Sex, Power, and Money: Prediction from the Dark Triad and Honesty–Humility
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Data were collected from two undergraduate student samples to examine (i) the relations of the ‘Dark Triad’ variables (Machiavellianism, Psychopathy, and Narcissism) with the HEXACO personality dimensions, as well as (ii) the ability of the aforementioned characteristics and of the Big Five personality factors to predict outcome variables related to sex, power, and money. Results indicated that the common variance of the Dark Triad was very highly correlated with low Honesty–Humility and that the unique variance of each of the Dark Triad variables also showed theoretically meaningful relations with the other five HEXACO factors. Furthermore, the Dark Triad and Honesty–Humility were strong predictors of three domains of outcome variables—Sex (short–term mating tendencies and sexual quid pro quos), Power (Social Dominance Orientation and desire for power), and Money (conspicuous consumption and materialism)—that were not well predicted by the dimensions of the Big Five. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it