“Are darker individuals in control?”: A path model of the Dark Triad, Emotional Regulation and Locus of Control
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Among the socially aversive personality traits, the Dark Triad (i.e., Machiavellianism, narcissism, and psychopathy) is one of the most prominent. It is known that there is an association between these traits and emotional regulation and control strategies. However, further empirical support is needed to understand how these traits simultaneously influence each other. Thus, this study aimed to investigate the relationship between the Dark Triad, emotion dysregulation strategies, and locus of control using a predictive model. The participants consisted of 305 individuals aged 18 to 59 years (M = 32.5; SD = 12.05) who responded to the Dirty Dozen (DD), the Emotional Dysregulation Scale (EDEA), the Locus of Control Scale (ELOCUS), and the Baptist Depression Scale (EBADEP). Our results suggest positive associations of Machiavellianism, psychopathy, and narcissism with maladaptive emotional dysregulation strategies, and these strategies predicted external locus of control. Therefore, individuals with darker traits tend to employ dysfunctional emotion regulation strategies and consequently attribute external events as the cause of such outcomes.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".