1. Understanding Human Cruelty:
A Journey to the Dark Side of Personality
Erin Buckels & Del Paulhus
University of British Columbia

6. Why Are People Cruel? Stable individual differences Many explanations
Power of the situation
Obedience to authority
Diffusion of responsibility
Anonymity
Dehumanization
etc.
Stable individual differences
Milgram’s Obedience Experiments

7. Outline Background on the Dark Tetrad (D4) Initial D4 Lab Studies
D4 in Cyberspace
Conclusions

8. A Personality Perspective
Individual differences that predict behavior
Traits assessed via questionnaire
Scores lie on a continuum (often normally distributed)

9. The Big Five Model

10. Agreeableness Facet Level traits Trust (forgiving)
Straightforwardness (not demanding)
Altruism (warm)
Compliance (not stubborn)
Modesty (not a show-off)
Tender-mindedness (sympathetic)

11. Dark Personality Traits
Different “flavors” of malevolence
More than one way to be “bad”
Subclinical tendencies (not extremes)

12. Subclinical vs. Clinical
Clinical samples
comprised of individuals who are under clinical or forensic supervision
Mostly extreme cases
Subclinical samples
continuous distributions in broader community samples
Naturally includes some extreme cases

13. The Dark Triad (D3) Machiavellianism Narcissism Psychopathy Callous
Three distinct, but overlapping traits
Callous
Machiavellianism
Narcissism
Psychopathy

14. Subclinical Psychopathy
Self-Report Psychopathy Scale (SRP)
Characteristics:
Impulsive, erratic, lacking self-control
Reckless thrill-seeking
Antisocial behavior
e.g., “People who mess with me always regret it.”

15. Subclinical Narcissism
Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI)
Characteristics:
Grandiosity
Selfish, sense of entitlement
Others are insignificant
e.g., “I have been compared to famous people”

16. Machiavellianism Christie & Geis (1970): Mach-IV scale
Models the philosophy of Nicolo Machiavelli, political advisor to the Medici family in the 1500’s
Master manipulator
Cynical worldview
Strategic, calculating, amoral

17. Machiavellianism

18. Empirical Research on the D3
Machiavellians: Plagiarize essays and avoid risky bets
Narcissists: self-enhance and aggress after an ego threat
Psychopaths: lie, cheat, and aggress in the laboratory. They also report a range of misbehaviors and report stalking their romantic interests.

19. Empirical research cont’d
Behavior genetics research:
D3 have substantial genetic components
Only Machiavellianism has a shared environmental component
Other interesting tidbits:
Dark traits may be reflected in certain facial features
Somewhat accurately decoded by observers

20. Machiavellianism
High
Low

21. Psychopathy
Low
High

22. Narcissism
High
Low

23. Machiavellianism
Low
High

24. Psychopathy
High
Low

25. Narcissism
Low
High

26. The Dark TETRAD (D4)
Machiavellianism
Narcissism
Psychopathy
Sadism

27. Origins of Sadism The Marquis de Sade (1740-1814)
Donatien Alphonse François,
The Marquis de Sade ( )
(sexual sadism)
Censored!

28. Sadistic Personality Disorder
In DSM-III, but not DSM-IV or DSM-5
Example characteristics:
Takes pleasure/amusement in the suffering of others.
Humiliates others.
Disciplines subordinates unusually harshly.
Has lied to harm others.
Manipulates others using fear.
Is fascinated by violence, weapons, injury, or torture.
Not directed toward only one person and not solely for sexual arousal.

29. Everyday Sadism Callous enjoyment of others’ suffering Appetitive
Chronic (trait-like)
Suffering: physical and/or emotional pain
May or may not be sexualized
Direct vs. Vicarious sadism

30. Two Ways to be a Sadist: Direct Sadism Vicarious Sadism (r = .60)
In other words, with everyday sadism, some people like to hurt, while others like to watch.
These are not necessarily the same people.
At the same time, direct and vicarious sadism are strongly positively correlated with each-other. So they often do co-occur.
In our research, we’ve developed a sadism questionnaire that captures both direct and vicarious aspects of the construct.

31. Measures of Everyday Sadism
Short Sadistic Impulse Inventory (SSIS)
Varieties of Sadistic Tendencies (VAST)
Vicarious sadism
Direct sadism
Comprehensive Assessment of Sadistic Tendencies (CAST)
Direct physical sadism
Direct verbal sadism

32. Our Initial Lab Studies
How to study sadistic behavior in the lab?
Is sadism different from other callous traits (i.e., the Dark Triad)?
Buckels, Jones, & Paulhus (2013), Psychological Science

33. Study 1: Crunching Bugs

34. Task Choices Choose from the following: Kill bugs yourself
Help experimenter kill bugs
Clean toilets
Ice water pain tolerance
Muffin, Tootsie, & Ike

35. Bug Killers had the Highest Sadism Scores
Odds of bug crunching increased by a factor of 2.10 (or 110%) with each SD increase in sadism.
Bug Killers had the Highest Sadism Scores
Ice
Water
Clean
Toilets
Assist with Killing
Kill
Bugs
Mean Self Report Sadism

36. Post-task Pleasure (self-reported “happy, aroused, excited” affect )

37. Study 2: Unprovoked Aggression

38. Sadism & Unprovoked Aggression
Psychopaths hurt innocent people
Only a sadist would WORK to hurt others
Investing time & effort: personal cost
Due to intrinsic rewards (absent for Dark Triad)
Tested in the lab using a
white-noise aggression paradigm

39. AGGRESSION (Blast Intensity & Duration)
EASY Aggression
AGGRESSION (Blast Intensity & Duration)
Perspective Taking
r = -.39*
Empathic Concern
r = -.37*
Narcissism
r = .40*
Psychopathy
r = .58**
Sadism
r = .57**
* p < .05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001

40. Costly / HARD Aggression
Sadism
Working to Hurt Innocent Victim
Direct sadism: strongest and only sig. predictor.
Remained sig. (β = .62) when controlling for the Dark Triad
Important evidence of discriminant validity
* p < .05

41. Dark Personalities in Cyberspace

42. Facebook Use (hrs / day)
Participants: 122 Undergrads at the U of Wpg
Facebook T1,
Dark Tetrad 5 months later
(controlling for age & gender)

43. Online Trolling?

44. Online trolling is a hot topic
August 2016

45. Trolling has a lasting impact on its victims

46. Alt-Right Trolls Influenced the U.S. Presidential Election

47. “Lulz” as Sadistic Pleasure

48. Buckels, Trapnell, & Paulhus (2013), Personality and Individual Differences
Our Initial Research
In 2 online studies (total N = 1215), participants completed D4 measures & questions about their Internet commenting styles
Including trolling
Results:
Strong positive correlations between trolling & D4
Sadism was a unique predictor of trolling (β = .61***)
Trolling is strongly indicative of everyday sadism

49. Are Trolls Truly Malevolent?
Just identity claims?
Limitations of self-reported malevolence
Are they trolling us?

50. Follow-up Research
Deeper, non-obvious evidence of malevolence in trolls?
Psychological biases that support sadism in everyday people
Study 1: Judgments of Others’ Suffering
Study 2: Moral Judgment (not discussed here)
Buckels, Trapnell, Andjelovic & Paulhus (in prep.)

51. Sadistic Pain Perception
How do trolls and sadists judge the intensity of others’ suffering?
(physical and emotional pain)

52. Competing Hypotheses H1a: Tendency to exaggerate others’ suffering
Sadistic fantasy
H1b: Tendency to minimize others’ suffering
More socially acceptable to laugh at minor pain (versus serious pain)
Real deficiencies in empathic response to suffering

53. Method Participants: 304 MTurkers (51% Women; M age = 34 yrs)
Completed an online survey that included measures of the Dark Tetrad, trolling (iTroll)
Presented with 6 photographs from the International Affective Picture System (Lang, et al., 2005)
Physical Injuries and facial expressions of pain
Provided 2 ratings for each photo

54. Perceived Pain Intensity
“How much pain is this person in?” (5-point scale)

55. Perceived Pain Intensity
“How much pain is this person in?” (5-point scale)

56. Obtained Pleasure
“How pleasing (or unpleasing) is this photo?” (7-point scale)
We also assessed pleasure.

57. Obtained Pleasure
“How pleasing (or unpleasing) is this photo?” (7-point scale)

58. Mediation Analysis (Trolling)
-.39***
Trolling
Pleasure
.40***
(-.26***)
Perceived Pain Intensity
-.10
95% CI for the standardized indirect effect = [-0.24, -0.09]
* p < .05, *** p < .001

59. Mediation Analysis (Sadism)
-.38***
Sadism
Pleasure
.47***
(-.27***)
Perceived Pain Intensity
-.10
95% CI for the standardized indirect effect = [-0.27, -0.11]
* p < .05, *** p < .001

60. D4 on the Net: Discussion
Dark personalities use social media websites more often than others
Online trolls are high in sadistic traits
Trolling/sadism associated with a tendency to underestimate the intensity of others’ suffering
May explain why trolls do what they do
“I’m not hurting anyone”

61. Take Home Message Continuing evidence that sadism:
exists and can be measured in everyday people
is distinct from traits like psychopathy
People with dark traits walk among us

63. We need darkness to see the stars

64. Thank You Del Paulhus, Paul Trapnell
RA’s: Lu Zhao, Vivian Tong, Sara Ahmadian, Mona Zhu
Thanks for listening!
Thanks!

65. Become an undergraduate research assistant!

66.  We need volunteer research assistants (RA’s)
Get Involved!
 We need volunteer research assistants (RA’s)
 We are looking for motivated third year, fourth year, or honours students (ideally in Psychology)
 Min. commitment is 3 hours per week
 Benefits: Research experience for grad school. References from affiliated faculty. Possibility for paid RA work in the future.

67. for details: