nebraska
Press.
Hogan, R., & Kaiser, R. B. (2005). What we know about leadership. Review of General
Psychology, 9, 169–180.
Jonason, P. K., Jones, A., & Lyons, M. (2013). Creatures of the night: Chronotype andthe Dark Triad traits. Personality and Individual Differences, 55, 538–541.
Jonason, P. K., & Krause, L. (2013). The emotional deﬁcits associated with the Dark
Triad traits: Cognitive empathy, affective empathy, and alexithymia. Personality
and Individual Differences, 55, 532–537.
Jonason, P. K., Li, N. P., & Czarna, A. Z. (2013). Quick and dirty: Some psychosocial
costs associated with the Dark Triad in three countries. Evolutionary Psychology,
11, 172–185.
Jonason, P. K., Li, N. P., & Teicher, E. A. (2010). Who is James Bond?: The Dark Triadas an agentic social style. Individual Differences Research, 8, 111–120.
Jonason, P. K., Lyons, M., Bethell, E., & Ross, R. (2013). Different routes to limited
empathy in the sexes: Examining the links between the Dark Triad andempathy. Personality and Individual Differences, 57, 572–576.
Jonason, P. K., Slomski, S., & Partyka, J. (2012). The Dark Triad at work: How toxic
employees get their way. Personality and Individual Differences, 52, 449–453.
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.
Jonason, P. K., & Webster, G. D. (2010). The Dirty Dozen: A concise measure of the
Dark Triad. Psychological Assessment, 22, 420–432.
Jonason, P. K., Webster, G. W., Schmitt, D. P., Li, N. P., & Crysel, L. (2012). The
antihero in popular culture: A life history theory of the Dark Triad. Review ofGeneral Psychology, 16, 192–199.
Jonason, P. K., Wee, S., & Li, N. P. (2014). Thinking bigger and better about ‘‘bad
apples’’: Evolutionary Industrial/Organizational Psychology and the Dark Triad.
Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 7,
117–121.
Jonason, P. K., Wee, S., Li, N. P., & Jackson, C. (2014). Occupational niches and the
Dark Triad traits. Personality and Individual Differences, 69, 119–123.
Jones, D. N., & Paulhus, D. L. (2014). Introducing the Short Dark Triad (SD3): A brief
measure of dark personality traits. Assessment, 21, 28–41.
Judge, T. A., & LePine, J. A. (2007). The bright and dark sides of personality:
Implications for personnel selection in individual and team contexts. In J.
Langan-Fox, C. Cooper, & R. Klimoski (Eds.), Research companion to thedysfunctional workplace: Management challenges and symptoms (pp. 332–355).
Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Kristof, A. L. (1996). Person–Organization ﬁt: An integrative review of its
conceptualizations, measurement and implications. Personnel Psychology, 49,
1–49.
Kristof-Brown, A. L., Zimmerman, R. D., & Johnson, E. C. (2005). Consequences ofindividuals’ ﬁt at work: A meta-analysis of person–job, person–organization,
person–group, and person–supervisor ﬁt. Personnel Psychology, 58, 281–342.
Mael, F., & Ashforth, B. E. (1992). Alumni and their alma mater: A partial test of thereformulated model of organizational identiﬁcation. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 13, 103–123.
O’Boyle, E. H., Forsyth, D. R., Banks, G. C., & McDaniels, M. A. (2012). A meta-analysisof the Dark Triad and work behavior: A Social Exchange perspective. Journal ofApplied Psychology, 97, 557–579.
Paulhus, D. L., & Williams, K. M. (2002). The dark triad of personality: Narcissism,
Machiavellianism, and psychopathy. Journal of Research in Personality, 36,
556–563.
Raskin, R. N., & Terry, H. (1988). A principal components analysis of the Narcissistic
Personality Inventory and further evidence of its construct validity. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 890–902.
Rosenthal, S. A., & Pittinsky, T. L. (2006). Narcissistic leadership. The Leadership
Quarterly, 17, 617–633.
Sibley, C. G., & Duckitt, J. (2010). Big-Five personality, social worldviews, andidealogical attitudes: Further tests of a dual process cognitive-motivationalmodel. Journal of Social Psychology, 149, 545–561.
Spain, S. M., Harms, P., & Leberton, J. M. (2014). The dark side of personality at work.
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35, S41–S60.
Spector, P. E., & Fox, S. (2003). Reducing subjectivity in the assessment of the job
environment: Development of the Factual Autonomy Scale (FAS). Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 24, 417–432.
Wilson, M., & Daly, M. (1985). Competitiveness, risk-taking, and violence: The
young male syndrome. Ethology and Sociobiology, 6, 59–73.