[4] He viewed Machiavelli as a source to gain ideas from and eventually wrote test items that were loosely based on his general writing style.
[3] Items featured on the test include questions such as "most people who get ahead in the world lead clean, moral lives" and "P.T.
High scorers were more likely to win experimental games by deceiving the other person, while low Machs tried playing by the rules of the experiment.
[18] In studies it was shown that high scorers on the Kiddie Mach had a better time detecting when their opponent was lying and when they told the truth.
However, empirical tests don't show this difference, and in actuality they measure Machiavellianism as including low conscientiousness.
[20] The researchers then created a questionnaire called the Five Factor Machiavellianism Inventory (FFMI), starting with 201 questions based on these traits.
They shortened the questionnaire to 52 questions and confirmed it worked well by comparing it to other established measures of personality, including the Big Five traits, existing Machiavellianism tests, psychopathy, narcissism, ambition, and impulsivity.
[20] The FFMI displayed positive correlations with a range of criteria for vocational and work-related success and was shown to be distinct from psychopathy.
[21] Dahling, Whitaker, and Levy (2009) developed the Machiavellian Personality Scale (MPS) to address the shortcomings of the original MACH-IV.
These include the response styles of the test takers, the varying factor structures, the scale merely being a measure of cynicism only and "insufficient content and construct validity".