Personality and Individual Differences xxx (2014) xxx–xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Personality and Individual Differences

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/paid

Is there a ‘‘dark intelligence’’? Emotional intelligence is used by dark

personalities to emotionally manipulate others
Ursa K.J. Nagler a,⇑,1, Katharina J. Reiter a,⇑,1, Marco R. Furtner a, John F. Rauthmann b
a
Institute of Psychology, Leopold-Franzens Universität Innsbruck, Austria
b
Institute of Psychology, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Germany

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Potential ‘‘darker sides’’ of socio-emotional intelligence (SEI) have been repeatedly noted. We examine
Available online xxxx whether SEI is associated with emotional manipulation of others when used by dark personalities (Dark
Triad: narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy). In N = 594 participants, narcissism was positively,
Keywords: Machiavellianism negatively, and psychopathy positively and negatively associated with SEI. Moreover,
Emotional manipulation narcissism and psychopathy moderated links between facets of emotional intelligence and emotional
Dark Triad manipulation. Findings are discussed in context of a ‘‘dark intelligence’’ used for malicious intents.
Narcissism
Ó 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Machiavellianism
Psychopathy
Emotional intelligence
Social intelligence

1. Introduction & Sachse, 2010), including communication competence (e.g., Diez,

1984), social intelligence (e.g., Cantor & Kihlstrom, 1987; Gardner,
Are social and emotional skills always used for good intentions? 1993; Guilford, 1967; Thorndike, 1920), and emotional intelligence
Potential ‘‘dark sides’’ of socio-emotional intelligence (SEI), such as (e.g., Mayer & Salovey, 1997; Salovey & Mayer, 1990). Not only
the emotional manipulation of others (Austin, Farrelly, Black, & interpersonal (e.g., encoding and decoding social information)
Moore, 2007), have garnered interest during the last years. None- but also the intrapersonal skills (e.g., regulating own emotions)
theless, SEI is widely regarded as adaptive, desirable, and positive are considered important. This is also reflected in Riggio’s and Car-
(Grieve & Mahar, 2010; Veselka, Schermer, & Vernon, 2012). ney’s (2003, p. 1) definition of social intelligence (see also Guilford,
Although SEI and emotional manipulation both involve the skill 1967; Mayer & Salovey, 1997; Salovey & Mayer, 1990) as socially
to influence others’ emotions, no empirical association between intelligent individuals are ‘‘skilled in receiving, decoding, and accu-
these two variables could be asserted so far (Austin et al., 2007). rately interpreting emotional and social information from both the
We thus examine in this study under which circumstances SEI is self and from others, and . . . in sending and regulating emotional
associated with emotional manipulation. Due to its callous and and social information appropriate to the interpersonal and situa-
manipulative character (e.g., Jones & Figueredo, 2013; Paulhus & tional circumstances.’’ In this study, we consider these different
Williams, 2002; Veselka et al., 2012), the Dark Triad of narcissism, types of socio-emotional skills.
Machiavellianism, and psychopathy was considered as a possible Social intelligence (SI) dates back to Thorndike’s (1920) distinc-
moderator of relations between SEI and emotional manipulation. tion between perceiving and acting in social settings. According
to him, social intelligence is ‘‘the ability to understand and manage
men and women, boys and girls and to act wisely in human rela-
1.1. Socio-emotional intelligence tions’’ (italics added). As can be gleaned from this early definition,
the concept of SI already included the potential for manipulating
‘‘Socio-emotional intelligence’’ serves as an umbrella term for others by referring to ‘‘managing’’ people. Thus, a potential ‘‘dark
various abilities, skills, aptitudes, and traits (Furtner, Rauthmann, side’’ of social intelligence has already been hinted at.
Emotional intelligence (EI) was first defined by Salovey and
⇑ Corresponding authors. Address: Universität Innsbruck, Institut für Psychologie, Mayer (1990) as the ability to deal with emotions. It has since
Innrain 52, A-6020 Innsbruck, Austria. Tel.: +43 6803242821; fax: +49 gained much attention in popular literature (e.g., Goleman, 1995)
87429653129.
and academic research (e.g., Mayer, Roberts, & Barsade, 2008). EI
E-mail addresses: [email protected] (U.K.J. Nagler), katharina.reiter@ya-
hoo.de (K.J. Reiter). has been concretized and defined quite differently in psychological
1
Ursa Nagler and Katharina Reiter share first authorship. literature which has lent itself to controversial debates about its

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.01.025
0191-8869/Ó 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Please cite this article in press as: Nagler, U. K. J., et al. Is there a ‘‘dark intelligence’’? Emotional intelligence is used by dark personalities to emotionally
manipulate others. Personality and Individual Differences (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.01.025
2 U.K.J. Nagler et al. / Personality and Individual Differences xxx (2014) xxx–xxx

nature. For example, it has been defined as an ability or skill hus & Williams, 2002) which should be associated with less EI. Fur-
(Mayer & Salovey, 1997), trait (Petrides, Vernon, Schermer, & Ves- thermore, Machiavellianism and EI are negatively correlated
elka, 2011), or mixture of both (Mayer et al., 2008). Moreover, EI (Petrides et al., 2011; Veselka et al., 2012; Austin et al., 2007; Ali,
may pertain to the recognition, processing, interpretation, utiliza- Amorim, & Chamorro-Premuzic, 2009), while Machiavellianism
tion, and regulation of either own emotions or of others (Mayer has also been described as a social exploitation strategy that would
et al., 2008). Here, we conceptualize EI as a skill that can be self-re- require a minimum of interpersonal skills to successfully manipu-
ported (Mayer et al., 2008). late others (Jones & Paulhus, 2009; Wilson, Near, & Miller, 1996).
Recent research has started to uncover potential ‘‘dark,’’ dys- Also, psychopathy was found to be positively (Petrides et al.,
functional, or maladaptive aspects of EI in interpersonal relations 2011; Veselka et al., 2012) and negatively related to EI (Copestake,
(e.g., Austin et al., 2007; de Raad, 2005) despite the fact that EI Gray, & Snowden, 2013; Ermer, Kahn, Salovey, & Kiehl, 2012).
appears to be a widely valued and genuinely positive skill (Salovey, Moreover, a lack of empathy is considered as a hallmark of psy-
Mayer, & Caruso, 2002). Austin et al. (2007) have therefore chopathy (Furnham et al., 2013). Taken together, dark personalities
introduced the concept of ‘‘emotional manipulation’’ as the should require SEI to get ahead, but their callous, exploitative ten-
‘‘management’’ of others and their emotions: emotional skills are dencies may obstruct smooth interpersonal navigation. In this
intentionally used to achieve a desired outcome (e.g., to get some- study, we thus investigate whether and how the SEI is associated
one to do something for them). Therefore, emotional skills are with the Dark Triad.
utilized in a strategic and manipulative way to influence others’
emotions.
The constructs of SI and EI show conceptual and empirical over- 2. The current study
laps. First, both are usually beneficial to navigating the social world
(Lopes et al., 2004) and involve decoding others’ interpersonal 2.1. Aims and scope
signals (Mayer et al., 2008). Second, both have been shown to be
positively intercorrelated (Riggio & Carney, 2003). Third, both have This study had several aims. First, we examine associations be-
been linked to ‘‘managing’’ others or ‘‘cleverly’’ interacting in inter- tween SEI and the Dark Triad. Second, we examine associations be-
personal contexts (Kafetsios, Nezlek, & Vassiou, 2011). This may tween SEI and emotional manipulation. We also address under
point to a common ‘‘darker side’’ of both SI and EI. Due to these which circumstances this link exists: Do Dark Triad traits moderate
similarities, we speak of the macro-construct ‘‘socio-emotional associations between SEI and emotional manipulation? It might be
intelligence.’’ the case that, on average, SEI is not associated with emotional
manipulation (see Austin et al., 2007), but only when they are used
1.2. The Dark Triad by dark personalities. Investigating these issues may shed further
light on the mixed findings in extant literature. On the one hand,
The Dark Triad consists of three conceptually distinct, but dark personalities are deemed anti-social with little empathy and
empirically overlapping personality traits (Furnham, Richards, & regard for others. On the other hand, however, they seem to be
Paulhus, 2013; Paulhus & Williams, 2002): narcissism, Machiavel- motivated and adept at deciphering who can be exploited in which
lianism, and psychopathy. The sub-clinical forms of these traits ways (Buss & Chiodo, 1991) which suggests interpersonal skills.
share a callous, manipulative, and exploitative nature (Jonason, This also allows us to elucidate potential ‘‘dark sides’’ of SEI (Austin
Webster, Schmitt, Li, & Crysel, 2012; Jones & Figueredo, 2013; Rau- et al., 2007).
thmann, 2012a). Narcissism is characterized by an overly enhanced
view of the self and feelings of grandiosity, paired with devaluation
of others (Morf & Rhodewalt, 2001). Raskin and Terry (1988) de- 2.2. Hypotheses
scribed narcissism as excessive self-love and selfishness, with the
tendency of disregarding others and a lack of empathy. Machiavel- We formed five hypotheses. First, we hypothesized that narcis-
lianism is characterized by cold and strategic manipulation of oth- sism would show overall positive relations with SEI (Hypothesis 1)
ers (Christie & Geis, 1970). Machiavellians possess an unemotional, as narcissism seems to be the ‘‘brightest’’ member of the Dark Triad
pragmatic, and cynical perspective on life and interpersonal rela- (Rauthmann & Kolar, 2013). Moreover, narcissists have been found
tionships which may be used as a justification for exploiting others to be charming, interesting, and even seductive (Back, Schmukle, &
and acting in immoral ways (Rauthmann, 2012b). Psychopathy is Egloff, 2010; Dufner, Rauthmann, Czarna, & Denissen, 2013) which
characterized by an anti-social behavioral style, impulsive thrill- suggests some form of interpersonal skills. Second, we hypothe-
seeking, cold affect (i.e., the lack of feeling guilt or empathy), and sized that Machiavellianism and psychopathy would show overall
interpersonal manipulation (Hare, 2003; Williams, Nathanson, & negative relations with SEI (Hypothesis 2) as both pertain to ‘‘dar-
Paulhus, 2003). Among the members of the Dark Triad, it can be re- ker’’ aspects of human personality (Rauthmann & Kolar, 2013).
garded as the ‘‘darkest’’ (Rauthmann & Kolar, 2013). Both traits share strong similarities so that it has even proposed
they reflect one and the same trait continuum (McHoskey, Worzel,
1.3. Relations between socio-emotional intelligence and the Dark Triad & Szyarto, 1998). Both are characterized by callousness and a lack
of empathy, suggesting less ability or motivation to attend to
A common thread among the Dark Triad traits is their exploit- others. Third, we hypothesized that all three Dark Triad traits
ative social style at the expense or disregard of others’ welfare would show moderate to strong positive relations with emotional
(Jones & Paulhus, 2011). As such, persons scoring high on the Dark manipulation due to their exploitative nature (Hypothesis 3).
Triad may be prone to manipulating others’ emotions to get their Fourth, we hypothesized that SEI would show overall no or at best
way and push through their self-beneficial agendas. However, are weak positive relations with emotional manipulation (Hypothesis
narcissists, Machiavellians, and psychopaths socially and emotion- 4). Lastly, we hypothesized that the Dark Triad traits may function
ally intelligent? as positive moderators of the link between SEI and emotional
Existing research has produced mixed findings. On the one manipulation (Hypothesis 5). Specifically, the Dark Triad traits
hand, a positive relation between narcissism and EI has been estab- should yield or increase a positive association between SEI and
lished (Petrides et al., 2011; Veselka et al., 2012). On the other emotional manipulation because dark personalities should utilize
hand, narcissists have been described as low in empathy (e.g., Paul- SEI to get their way.

Please cite this article in press as: Nagler, U. K. J., et al. Is there a ‘‘dark intelligence’’? Emotional intelligence is used by dark personalities to emotionally
manipulate others. Personality and Individual Differences (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.01.025
 U.K.J. Nagler et al. / Personality and Individual Differences xxx (2014) xxx–xxx 3

3. Methods the three Dark Triad members. In each model, the respective other
two members of the Dark Triad were controlled as covariates.
3.1. Participants and procedure
4. Results
Two samples were used for this study, aggregated to one sam-
ple (N = 594; 438 women, 138 men, 18 no indication; age: 4.1. Hypotheses 1 and 2: SEI and the Dark Triad
M = 22.71, SD = 4.36, range = 18–65). Further information of this
sample, along with descriptive statistics of the scales used here, As can be seen from correlations in Table 1, narcissism showed
can be found in Furtner et al. (2010) as well as Rauthmann and Will positive relations with socio-emotional expressivity and control,
(2011). while it showed no or even a negative relation to emotional and so-
cial sensitivity, respectively. Machiavellianism showed negative
3.2. Measures relations with all SEI scales except for emotional control. Psychop-
athy was unrelated to socio-emotional expressivity, negatively to
3.2.1. Socio-emotional intelligence socio-emotional sensitivity, and positively to socio-emotional
SEI was assessed with the self-reported Social Skills Inventory control. Multiple regressions further corroborated the finding that
(SSI: Riggio & Carney, 2003). The SSI measures SI (for the ‘‘verbal’’ narcissism was generally positively and Machiavellianism and psy-
domain) and EI (for the ‘‘non-verbal’’ domain) with 90 self-report chopathy negatively related to SEI. Thus, our Hypotheses 1 and 2
items. Six subscales can be computed (15 items each). EI encom- were supported by the data.
passes emotional expressivity (accurately expressing and communi-
cating emotional states; e.g., ‘‘I have been told that I have 4.2. Hypotheses 3 and 4: SEI, Dark Triad, and emotional manipulation
expressive eyes’’), emotional sensitivity (receiving and interpreting
others’ emotions; e.g., ‘‘I am often told that I am a sensitive, under- As can be seen from correlations and regression coefficients in
standing person’’), and emotional control (regulating emotional dis- Table 1, emotional manipulation was strongly and positively asso-
plays; e.g., ‘‘I am very good at maintaining a calm exterior even if I ciated with all three Dark Triad traits, thus supporting Hypothesis
am upset’’). SI encompasses social expressivity (verbal expression 3. Further, it was weakly and positively associated with emotional
and engaging others in social discourse; e.g., ‘‘When telling a story, sensitivity (regression only), emotional control (correlation only),
I usually use a lot of gestures to help get the point across’’), social and social control, while negatively with social expressivity
sensitivity (interpreting others’ communication and behaving so- (regression only). The weak positive relations speak in favor of
cially appropriate; e.g., ‘‘I am generally concerned about the Hypothesis 4.
impression I am making on others’’), and social control (playing
roles and presenting oneself; e.g., ‘‘I am not very good at mixing
4.3. Hypothesis 5: moderations
at parties’’). Answers were given on a five-point Likert-type scale
(1 = not at all like me to 5 = exactly like me), and sum scores were
4.3.1. Social intelligence
computed for all six scales.
We found no statistically significant interaction effects of
narcissism, Machiavellianism, or psychopathy with any SI facet
3.2.2. Dark Triad when predicting emotional manipulation. Thus, neither member
Narcissism was measured with the 17-item Narcissistic Person- of the Dark Triad moderated links between SI and emotional
ality Inventory (von Collani, 2008). Answers were given on a five- manipulation.
point Likert-type scale (0 = not at all like me to 4 = totally like me),
and mean scores were computed. Machiavellianism was measured
4.3.2. Emotional intelligence
on a six-point Likert-type scale (0 = not at all like me to 5 = totally
From nine possible statistically significant interaction effects,
like me) with an 18-item scale (Henning & Six, 2008; Rauthmann,
we found four Dark Triad  EI interactions when predicting emo-
2012b). A sum score was computed. Psychopathy was measured
tional manipulation. First, narcissism positively moderated the link
with a 30-item version of the Self-Report Psychopathy Scale-III
between emotional expressivity and emotional manipulation with
(Williams et al., 2003). Answers were given on a five-point Lik-
a significant interaction effect, B = .0004 (SE = .00), DR2 = .00, F(1,
ert-type scale (0 = not at all like me to 4 = totally like me), and means
571) = 4.72, p = .03. However, a simple slope analysis indicated no
were computed.
significant effects for any slope. Hence, a real moderation effect
was not present.
3.2.3. Emotional manipulation Second, narcissism further positively moderated the link be-
Emotional manipulation was measured on a five-point Likert- tween emotional control and emotional manipulation with a sig-
type scale (0 = strongly disagree to 4 = strongly agree) with the nificant interaction effect, B = .0004 (SE = .00), DR2 = .00, F(1,
‘‘emotional manipulation tendency’’ facet (10 items) from Austin 570) = 4.80, p = .02. A simple slope analysis indicated a non-signif-
et al.’s (2007) questionnaire. Means were computed. icant slope at 1 SD of narcissism (B = .00, SE = .00, p = .422), a sig-
nificant slope at M of narcissism (B = .00, SE = .00, p = .002), and a
3.3. Data-analytical strategy significant slope at +1 SD of narcissism (B = .01, SE = .00, p < .001).
Findings are graphically presented in Fig. 1A. Higher levels of nar-
Associations among the subscales of socio-emotional intelli- cissism coincided with stronger associations between emotional
gence, the three members of the Dark Triad, and emotional control and emotional manipulation.
manipulation (Hypotheses 1–4) were investigated with bivariate Third, psychopathy positively moderated the link between
zero-order Person correlations and linear multiple regressions. emotional control and emotional manipulation with a significant
Whether the three members of the Dark Triad moderated the rela- interaction effect, B = .01 (SE = .00), DR2 = .01, F(1, 570) = 7.90,
tionship between SEI scales and emotional manipulation was p = .001. A simple slope analysis indicated a non-significant slope
investigated with Hayes’ (2012) SPSS macro PROCESS. Eighteen at 1 SD of psychopathy (B = .00, SE = .01, p = .888), a significant
models were computed in total, varying the independent variable slope at M of psychopathy (B = .01, SE = .00, p = .004), and a signif-
as the six subscales of SEI as well as the moderator variable as icant slope at +1 SD of psychopathy (B = .01, SE = .00, p < .001).

Please cite this article in press as: Nagler, U. K. J., et al. Is there a ‘‘dark intelligence’’? Emotional intelligence is used by dark personalities to emotionally
manipulate others. Personality and Individual Differences (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.01.025
4 U.K.J. Nagler et al. / Personality and Individual Differences xxx (2014) xxx–xxx

Table 1
Intercorrelations.

Variables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Dark Triad
1. Narcissism –
2. Machiavellianism .58*** –
3. Psychopathy .74*** .59*** –
Social intelligence
4. Social expressivity .16*** (.47***) .16*** ( .35***) .00 ( .14*) –
5. Social sensitivity .14** (.01) .01 (.18***) .22*** ( .34***) .01 –
6. Social control .29*** (.53***) .11** ( .43***) .16*** (.02) .64*** .41*** –
Emotional intelligence
7. Emotional expressivity .15*** (.40***) .14** ( .34***) .04 ( .05) .64*** .01 .44*** –
8. Emotional sensitivity .04 (.33***) .28*** ( .34***) .19*** ( .22***) .39*** .18*** .24*** .29*** –
9. Emotional control .15*** (.09) .12** (.04) .14** (.05) .10* .18*** .18*** .36*** .07 –
10. Emotional manipulation .69*** (.33***) .55*** (.14***) .71*** (.38***) .06 ( .02) .01 (.13**) .13** (.12) .05 (.13*) .03 ( .11*) .20*** (.26***) –

N = 594.
Standardized regression coefficients beta (b) from multiple regressions are presented in parentheses below the zero-order bivariate Pearson product-moment correlation
coefficients. Social intelligence, emotional intelligence, and emotional manipulation were predicted from all three Dark Triad members simultaneously. Emotional manip-
ulation was predicted from all six scales of social and emotional intelligence simultaneously.
*
p < .05.
**
p < .01.
***
p < .001.

Findings are graphically presented in Fig. 1B. Higher levels of psy- tions with others. However, they do not necessarily need to be
chopathy coincided with stronger associations between emotional able to interpret others’ emotions to keep this enhanced view of
control and emotional manipulation. the self. The inability to interpret others’ emotions and act accord-
Fourth, psychopathy positively moderated the link between ingly is in accordance with Jonason and Krause’s (2013) findings,
emotional sensitivity and emotional manipulation with a which indicate that narcissists show low affective empathy and
significant interaction effect, B = .009 (SE = .00), DR2 = .00, F(1, that they have difficulties identifying others’ feelings. Machiavel-
571) = 4.3, p = .04. A simple slope analysis indicated a non-signifi- lianism showed a negative relation to all SEI scales except emo-
cant slope at 1 SD of psychopathy (B = .01, SE = .00, p = .254), a tional control. This fits to Machiavellians’ externally oriented
significant slope at M of psychopathy (B = .01, SE = .00, p = .001), thinking that does not focus on feelings (Rauthmann & Will,
and a significant slope at +1 SD of psychopathy (B = .01, SE = .00, 2011). Psychopathy’s negative associations with perceiving others’
p < .001). Findings are graphically presented in Fig. 1C. As can be emotions and regulating emotional displays might be one of many
seen, higher levels of psychopathy coincided with stronger associ- reasons why they are perceived as cold-blooded and dark (Rauth-
ations between emotional sensitivity and emotional manipulation. mann & Kolar, 2013).
The moderation findings of narcissism and psychopathy may be
taken as an indication that some dark personalities may reap ben-
5. Discussion efits from EI skills in manipulating others. Put differently, EI can be
associated with emotional manipulation (cf. Austin et al., 2007),
We examined relationships between the SEI and the Dark Triad and especially so when narcissist and psychopaths utilize those
regarding emotional manipulation tactics. First, there was as posi- skills. Hence, there is some form of ‘‘dark intelligence’’ as the dark
tive relation between SEI scales and narcissism, while Machiavel- side of EI (see also O’Connor & Athota, 2013) although we may add
lianism showed mainly negative relations, and psychopathy that the interactions between narcissism and psychopathy, respec-
showed mixed findings. Second, the relation between emotional tively, with the EI skills were rather small. As we had a relatively
control and emotional manipulation was moderated by psychopa- large sample size, we were able to detect small effects.
thy and narcissism. Machiavellianism showed no such effects.
5.2. Limitations and prospects
5.1. Interpretation
The limitations of this work point to areas of future research.
Emotional manipulation was associated with all three Dark First, we assessed SEI solely with self-reports. People’s reports of
Triad traits. This link can be explained by the fact that the manip- how socio-emotionally skilled they are may not necessarily corre-
ulation of others is one of the core characteristics of dark personal- spond to their actual motivations or abilities. Thus, future research
ities (Paulhus & Williams, 2002; Jones & Figueredo, 2013). should include ability tests and also ask about people’s motivation
Emotional manipulation was also related to socio-emotional con- to utilize SEI. Second, empathy-related constructs in the SSI do not
trol. This seems plausible because regulating one’s own and others’ distinguish between ‘‘hot’’/affective (feeling what others feel) and
emotions is helpful in manipulating others (Austin et al., 2007). It ‘‘cold’’/cognitive empathy (understanding what others feel). For
seems crucial to regulate one’s own emotional displays, be able to example, dark personalities may score high on cognitive empathy
play social roles and present oneself accordingly to effectively (Wai & Tiliopoulos, 2012; Book, Quinsey, & Langford, 2007; Dolan
influence others’ emotions. Moreover, these results further support & Fullam, 2004; Hansen, Johnsen, Hart, Waage, & Thayer, 2008)
the notion that EI can have a maladaptive aspect in interpersonal and lower on affective empathy (Jonason & Krause, 2013). This
relations (e.g., Austin et al., 2007; de Raad, 2005). may allow them to understand and use other people’s emotions
As narcissism is the ‘‘brightest’’ Dark Triad member (Rauthmann without feeling guilt. Thus, different forms of empathy should be
& Kolar, 2013), its correlation with almost all aspects of SEI seems distinguished. Third, we used Austin et al.’s (2007) global emo-
reasonable. The positive relation with socio-emotional expressivity tional manipulation tactics subscale. Future studies should differ-
and socio-emotional control may reflect narcissists’ thrive to main- entiate between different manipulation tactics (Rauthmann,
tain their grandiose self-view by behaving accordingly in interac- 2013) to cast a more differentiated view. Additionally, emotional

Please cite this article in press as: Nagler, U. K. J., et al. Is there a ‘‘dark intelligence’’? Emotional intelligence is used by dark personalities to emotionally
manipulate others. Personality and Individual Differences (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.01.025
 U.K.J. Nagler et al. / Personality and Individual Differences xxx (2014) xxx–xxx 5

Fig. 1. Moderation findings.

manipulation should also not be self-reported, but ideally – as far and psychopaths). To the extent that EI can be and is used for mali-
as ethics allow it – be sampled as actual behavior (where success cious purposes (e.g., deception, exploitation, harm of others), a
rates can be tracked by attending to the emotional outcomes of ‘‘dark intelligence’’ may be formed by those who use EI as a tool
those being manipulated). to a self-serving and manipulative end.

6. Conclusion
References
Social and emotional skills are not always used to manipulate
Ali, F., Amorim, I., & Chamorro-Premuzic, T. (2009). Empathy deficits and trait
others. The utilization of EI skills for the emotional manipulation emotional intelligence in psychopathy and Machiavellianism. Personality and
of others is facilitated by dark personalities (namely, narcissists Individual Differences, 47(7), 758–762.

Please cite this article in press as: Nagler, U. K. J., et al. Is there a ‘‘dark intelligence’’? Emotional intelligence is used by dark personalities to emotionally
manipulate others. Personality and Individual Differences (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.01.025
6 U.K.J. Nagler et al. / Personality and Individual Differences xxx (2014) xxx–xxx

Austin, E. J., Farrelly, D., Black, C., & Moore, H. (2007). Emotional intelligence, Kafetsios, K., Nezlek, J. B., & Vassiou, A. (2011). A multilevel analysis of relationships
Machiavellianism and emotional manipulation: Does EI have a dark side? between leaders’ and subordinates’ emotional intelligence and emotional
Personality and Individual Differences, 43, 179–189. outcomes. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 41(5), 1121–1144.
Back, M. D., Schmukle, S. C., & Egloff, B. (2010). Why are narcissists so charming at Lopes, P. N., Brackett, M. A., Nezlek, J. B., Schütz, A., Sellin, I., & Salovey, P. (2004).
first sight? Decoding the narcissism–popularity link at zero acquaintance. Emotional intelligence and social interaction. Personality and Social Psychology
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98(1), 132–145. Bulletin, 30, 1018–1034.
Book, A. S., Quinsey, V. L., & Langford, D. (2007). Psychopathy and the perception of Mayer, J. D., Roberts, R. D., & Barsade, S. G. (2008). Human abilities: Emotional
affect and vulnerability. Criminal Justice And Behavior, 34(4), 531–544. intelligence. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 507–536.
Buss, D. M., & Chiodo, L. M. (1991). Narcissistic acts in everyday life. Journal of Mayer, J. D., & Salovey, P. (1997). What is emotional intelligence? In P. Salovey & D.
Personality, 59(2), 179–215. Sluyter (Eds.), Emotional development and emotional intelligence: Implications for
Cantor, N., & Kihlstrom, J. F. (1987). Personality and social intelligence. Englewood educators. New York: Basic Books.
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. McHoskey, J. W., Worzel, W., & Szyarto, C. (1998). Machiavellianism and
Christie, R., & Geis, F. (1970). Studies in Machiavellianism. New York, NY: Academic psychopathy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(1), 192–210.
Press. Morf, C. C., & Rhodewalt, F. (2001). Expanding the dynamic self-regulatory
Copestake, S., Gray, N. S., & Snowden, R. J. (2013). Emotional intelligence and processing model of narcissism: Research directions for the future.
psychopathy: A comparison of trait and ability measures. Emotion, 13(4), Psychological Inquiry, 12(4), 243–251.
691–702. O’Connor, P. J., & Athota, V. S. (2013). The intervening role of agreeableness in the
De Raad, B. (2005). The trait-coverage of emotional intelligence. Personality and relationship between trait emotional intelligence and Machiavellianism:
Individual Differences, 38, 673–687. Reassessing the potential dark side of EI. Personality and Individual Differences,
Diez, M. E. (1984). Communicative competence: An interactive approach. In R. N. 55(7), 750–754.
Bostrom (Ed.), Communication yearbook 8 (pp. 56–79). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Paulhus, D. L., & Williams, K. M. (2002). The Dark Triad of personality: Narcissism,
Dolan, M., & Fullam, R. (2004). Theory of mind and mentalizing ability in antisocial Machiavellianism and psychopathy. Journal of Research in Personality, 36(6),
personality disorders with and without psychopathy. Psychological Medicine, 34, 556–563.
1093–1102. Petrides, K. V., Vernon, P. A., Schermer, J., & Veselka, L. (2011). Trait emotional
Dufner, M., Rauthmann, J. F., Czarna, A. Z., & Denissen, J. J. A. (2013). Are Narcissists intelligence and the dark triad traits of personality. Twin Research and Human
sexy? Zeroing in on the effect of Narcissism on short-term mate appeal. Genetics, 14(1), 35–41.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39, 870–882. Raskin, R., & Terry, H. (1988). A principal-components analysis of the narcissistic
Ermer, E., Kahn, R. E., Salovey, P., & Kiehl, K. A. (2012). Emotional intelligence in personality inventory and further evidence of its construct validity. Journal of
incarcerated men with psychopathic traits. Journal of Personality and Social Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 890–902.
Psychology, 103, 194–204. Rauthmann, J. F. (2012a). The Dark Triad and interpersonal perception: Similarities
Furnham, A., Richards, S. C., & Paulhus, D. L. (2013). The Dark Triad of personality: A and differences in the social consequences of narcissism, Machiavellianism, and
10 year review. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 7, 199–216. psychopathy. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 3, 487–496.
Furtner, M. R., Rauthmann, J. F., & Sachse, P. (2010). The socioemotionally intelligent Rauthmann, J. F. (2012b). Towards multifaceted Machiavellianism: Content,
self-leader: Examining relations between self-leadership and socioemotional factorial, and construct validity of a German Machiavellianism scale.
intelligence. Social Behavior and Personality, 38, 1191–1196. Personality and Individual Differences, 52, 345–351.
Gardner, H. (1993). Multiple intelligences: The theory in practice. New York, NY US: Rauthmann, J. F. (2013). Investigating the MACH-IV with Item Response Theory and
Basic Books. proposing the trimmed MACH⁄. Journal of Personality Assessment, 95(4),
Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional intelligence: Why it can matter more than IQ (first ed.). 388–397.
New York: Bantam. Rauthmann, J. F., & Kolar, G. P. (2013). Positioning the Dark Triad in the
Grieve, R., & Mahar, D. (2010). The emotional manipulation–psychopathy nexus: interpersonal circumplex: The friendly-dominant narcissist, hostile-
Relationships with emotional intelligence, alexithymia and ethical position. submissive Machiavellian, and hostile-dominant psychopath? Personality and
Personality and Individual Differences, 48, 945–950. Individual Differences, 54(5), 622–627.
Guilford, J. P. (1967). The nature of human intelligence. New York, NY US: McGraw- Rauthmann, J. F., & Will, T. (2011). Proposing a multidimensional Machiavellianism
Hill. conceptualization. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal,
Hansen, A. L., Johnsen, B. H., Hart, S., Waage, L., & Thayer, J. F. (2008). Brief 39(3), 391–403.
communication: Psychopathy and recognition of facial expressions of emotion. Riggio, R. E., & Carney, D. R. (2003). Social skills inventory manual (second ed.). Mind
Journal of Personality Disorders, 22, 639–645. Garden.
Hare, R. D. (2003). Manual for the revised psychopathy checklist. Toronto, Canada: Salovey, P., & Mayer, J. D. (1990). Emotional intelligence. Imagination, Cognition and
Multi-Health Systems. Personality, 9, 185–211.
Hayes, A.F. (2012). PROCESS: A versatile computational tool for observed variable Salovey, P., Mayer, J. D., & Caruso, D. (2002). The positive psychology of emotional
mediation, moderation, and conditional process modeling. <http:// intelligence. In C. R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology
www.afhayes.com/>. (pp. 159–171). New York, NY US: Oxford University Press.
Henning, H., & Six, B. (2008). Machiavellismus. In A. Glöckner-Rist (Ed.), Thorndike, R. K. (1920). Intelligence and its uses. Harper’s Magazine, 140, 227–335.
Zusammenstellung sozialwissenschaftlicher Items und Skalen. ZIS Version 12.00. Veselka, L., Schermer, J. A., & Vernon, P. A. (2012). The Dark Triad and an expanded
Bonn, Germany: GESIS. framework of personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 53, 417–
Jonason, P. K., & Krause, L. (2013). The emotional deficits associated with the dark 425.
triad traits: Cognitive empathy, affective empathy, and alexithymia. Personality von Collani, G. (2008). Modifizierte deutsche Versionen des Narcissistic Personality
and Individual Differences, 55(5), 532–537. Inventory (NPI-d). In A. Glöckner-Rist (Ed.), Zusammenstellung
Jonason, P. K., Webster, G. W., Schmitt, D. P., Li, N. P., & Crysel, L. (2012). The sozialwissenschaftlicher Items und Skalen. ZIS Version 12.00. Bonn, Germany:
antihero in popular culture: A life history theory of the Dark Triad. Review of GESIS.
General Psychology, 16, 192–199. Wai, M., & Tiliopoulos, N. (2012). The affective and cognitive empathic nature of the
Jones, D. N., & Figueredo, A. J. (2013). The core of darkness: Uncovering the heart of dark triad of personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 52(7), 794–799.
the Dark Triad. European Journal of Personality, 27, 521–531. Williams, K. M., Nathanson, C., & Paulhus, D. L. (2003). Structure and validity of the
Jones, D. N., & Paulhus, D. L. (2011). Differentiating the Dark Triad within the self-report psychopathy scale-III in normal populations. Toronto, Canada:
interpersonal circumplex. In L. M. Horowitz & S. Strack (Eds.), Handbook of Presentation at the 111th annual convention of the American Psychological
interpersonal psychology: Theory, research, assessment, and therapeutic Association.
interventions (pp. 249–267). Hoboken, NJ US: John Wiley & Sons Inc. Wilson, D. S., Near, D., & Miller, R. R. (1996). Machiavellianism: A synthesis of the
Jones, D. N., & Paulhus, D. L. (2009). Machiavellianism. In M. R. Leary & R. H. Hoyle evolutionary and psychological literatures. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 285–299.
(Eds.), Handbook of individual differences in social behavior (pp. 93–108). New
York, NY US: Guilford Press.

Please cite this article in press as: Nagler, U. K. J., et al. Is there a ‘‘dark intelligence’’? Emotional intelligence is used by dark personalities to emotionally
manipulate others. Personality and Individual Differences (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.01.025