Development and validation of implicit association test for propensity to be engaged in manipulative communication

Results

Descriptive statistics

We have analyzed the obtained data via IBM Statistics to find out the main descriptive statistics of our scales. In this analysis we used the final summed data from MAC scale and 360° questionnaire and calculated dF (difference in time between two polar sets of double categorization) of IAT (see Table 1). The summed results of MAC were calculated according to the manual of interpreting data by Znakov. For the calculation of results of 360° questionnaire, we have used the initial score for groups, containing two people and the median of estimations for groups that had more than two individuals.

Table 1. Descriptive statistics of measures

Measurement	Minimum	Maximum	Mean	Median	SD
Implicit Association Test	-490. 34	596. 73	2. 50	24	329. 595
360° questionnaire	12	68	36. 659	39. 42	14. 22
MAC scale	10	67	37. 912	38. 36	14. 582

Reliability analysis

As a criterion for the internal reliability of the scale, an analysis of the Cronbach's Alpha coefficients was used. The coefficient values were satisfactory if they reach 0.6 (Sekaran, 2006). The indicators were good for Alfa equal to 0.8 and higher. The results of the reliability analysis are presented in the Table 2.

Table 2. Cronbach's Alpha coefficients

	IAT	360°	MAC
б	. 798	. 804	. 629



Note: IAT = Implicit Association Test, 360° = 360° Questionnaire, MAC = test of Machiavellianism

All scales used in this research demonstrated satisfactory reliability results (б ? 0. 6). Moreover, the values of the Cronbach's Alpha were good for 360° (б ? 0. 8) and IAT (б ? 0. 8).

Distribution analysis

As a criterion for the normality, we have used Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, together with the visual analysis of distribution histogram. The criterion of normality is p-value higher than . 05. According to the results (see Appendix G), our results were not distributed normally at p > . 05. The same results could be seen via visual analysis of graphs of obtained data.

According to the distribution histogram of MAC (see Figure 4), we can see that the distribution was not normal.

Figure 4. The distribution histogram of summed results of Machiavellianism scale

On a Figure 5 the distribution histogram of summed results of 360° Assessment is presented. We can see that our distribution is far from the normal curve, due to the presence of many results in two points - around 20 and 40 points.



Figure 5. The distribution histogram of summed results of 360° Assessment

Due to the fact, that the results of dF of IAT might take both positive and negative values, we have used Population Pyramid to show the distribution (see Figure 6). The obtained distribution has shown the prevalence of results at value 400 for prosocial respondents, while there was a peak of results at value -300 for people, who use manipulative communication. The distribution for prosocial and antisocial respondents is symmetrical.

Figure 6. The distribution population pyramid of dF of Implicit Association Test

Group differences

According to the results, we have divided the participants on its median - 38 for MAC, 39 for 360°. Those, who have higher scores, are considered to be manipulators (antisocial), when the result is lower the person is not manipulative (prosocial). The results of IAT were divided according to their number - if a number is negative, meaning that categorization between “manipulation” and “good” was faster, the result indicates that a person is prone to use manipulation tactics, resulting in the group of antisocial behavior, if a number is positive, meaning that categorization between “manipulation” and “bad” was faster, a person belongs to non-manipulative also called prosocial group. As the results show, the total number of participants, allocated to either prosocial or antisocial group depends on the test. According to the results of Implicit Association Test, our sample consisted of 51 (52,6%) manipulators and 46 (47,4%) prosocial respondents. If we consider the division of the sample by MAC, we get 38 (39, 2%) antisocial subjects and 59 (60,8%) persons who were not indicated as manipulators. 360° Assessment revealed 54 (55,7%) people, who use manipulations and 43 (44,3%) non-manipulators.

As can be seen by the frequencies cross tabulated in Table 14, there is a significant relationships between grouping of Implicit Association Test and 360° Assessment, XІ (2, N = 98) = 21. 742, p < . 001. However, there were no significant relationships between the results of MAC and 360° (XІ (2, N = 98) = . 004, p > . 05) and between the results of IAT and MAC (XІ (2, N = 98) = 1. 54, p > . 05). The results are presented in Table 2.

Table 2. Crosstabs and XІ for measured variables

Variables	Crosstab	XІ	p
IAT and 360°		Prosocial 360°	Antisocial 360°	Total	21. 742	. 001
	Prosocial IAT	34	17	51
	Antisocial IAT	9	37	46
	Total	43	54	98
MAC and 360°	Prosocial MAC Antisocial MAC Total Prosocial 360° 26 17 43 Antisocial 360° 33 21 54 Total 59 38 98	. 004	. 948
IAT and MAC	Prosocial MAC Antisocial MAC Total Prosocial IAT 34 17 51 Antisocial IAT 25 21 46 Total 59 38 98	1. 540	. 215

Note: IAT = Implicit Association Test, 360° = 360° Questionnaire, MAC = Test of Machiavellianism

Then we have estimated the differences in results depending on gender and age. We have used Mann Whitney U-test to test the differences between genders. According to the results of Mann Whitney U-test there were no significant differences in MAC (U = 1081. 87, p = . 758), IAT (U = 1010. 000, p = . 373) and 360° (U = 1123. 000, p = . 953) between gender groups. The results of One-Way ANOVA for age differences have indicated that there were no significant differences in results of MAC (F (15, 81) = 2. 41, p = . 073), IAT (F (15, 81) = 1. 695, p = . 068) and 360° (F(15, 81) = . 850, p = 0. 620).

Correlational analysis

To investigate the correlation between the results of Implicit Association Test and MAC-scale we used Pearson correlation. The results of IAT do not correlate with the results of MAC at p < .05, however they have moderate correlation (r = -. 574) with 360° at p < .01 (see Table 3).

Table 3 Correlational Matrix for the results of IAT, MAC and 360 (N = 98)

Variables	1	2	3
1. MAC	-
2. IAT	. 040 p=. 834	-
3. 360°	. 067 p=. 328	-. 574 p=. 001	-

Note: IAT = Implicit Association Test, 360° = 360° Questionnaire, MAC = Test of Machiavellianism

To evaluate the obtained distribution between MAC and IAT we built the chart, taking the results of Implicit Association Test as Y-axis and the results of Machiavellianism scale as X-axis, the axis themselves represent the median score, according to which we have divided our sample to manipulators and non-manipulators. Thus, people who scored less than 0 for IAT are considered manipulators, if the result was higher than 0 the person is not prone to use manipulation. As for MAC-scale, the median was 38, if a person is higher than 38 his results indicate manipulation and vice versa. Thus, we have received four quarters. The first one has people who are considered to be prosocial by both tests; the third one represents people who were indicated as manipulators by both tests; people who resulted in the second quarter were considered manipulators by explicit measure and prosocial by implicit one; the fourth quarter contains respondents who demonstrated high levels of manipulation in implicit test, but not revealed them in explicit one. The results, placed in the fourth quarter represent the Social Desirability phenomenon.

As we can see from the Figure 7, the distribution of results does not have any particular pattern, i. e. participants are spread evenly in four quarters. Thus, the effect of SD was not demonstrated in our research.

Figure 7. The graph of distribution of obtained data on IAT and MAC with axis representing median 

In order to estimate the distribution of results on IAT and 360 Assessment, we built a chart, where the results of IAT were taken as Y-axis and the results of 360° were X-axis. The axis themselves were placed according to the median score, that we used to distinguish prosocial and antisocial respondents. Thereby, people who scored less than 0 for IAT are considered manipulators, and if the result was higher than 0 the person is not prone to use manipulation. For 360° questionnaire we used its median 39. If a respondent scored higher, his group has evaluated him to be a manipulator, if the score is lower, a subject is not considered to have the propensity to use manipulative communication. In this way, we have received four quarters. The first one has people who are considered to be prosocial by both tests; the third one represents people who were indicated as manipulators; people who resulted in the second quarter were considered manipulators by other people and prosocial by implicit testing; the fourth quarter contains respondents who showed high levels of propensity to be engaged in manipulative communication by IAT, but were not considered manipulators by 360 Assessment.

Figure 8. The graph of distribution of obtained data on IAT and 360° with axis representing median

As we can see from Figure 8, the majority of respondents are in the first and the third quarters. It means that our Implicit Association Test demonstrated results that correlate with estimation from other people whether an individual is using manipulative techniques in their real life. The least amount of respondents end up in the fourth quarter, indicating that implicit attitudes could be seen by people around.

Mann Whitney U-test

To estimate the differential ability of stimulus material of implicit testing, we have conducted Mann Whitney U-test. The testing variable was the results of IAT, the grouping variable - divided groups of IAT. According to the results, Implicit Association Test has shown high level of differential power (U =1081. 00, p < . 01).

Regression Analysis

Socio-demographic characteristics (gender and age of respondents) were entered as independent variables into the hierarchical regression model at the first step; the second step included summed results of MAC scale and 360° Assessment. The results of Implicit Association test were the dependent variable. The results of the analysis are presented in the Table 4.

Implicit attitudes had an effect on the 360° Assessment. The first step of regression analysis has shown that age and gender did not predict the results of 360°, the model was not significant and did not explain the obtained results (rІ = . 039, p > . 05). In the second step with the inclusion of IAT and MAC we received significant model with high value of the explained dispersion (rІ = . 463, p < . 01). In this model we can see that IAT has higher predictive power (в = -. 579, p < . 01), than MAC (в = -. 152, p < . 05).

In order to investigate the retest reliability, we have found the correlations between the first and the second trial of IAT on 17 respondents. Retest reliability is considered to be acceptable, if the Pearson Correlation coefficient between the results of two tests is higher, than 0. 6 and good if it is higher, than 0. 7. We have found the acceptable level of retest reliability (r = . 694, p = . 02), which is close to the good one (see Table 5).



Table 4. Summary of Regression Analysis for Variables predicting 360° Assessment

Variable	B	в	t	SD	Sig.	Model Sig.	R	rІ
Step 1						. 655	. 095	. 039
(Constant)	44. 707		4. 758	9. 396
Age	-. 333	-. 094	-. 911	. 366	. 365
Gender	. 276	. 010	. 093	2. 967	. 926
Step 2						. 000	. 683	. 463
(Constant)	50. 109		5. 941	8. 435
Age	-. 265	-. 074	-. 869	. 305	. 387
Gender	-2. 178	-. 075	-. 869	2. 508	. 387
MAC	-. 148	-. 152	-1. 738	. 085	. 046
IAT	-. 025	-. 579	-6. 595	. 004	. 000

Note: IAT = Implicit Association Test, MAC = Test of Machiavellianism

Retest reliability check

Table 5 Correlational Matrix for the results of IAT and IAT (N = 17)

Variables	1	2
1. First IAT	-
2. Second IAT	. 694**	-

Note: IAT = Implicit Association Test, ** p < 0. 01

General discussion

In the present study the Implicit Association Test for propensity to be engaged in manipulative communication was developed and validated. The results of IAT were compared to the results of explicit measure of Machiavellianism, which is commonly used to measure manipulative propensities. Moreover, the results of the implicit testing were collated with the results of 360° Assessment, created on a theory basis and evaluated by the group of experts, who have sufficient knowledge of manipulative behavioral patterns.

When we analyzed obtained data for differences in gender and age group, we have not found any statistically significant differences. Though it might imply that socio demographic variables do not influence manipulation in the general population. However, our sample was quite homogeneous in age distribution; therefore the interpretation of this result is limited. As for gender distribution, our sample was similar to the distribution of genders in population in the age that we tested. Thus, we can assume that in the age of 20-25 years gender does not explain the propensity to be engaged in manipulative communication.

In general, the results of MAC scale were lower, than other tests. As there was no prior research on this topic, we do not have any data to compare with our result. Therefore, we would assume that lower scores of Machiavellianism, compared to other tests may represent the social desirability bias. Respondents were not willing to project negative image of themselves and answered in more positive way. However, this result may be interpreted the other way, i.e. subjects showed the true situation in self-report and other tests showed more negative image due to biases. The relationships between self-report measures and objective ones, e.g. peer-review are still a matter of high interest in psychological community.

We have conducted the scale reliability check for the 360° questionnaire and Implicit Association Test, that showed decent results (б=. 798 for IAT and б=. 804 for 360°). Scale reliability indicates that items in the test are measuring the same construct, which is vital for further usage of the test. Our results have proved that our testing material was developed properly and it might be applied for practical purposes.

As well as many other studies we have not found significant correlation between IAT and MAC results (e. g. , Karpinski and Hilton, 2001). As it was suggested by Hofmann et al. in meta-analysis of relationships between explicit and implicit measurements, the correlation rate will be high for such attitudes that are not socially judged and thus should not be controlled or changed, for example consumer behavior, and will be low or even will not appear if there is a pressure of a social norm of accepted behavior, for example racism. In our case manipulation is a characteristic that should not be demonstrated to people directly, because it might change the feeling of others about a person resulting in worsen of relationships. Another reason of low correlation between MAC and IAT might be ascribed to the absence of time limit for MAC testing. Hofmann has indicated, that if a person doesn`t have enough time for completing an explicit measurement, provoking stress and thus lower behavioral control, the correlation between explicit and implicit tests will be higher.

However, we have found moderate correlation (r=. 57, p<. 01) between implicit measurement and 360° assessment. This leads us to the assumption that implicit attitudes might be visible for partners in long-term relationships. Due to the fact that our sample consisted of only people who knew each other for a long period of time, we cannot predict whether this phenomenon will occur in other kind of relationships. Further research is needed to investigate this phenomenon.

Even though we used 360° Assessment as a form of objective measure and contraposed it to subjective questionnaires, this method has its own limitations. First, 360° questionnaire is a form of peer evaluation, which means that people can estimate only those characteristics that they know from communicating about a subject. The question which attitudes explicit or implicit they have evaluated is disputable, as implicit attitudes are hidden when a person controls his behavior and are shown in stress, time pressure and other situations where controlling is impossible or unnecessary. Second, relationships between a subject and an evaluator have a predominant role in the final result. People less likely to ascribe their close friends negative characteristics. In our study groups of participants knew each other for a long time and they probably saw their partners in different situations, so we believe that they were able to estimate the real personality. But we did not control the state of relationships at the moment of testing. Perhaps some results were biased by recent arguments or other negative interactions, resulting in more negative evaluations.

The distribution of results of IAT and MAC scale does not correspond to our predictions. The results are distributed evenly among four quarters of the graph. We hypothesized that in the modern culture characterized by very competitive atmosphere, the majority of people will portrait characteristics that will help them to achieve higher goals with less effort, such as manipulation. However, the results indicate that this assumption was not right. Based on our distribution we can suppose that manipulation allocated normally across population.

Though the distribution of IAT and 360° coincides our expectations. Based on this we can suppose that IAT measures the behavior that could be recognized by others as manipulative. In this study we consider this result a proof that our implicit measurement is working as it supposed to work - revealing true intentions of a person that are demonstrated in behavior.

The developed test has shown to predict the results of 360° Assessment on 30% value. This value is acceptable in our study because implicit attitudes could not be found in every situation, because the behavior might be controlled by explicit ones when a person is not nervous or does not have time limits. According to our data, it has even higher predictive power, than explicit measurement, which goes along with previous research of usage of IAT to test negatively perceived concepts (Greenwald, Poehlman, Uhlmann, Banaji). Nevertheless, it is crucial to notice that together they give higher predictive power, so it is reasonable to use both testing.

We have checked the retest reliability with the help of second testing of a portion of original sample on IAT after a month of first test. The results had moderate correlation (r=. 684, p<. 01). Moreover, the polarity of results has remained the same for 16 subjects out of 17. According to the IAT results analysis practice it means that if a person showed his propensity to use manipulation during the first test, he would show the same propensity during second test. We see this as a possible indicator that our implicit testing has high retest reliability. However, the sample that we retested is not sufficient in number to claim that our result will be constant.

During the check of retest reliability we have obtained interesting trend in results. In many cases the dF (difference in time between two polar sets of double categorization) of the second testing was slightly lower, than in the first try. This result might be an example of the testing effect, which occur when participants take the same test several times and learn how to answer to it. This effect was also noted by Greenwald in his testing, where he showed that testing effect might appear in implicit measurements, but it will not affect the general interpretation of results due to its small influence.

According to the results and given feedback our IAT included words that were hard to associate in fourth and seventh segments of testing, where participants needed to allocate attribute to double-category. For example, the word «Выгода» has positive meaning, but it was chosen as the element of manipulation. Subjects have also indicated that the word «Предательство», which was meant to be in the category “bad”, was too close to the definition of manipulation. Due to this some bias might have occurred. However, the IAT is designed to give several attempts to categorize every item, which presumably could have eliminated that factor. Those words should be revised. Nevertheless, further research is needed to provide efficient proof of influence of this phenomenon. All along of possibilities of IAT, the usage of pictures might be used in further research to eliminate the influence of difficulties caused by the words choice.

In general we can say that implicit factors are more like instincts, when explicit ones are more connected with reasonable behavior, based on understanding of social environment. The actual behavior consists of two layers - the intention, caused by implicit attitudes and correction driven from explicit form. Thus, it is impossible to predict how a person will normally act without taking into consideration both factors.

Currently, the existing explicit measures of manipulation remain insufficient. The majority of them are too obvious for a subject, they do not include the social desirability testing, and thus the results are forgeable. Moreover, they cannot provide predictions of real intentions, instead showing the social adaptation of a person, how he has learned to behave in certain situations. However, it is not always necessary to find out the implicit characteristics, because they might remain hidden if a person is able to fully control his behavior.

Conclusion

The aim of our research was to develop the Implicit Association Test for the propensity to be engaged in manipulative communication and further validate it by estimating construct, discriminative, criterial validity and retest reliability. We have accomplished the goal of developing the test that provided us with acceptable values of validity and reliability.

The research question of our study was to investigate how well IAT will predict the actual behavior comparing with explicit measures. We have received results that demonstrate implicit measures overpower explicit ones in predicting behavior. Moreover, we have shown that our test can show traits that other people consider being manipulative.

The achieved result is vital in the theoretical field of psychology, because it is the first attempt to measure manipulation in implicit testing, assuming that manipulation as a negatively perceived concept might not be accessible via explicit measures. We believe that the usage of implicit tests might be the breakthrough for psychologists who study vital social interactions and constructs, because it gives another layer of understanding how to predict actual behavior.

Another accomplishment is our definition of manipulation, gathered from the analysis of many different resources that sometimes contradicted each other. Based on that definition we developed 360° questionnaire which has shown high level of scale reliability and potentially might be used together with implicit measurement to achieve higher predictive power.

Our test could be used in many different spheres, but we see its main implication in HR management. Due to the fact, that IAT allows us to know how people will react to stressful events and unexpected situations it could be used for hiring specialists, for whom those characteristics are a matter of vital importance. Moreover, the results of IAT are hard to fake because of not obviousness of the task given to the participant. Another advantage is time limit - implicit testing is very quick, it usually takes 5-10 minutes which is required in the modern world.

Nevertheless, some limitations of this study should be acknowledged. The main limitation of our study is our sample. First, it was not sufficient in number to say uniquely that the test will work exactly as we planned. Moreover, it consisted of only young people, creating possible biases in results. Finally, it was convenient sample gathering which has definitely distorted the final result.

Another limitation is connected with disadvantages of chosen methods. In IAT we used words that were hard sometimes to categorize, because they belonged to both category and attribute. In addition 360° Assessment has its own limitations, because the result is influenced by the relationships between subjects and their knowledge about each other.

This topic definitely requires further development. Future studies might be conducted on non-Russian sample to investigate cultural differences in manipulative implicit factors. Moreover, the design of the study should be changed into experimental to measure real behavior and compare it to the prediction of implicit test. communication manipulation intercourse psyche



Refferences

1. Ajzen, I., Fishbein, M. (1985). A Bayesian analysis of attribution processes. Psychological Bulletin, 82(2), 261.

2. Allport, G. W. 1935. Attitudes. In Handbook of social psychology. Edited by C. Murchison, 798-844. Worcester, MA: Clark Univ. Press.

3. Andreeva, Y. (1980). Social psychology text (p. 416). Moscow: Mosk.

4. Ang, I. (1990). Culture and communication: Towards an ethnographic critique of media consumption in the transnational media system. European journal of communication, 5(2), 239-260.

5. Asendorpf, J. B. , Banse, R. and Mьcke, D. (2002). Double dissociation between implicit and explicit personality self-concept: the case of shy behavior. Journal of personality and social psychology, 83(2), 380.

6. Attardo, S. (1998). Locutionary and perlocutionary cooperation: The perlocutionary cooperative principle. Journal of Pragmatics, 27(6), 753-779.

7. Bassett, J. F. (2010). The Effects ofMortality Salience and Social Dominance Orientation on Attitudes Toward Illegal Immigrants. Social Psychology 41(1), 52-55.

8. Berne, E. (1981). Away from a theory of the impact of interpersonal interaction on non-verbal participation. Transactional Analysis Bulletin, 1(1), 6-13.

9. Blass, R. (2005). Manipulation in the Speeches and Writings of Hitler and the NSDAP from a Relevance Theoretic Point of View. Manipulation and ideologies in the twentieth century, 169-190.

10. Chassot, Sylviane; Klшckner, Christian; Wьstenhagen, Rolf. (2015) Can implicit cognition predict the behavior of professional energy investors? An explorative application of the Implicit Association Test (IAT). Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition. vol. 4 (3).

11. Costa, P. T. , and MacCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO personality inventory (NEO PI-R) and NEO five-factor inventory (NEO-FFI): Professional manual. Psychological Assessment Resources, Incorporated.

12. Crowne, P and Marlowe. The approval motive: studies in evaluative dependence.

13. New York: Wiley, 1964. 233 p

14. Danciu, V. (2014). Manipulative marketing: persuasion and manipulation of the consumer through advertising. Theoretical and Applied Economics, 21(2 (591)), 19-34.

15. Disley, D. M. , Morrill, P. R. , Sproule, K. , and Lowe, C. R. (1999). An optical biosensor for monitoring recombinant proteins in process media. Biosensors and Bioelectronics, 14(5), 481-493.

16. Fehr, E., Schmidt, K. M. (1999). A theory of fairness, competition, and cooperation. The quarterly journal of economics, 114(3), 817-868.

17. Fishbein, M., Ajzen, I. (1985). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

18. Fisher, R. J. (1993). Social desirability bias and the validity of indirect questioning. Journal of consumer research, 20(2), 303-315.

19. Galasinski, D. (2000). The language of deception: A discourse analytical study. Sage Publications.

20. Greenwald, A. G. (1980). Sensory feedback mechanisms in performance control: with special reference to the ideo-motor mechanism. Psychological review, 77(2), 73.

21. Greenwald, A. G. , and Banaji, M. R. (1995). Implicit social cognition: attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes. Psychological review, 102(1), 4.

22. Greenwald, A. G. ; McGhee, D. E. ; Schwartz, M. (1998). «Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The Implicit Association Test». Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 74: 1464-1480

23. Greenwald, A. G. ; Smith, C. T. ; Sriram, N. ; Bar-Anan, Y. ; Nosek, B. A. (2009). «Implicit race attitudes predicted vote in the 2008 U. S. presidential election». Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy. 9 (1): 241-253

24. Grumm, M. , and von Collani, G. (2007). Measuring Big-Five personality dimensions with the implicit association test-Implicit personality traits or self-esteem?. Personality and Individual Differences, 43(8), 2205-2217.

25. Hacker, S. L. , and Gaitz, C. M. (1980). Interaction and performance correlates of Machiavellianism. The Sociological Quarterly, 11(1), 94-102.

26. Heaven, P. C. (1999). Attitudes Toward Women's Rights: Relationships with Social Dominance Orientation and Political Group Indentities. Sex Roles 41(718), 605-614.

27. Heider, F (1946). «Attitudes and Cognitive Organization». The Journal of Psychology. 21: 107-112.

28. Hofmann, Wilhelm and Gawronski, Bertram and Gschwendner, Tobias and Le, Huy and Schmitt, Manfred. (2005). A Meta-Analysis on the Correlation Between the Implicit Association Test and Explicit Self-Report Measures. Personality and social psychology bulletin. 31. 1369-85. 10. 1177/0146167205275613.

29. Jonason, P. K., Slomski, S., and Partyka, J. (2012). The Dark Triad at work: How toxic employees get their way. Personality and Individual Differences, 52(3), 449-453. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2011.11.008

30. Johnson, M. K. , and Hirst, W. (1991). Processing subsystems of memory. Perspectives on cognitive neuroscience, 198-217.

31. Kim, D. Y. (2003). Voluntary controllability of the implicit association test (IAT). Social Psychology Quarterly, 83-96.

32. Kraut, R. E. , Fish, R. S. , Root, R. W. , and Chalfonte, B. L. (1990). Informal communication in organizations: Form, function, and technology. In Human reactions to technology: Claremont symposium on applied social psychology (pp. 145-199)

33. Lasswell, Harold (1948). Bryson, L. , ed. The Structure and Function of Communication in Society. The Communication of Ideas. New York: Institute for Religious and Social Studies

34. Ligneul, R. , Girard, R. , and Dreher, J. -C. (2017). Social brains and divides: the interplay between social dominance orientation and the neural sensitivity to hierarchical ranks. Scientific Reports, 7, 45920. http://doi. org/10. 1038/srep45920

35. Macagno, F. , and Walton, D. (2010). What we hide in words: Emotive words and persuasive definitions. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(7), 1998-2013.

36. Maillat, D. (2013). Constraining context selection: On the pragmatic inevitability of manipulation. Journal of Pragmatics, 59, 190-199.

37. McClelland, J. L. , McNaughton, B. L. , and O'reilly, R. C. (1995). Why there are complementary learning systems in the hippocampus and neocortex: insights from the successes and failures of connectionist models of learning and memory. Psychological review, 102(3), 419.

38. McConnell, A. R. , and Leibold, J. M. (2001). Relations among the Implicit Association Test, discriminatory behavior, and explicit measures of racial attitudes. Journal of experimental Social psychology, 37(5), 435-442.

39. Montonen, H. , and Tanski, M. B. (2004). The Factory Experience-Experience Marketing to the End Consumer.

40. Nederhof, A. J. (1985). Methods of coping with social desirability bias: A review. European journal of social psychology, 15(3), 263-280.

41. Osborne, W. J. (1983). The Factorial Structure of Machiavellianism.

42. Parret, H. (1988). Elйments d'une analyse philosophique de la manipulation et du mensonge. Prйpublication. Documents de Travail et Prйpublications. Centro Internazionale di Semiotica e di Linguistica. Universita di Urbino Urbino, (70), 1-33.

43. Paulhus, D. L. (1991). Measurement and Control of Response Bias. Measures of Personality and Social Psychological Attitudes, 17-59. doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-590241-0.50006-x.

44. Paulhus, D. L. , and Williams, K. M. (2002). The dark triad of personality: Narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy. Journal of research in personality, 36(6), 556-563.

45. Perugini, M. (2005). Predictive models of implicit and explicit attitudes. British Journal of Social Psychology, 44(1), pp.29-45.

46. Petty, R. E. , and Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. Advances in experimental social psychology, 19, 123-205.

47. Rigotti, E. (2005). Towards a typology of manipulative processes. L. de Saussure and P. Schulz (eds. ), 61-83.

48. Sanders, M. R. , and Mahalingam, R. (2012). Social Dominance Orientation and John Henryism at the Intersection of Race and Class. Political Psychology 33(4), 553-573.

49. Scherer, K. T., Baysinger, M., Zolynsky, D., and Lebreton, J. M. (2013). Predicting counterproductive work behaviors with sub-clinical psychopathy: Beyond the Five Factor Model of personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 55(3), 300-305. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2013.03.007

50. Sidanius, J. , and Pratto, F. (1999). Social Dominance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

51. Sheinov, V. P. (2013). PSYCHOLOGICAL INFLUENCE: ESSENCE, TYPES AND MODEL. L4C 3N0 Canada E-mail Web Site Series, 43.

52. Shostrom, E. L. (1967). Man, the manipulator: The inner journey from manipulation to actualization.

53. Smith, E. R. , and DeCoster, J. (2000). Dual-process models in social and cognitive psychology: Conceptual integration and links to underlying memory systems. Personality and social psychology review, 4(2), 108-131.

54. Steffens, M. C. (2004). Is the implicit association test immune to faking?. Experimental psychology, 51(3), 165.

55. Steffens, M. C. , and Buchner, A. (2003). Implicit Association Test: separating transsituationally stable and variable components of attitudes toward gay men. Experimental Psychology, 50(1), 33.

56. Steffens, M. C. , and Schulze Kцnig, S. (2006). Predicting spontaneous big five behavior with implicit association tests. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 22(1), 13-20.

57. Stцber, J. (2001). The Social Desirability Scale-17 (SDS-17): Convergent validity, discriminant validity, and relationship with age. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 17(3), 222.

58. Stock, A. , and Stock, C. (2004). A short history of ideo-motor action. Psychological research, 68(2-3), 176-188.

59. Strack, F. , and Deutsch, R. (2004). Reflective and impulsive determinants of social behavior. Personality and social psychology review, 8(3), 220-247.

60. Teachman, B. A. , Gregg, A. P. , and Woody, S. R. (2001). Implicit associations for fear-relevant stimuli among individuals with snake and spider fears. Journal of abnormal psychology, 110(2), 226.

61. Wegner, Daniel M. ; Vallacher, Robin R. 1987 Implicit psychology: An introduction to social cognition. New York, NY, US: Oxford University Press Implicit psychology: An introduction to social cognition

62. Whitley, B. E. , and Жgisdьttir, S. (2000). The Gender Belief System, Authoritarianism, Social Dominance Orientation, and Heterosexuals' Attitudes Toward Lesbians and Gay Men. Sex Roles 42(11/12), 947-967.

63. Znakov V. V. . (2001). Metodika issledovaniya makiavelisma lichnosti. Sibirsky psychologichesky jurnal, (14-15)



Abstract

In this study we have developed the Implicit Association Test for the propensity to be engaged in manipulative communication and successfully validated it with the help of Machiavellianism scale by Znakov as an explicit instrument and 360° Assessment that we developed based on theoretical review and expert opinions as a measurement of the actual behavior on 98 respondents. Manipulation is a well-studied concept in psychology. However, it is not either conceptualized the same way across different studies, or operationalized correctly. In most cases propensity to be engaged in manipulative communication is measured by self-report questionnaires that are unable to eliminate the problem of Social Desirability. Due to the fact that manipulation is a socially negatively perceived concept, the effect of social desirability might bias the predictive power of measurements. Implicit association test has proven to be the method that can avoid this problem, due to the non-obviousness of task and its way of measuring - chronometry. Our test has demonstrated high predictive power, higher than scale of Machiavellianism and insignificant correlation with explicit measurement. However, further research with experimental design is needed to estimate predictive power more accurate.

Keywords: Implicit Association Test, IAT, manipulation, Machiavellianism



Appendix

Association collection questionnaire

Добрый день! Сейчас Вам предстоит пройти опрос, в котором от Вас потребуется привести ассоциации к словам, которые Вы увидите. Ваши данные полностью анонимны и будут анализироваться в обобщенном виде.

Опрос содержит 6 вопросов. Оценочное время прохождения опроса 5-10 минут.

Данная анкета представляет собой набор слов, к которым нужно привести ассоциации. Ассоциации - слова, похожие по значению, которые приходят на ум при прочтении предложенного материала.

Настоящее исследование проводится в рамках магистерской диссертации и включает в себя вопросы, связанные с общением.

1. Укажите, пожалуйста, Ваш пол М Ж

2. Укажите, пожалуйста, Ваш возраст _________________

3. Приведите как можно больше ассоциаций к слову: хорошо

4. Приведите как можно больше ассоциаций к слову: плохо



5. Приведите как можно больше ассоциаций к слову: манипулирование (в общении)

6. Приведите как можно больше ассоциаций к слову: порядочность

Спасибо за участие!

1. 360° Assesment for Expert-review

Добрый день! Сейчас Вам предстоит пройти опрос, в котором от Вас требуется оценить соответствие поведенческих маркеров и концепции «манипуляция». Ваши данные полностью анонимны и будут анализироваться в обобщенном виде. Оценочное время прохождения опроса 10-15 минут.

Прочитайте, пожалуйста, определение манипуляции:

Манипуляция - это особая форма общения, которая характеризуется следующими параметрами:

1. Субъект манипуляции оказывает влияние на объект манипуляции

2. В процессе манипуляции две стороны неравны - манипулятор считает себя выше объекта манипуляции и полностью контролирует ситуацию

3. У объекта формируется иллюзия независимости своих решений и действий. Влияние субъекта косвенное и незаметно для объекта

4. Манипуляция, с точки зрения этики, всегда негативный феномен, потому что манипулятор действует согласно собственной мотивации, достигая своих целей за счет другого человека, однако она может иметь положительные результаты для объекта, если мотивация манипулятора и объекта одинакова или схожа

5. Манипулятор характеризуется определенными личностными чертами, установками и умениями, которые позволяют осуществлять влияние

6. Ситуационные факторы могут медиировать и / или модерировать процесс манипулирования

7. Манипуляция может проявляться как склонность -- бессознательная предрасположенность к использованию манипуляций в качестве формы влияния, или как умение -- сознательное решение, которое требует специальной подготовки для реализации.

Оцените, пожалуйста, насколько, по Вашему мнению, часто манипулятор проявляет следующие поведенческие маркеры, где «1» соответствует «никогда», «2» - «очень редко», «3» - «редко», «4» - «иногда», «5» - «часто», «6» - «очень часто», «7» - «всегда».

Маркер	1	2	3	4	5	6	7
Стремится договариваться
Располагает к себе
Просит о невыполнимой услуге, после отказа предлагает что-то меньшее
Стремится помогать окружающим
Апеллирует к негативным последствиям
В зависимости от ситуации и оппонента может очень быстро менять свое поведение, чувства и мнения
Отстаивает свою точку зрения
Использует Вашу неосведомленность в какой-либо теме себе на руку
Корректен в общении
Уважает чужие интересы
Устанавливает свои условия
Скрывает намерения
Подкупает подарками, ожидая чего-то взамен
При Вашем появлении даже не поворачивает в вашу сторону голову
Поддерживает беседу
Лидер
Преувеличивает значимость просьбы («если ты этого не сделаешь, мир рухнет»)
Не говорит своего мнения, пока не услышит Вашего
Легко взаимодействует с незнакомцами
Внимательно слушает собеседника
Пытается вызвать сочувствие
Внимателен к деталям
Использует жестикуляцию
Смотрит прямо в глаза при разговоре
Играет фактами для собственной выгоды
Избегает обсуждений
Пользуется вашим стремлением помогать
Пытается вызвать у вас чувство вины
Просит о легко выполнимой услуге, которая ему не необходима
Пытается прояснить намерения, задавая вопросы
Пытается понять другого
Искренне отвечает на вопросы
Использует Ваши моральные принципы для достижения своих целей
Требует немедленного ответа на свои предложения
Берет на себя ответственность за результат группы
Любит порассуждать, вдаваясь в подробности
Оказывается в центре внимания
Забывает про важные даты

Спасибо за участие!

Interpretation of behavioral patterns

1-вопросы	-1-вопросы	0-вопросы
Требует немедленного ответа на свои предложения	Внимательно слушает собеседника	Использует жестикуляцию
Подкупает подарками, ожидая чего-то взамен	Стремится помогать окружающим	Оказывается в центре внимания
Угрожает наказанием за невыполнение его требований	Искренне отвечает на вопросы	Смотрит прямо в глаза при разговоре
В зависимости от ситуации и оппонента может очень быстро менять свое поведение, чувства и мнения	Пытается понять другого	Любит порассуждать, вдаваясь в подробности
Пытается вызвать сочувствие	Уважает чужие интересы	Отстаивает свою точку зрения
Искажает Ваши моральные принципы для достижения своих целей	Стремится договариваться	Легко взаимодействует с незнакомцами
Лицемерит	Пытается прояснить намерения, задавая вопросы	Забывает про важные даты
Избегает обсуждений		Лидер
Шантажирует		Берет на себя ответственность за результат группы
Использует Вашу неосведомленность в какой-либо теме себе на руку		Внимателен к деталям
Подтасовывает факты для собственной выгоды		Корректен в общении
Не говорит своего мнения, пока не услышит Вашего		Поддерживает беседу
Просит о легко выполнимой услуге, которая ему не необходима		При Вашем появлении даже не поворачивает в вашу сторону голову
Просит о невополнимой услуге, после отказа предлагает что-то меньшее
Пытается вызвать у вас чувство вины
Эксплуатирует вас из-за вашей порядочности
Преувеличивает значимость просьбы (если ты этого не сделаешь, мир рухнет)



Concordance levels of Kendall for expert review (N = 32)

Поведенческий паттерн (Behavioral pattern)	Kendall concordance level (K)	Significance (p-value)
Стремится договариваться	.87	.03
Располагает к себе	.64	.24
Просит о невыполнимой услуге, после отказа предлагает что-то меньшее	.76	.02
Стремится помогать окружающим	.74	.42
Апеллирует к негативным последствиям	.78	.017
В зависимости от ситуации и оппонента может очень быстро менять свое поведение, чувства и мнения	.57	.19
Использует Вашу неосведомленность в какой-либо теме себе на руку	.92	.010
Уважает чужие интересы	.69	.27
Устанавливает свои условия	.68	.42
Скрывает намерения	.95	.00
Подкупает подарками, ожидая чего-то взамен	.95	.072
Преувеличивает значимость просьбы («если ты этого не сделаешь, мир рухнет»)	.77	.025
Не говорит своего мнения, пока не услышит Вашего	.82	.09
Внимательно слушает собеседника	.65	1.7
Пытается вызвать сочувствие	.69	.52
Внимателен к деталям	.73	2.8
Играет фактами для собственной выгоды	.88	.021
Избегает обсуждений	.74	1.6
Пользуется вашим стремлением помогать	.91	.014
Пытается вызвать у вас чувство вины	.89	.27
Просит о легко выполнимой услуге, которая ему не необходима	.77	.041
Пытается прояснить намерения, задавая вопросы	.84	.09
Пытается понять другого	.59	.069
Искренне отвечает на вопросы	.79	.032
Использует Ваши моральные принципы для достижения своих целей	.72	.83
Требует немедленного ответа на сво...

Подобные документы

• Effective communication in different cultures

  Descriptions verbal communication in different cultures. The languages as the particular set of speech norms. Analysis general rules of speaking. Features nonverbal communication in different countries. Concept of communication as complicated process.
  
  реферат [213,9 K], добавлен 25.04.2012
  

• Linguistic and socio-cultural peculiarities of business communication

  The theory and practice of raising the effectiveness of business communication from the linguistic and socio-cultural viewpoint. Characteristics of business communication, analysis of its linguistic features. Specific problems in business interaction.
  
  курсовая работа [46,5 K], добавлен 16.04.2011
  

• Your actions speak louder than words

  Communication process is not limited to what we say with words. There are 3 elements of communication: Words (7% of information is communicated though words), Body language (55%) and tone of voice (38%). Thus, 93% of communication is non-verbal.
  
  топик [4,5 K], добавлен 25.08.2006
  

• Intercultural communication in English language education

  Basic approaches to the study of the English language. Intercultural communication and computerization of education. The use of technical means for intensification of the educational process. The use of video and Internet resources in the classroom.
  
  курсовая работа [333,1 K], добавлен 02.07.2014
  

• Verbal Communication

  Role and functions of verbal communication. Epictetus quotes. Example for sympathetic, empathetic listening. Effective verbal communication skills. Parameters of evaluation. Factors correct pronunciation. Use of types of pauses when communicating.
  
  презентация [53,0 K], добавлен 06.02.2014
  

• Communication in teaching English

  Theory of the communicative language teaching. Principles and features of the communicative approach. Methodological aspects of teaching communication. Typology of communicative language activities. Approbation of technology teaching communication.
  
  курсовая работа [608,8 K], добавлен 20.10.2014
  

• Establishing and development of the theory of translation as a science in the XX century

  History of interpreting and establishing of the theory. Translation and interpreting. Sign-language communication between speakers. Modern Western Schools of translation theory. Models and types of interpreting. Simultaneous and machine translation.
  
  курсовая работа [45,2 K], добавлен 26.01.2011
  

• Teaching business communication skills

  The general English programmes for students from backgrounds. Objectives of teaching business English. The rules of grammar, the domain of vocabulary and pronunciation. Major elements of business English. The concept of intercultural communication.
  
  реферат [22,0 K], добавлен 21.03.2012
  

• Foreign language classroom

  Culture in the Foreign language classroom. Cross-cultural communication. The importance of teaching culture in the foreign language classroom. The role of interactive methods in teaching foreign intercultural communication: passive, active, interactive.
  
  курсовая работа [83,2 K], добавлен 02.07.2014
  

• Industrial development of the African countries

  Palm oil is a form of edible vegetable oil obtained from the fruit of the oil palm tree. Chemistry and processing. Environmental, social and cultural impact. Biofuels and bioproducts. Regional production. Health. Blood cholesterol controversy.
  
  реферат [23,8 K], добавлен 12.05.2008
  

• How to be happy in your family life

  The relationships between man and woman. The conflicts in family and avoiding conflicts. The difference between fast food and homemade food. The communication between two or more people. Distinguishing of international good and bad superstitions.
  
  сочинение [7,9 K], добавлен 12.12.2010
  

• Functions of Management

  The analysis of four functions of management: planning, organizing, directing, controlling; and the main ways of improving functions of management. Problems with any one of the components of the communication model. The control strategies in management.
  
  контрольная работа [30,1 K], добавлен 07.05.2010
  

• The significance of English in today's world

  The reasons of importance of studying of English. Use of English in communication. Need for knowledge of English during travel, dialogue with foreigners, at information search on the Internet. Studying English in Russia is as one of the major subjects.
  
  реферат [16,5 K], добавлен 29.08.2013
  

• Social structure of the society

  What is social structure of the society? The concept of social structure was pioneered by G. Simmel. The main attributes of social structure. Social groupings and communities. Social status. Structural elements of the society’s fundamental institutions.
  
  реферат [25,4 K], добавлен 05.01.2009
  

• Social interaction and social relation. Levels of social interactions

  Social interaction and social relation are identified as different concepts. There are three components so that social interaction is realized. Levels of social interactions. Theories of social interaction. There are three levels of social interactions.
  
  реферат [16,8 K], добавлен 18.01.2009
  

• Political discourse

  The study of political discourse. Political discourse: representation and transformation. Syntax, translation, and truth. Modern rhetorical studies. Aspects of a communication science, historical building, the social theory and political science.
  
  лекция [35,9 K], добавлен 18.05.2011
  

• The problems of oral translation

  Translation is a means of interlingual communication. Translation theory. A brief history of translation. Main types of translation. Characteristic fiatures of oral translation. Problems of oral translation. Note-taking in consecutive translation.
  
  курсовая работа [678,9 K], добавлен 01.09.2008
  

• Text analysis in translation

  Systematic framework for external analysis. Audience, medium and place of communication. The relevance of the dimension of time and text function. General considerations on the concept of style. Intratextual factors in translation text analysis.
  
  курс лекций [71,2 K], добавлен 23.07.2009
  

• Social interactions and social processes

  The subjective aspects of social life. Social process – those activities, actions, operations that involve the interaction between people. Societal interaction – indirect interaction bearing on the level of community and society. Modern conflict theory.
  
  реферат [18,5 K], добавлен 18.01.2009
  

• Significance of translation in contemporary life

  Translation is mean of interlingual communication. Translations services industry. Importance of translation in culture life. Importance of translation in business life. Translation services in such areas as: economic, ecological, education, humanitarian.
  
  доклад [64,2 K], добавлен 02.12.2010
  

• главная
• рубрики
• по алфавиту
• вернуться в начало страницы
• вернуться к началу текста
• вернуться к подобным работам