Subclinical personal correlates of psychological safety

Keywords: personality traits, spheres of life, psycholinguistic model of danger, machiavellianism, narcissism, psychopathy


The critical transformations of modern society, when personal and public safety can be sharply and suddenly lost, and “negative” (destructive, subclinical, antisocial) personality traits have sources of development, makes it necessary to determine the peculiarities of the relationships between these phenomena. In recent years, the study of the dark sides of the personality, known as the “dark core”, has become increasingly relevant. The purpose of the article is to study the psychological features of the subjective feeling of personal safety in the conditions of the Covid-19 pandemic. Methods. The “Dark Triad” questionnaire (D. L Paulhus & K. M. Williams) and the author’s methodology were used to achieve the research goals. To investigate subclinical personal correlates, the short scale of Paulhus D. L. & Williams K. M. (2010) questionnaire, which allows determining a person’s tendency to manifest one of the personal constructs of the dark triad(machiavellianism, narcissism, and psychopathy) was used. In order to build a psycholinguistic model of human danger and research the levels of personal safety in various spheres of life, a collective author’s methodology was applied (Zhuravlova et al., 2020, 2022). The methodology consists of three parts: a) general information; b) associative scale;c) tasks aimed at determining feelings of personal security in physical, sexual, gender, family, territorial, financial, religious, national, political, social, food availability, and business spheres of life. Results. An empirical structural phenomenological psycholinguistic model of human danger has been built. The emotional, cognitive and behavioral components of the model are singled out. Significant  (p≤.05)difference between the phenomenological characteristics of the subjective associative images of the danger of “machiavellians”, “narcissists” and “psychopaths” were established. Machiavellianism (cynicism, the desire for manipulative influence on other people and the need for control), narcissism (egocentrism, pathological self-love)and psychopathy (antisociality, emotional coldness) do not have significant correlation with feelings of personal security. In general, the average value of the integral level of security of the respondents in the conditions of the Covid-19 pandemic is quite high. Significant difference was found between indicators of the subjective sense of security of the respondents with a high, medium and low level of manifestation of dark personality traits only in the political sphere of life (p = .032). Conclusions. The empirical structural-phenomenological psycholinguistic model of human danger has a three-component structure. There is a difference between the surface (conscious) and deep (subconscious) phenomenological characteristics of the subjective associative images of the danger for an individual. The former are characterized by the dominance of cognitive and emotional personal correlates, and the latter – by behavioral ones. The integral level of personal safety of Ukrainian citizens in the conditions of the Covid-19 pandemic is quite high. There is no reliable correlation between indicators of subclinical personality traits and its integral psychological safety, except for safety in the political sphere.


Download data is not yet available.


Aldousari S. S., Ickes W. How is Machiavellianism related to locus of control?: A meta-analytic review. Personality and Individual Differences. 2021. Vol. 174 (3-4). P. 110677.
Bani-Melhem S., Mohd. Shamsudin F., Mazen Abukhait R., Quratulain S. Paranoid personality and frontline employee’s proactive work behaviours: a moderated mediation model of empathetic leadership and perceived psychological safety. Journal of Service Theory and Practice. 2021. Vol. 31 (1). P. 113-135.
Blötner C., Steinmayr R., Bergold S. Malicious mind readers? A meta-analysis on machiavellianism and cognitive and affective empathy. Personality and Individual Differences. 2021. Vol. 181. P. 111023.
Bradley B. H., Postlethwaite B. E., Klotz A. C., Hamdani M. R., Brown K. G. Reaping the benefits of task conflict in teams: the critical role of team psychological safety climate. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2012. Vol. 97(1). P. 151.
Carmeli A., Gittell J. H. High‐quality relationships, psychological safety, and learning from failures in work organizations. Journal of Organizational Behavior: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior. 2009. Vol. 30 (6). P. 709-729.
De Hoogh A. H., Den Hartog D. N., Belschak F. D. Showing one’s true colors: Leader Machiavellianism, rules and instrumental climate, and abusive supervision. Journal of Organizational Behavior. 2021. Vol. 42 (7). P. 851-866.
Du T. V., Collison K. L., Vize C., Miller J. D., Lynam D. R. Development and validation of the super-short form of the Five Factor Machiavellianism Inventory (FFMI-SSF). Journal of Personality Assessment. 2021. Vol. 103 (6). P. 732-739.
Edmondson A. C., Lei Z. Psychological safety: The history, renaissance, and future of an interpersonal construct. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior. 2014. Vol. 1 (1). P. 23-43.
Edmondson A. Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative science quarterly. 1999. Vol. 44 (2). P. 350-383.
Edmondson A. C., Kramer R. M., Cook K. S. Psychological safety, trust, and learning in organizations: A group-level lens. Trust and distrust in organizations: Dilemmas and approaches. 2004. Vol. 12.P. 239-272.
Edmondson A.C. Psychological safety, trust, and learning in organizations: a group-level lens. In Trust and Distrust in Organizations: Dilemmas and Approaches. ed. RM Kramer. KS Cook. New York: Russell Sage. 2004. Р. 239-272.
Erkutlu H., Chafra J. Leader psychopathy and organizational deviance: the mediating role of psychological safety and the moderating role of moral disengagement. International Journal of Workplace Health Management. 2019. Vol. 12(4). P. 197-213.
Hu J., Erdogan B., Jiang K., Bauer T. N., Liu S. Leader humility and team creativity: the role of team information sharing, psychological safety, and power distance. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2018. Vol. 103 (3). P. 313.
Гудімова А. Х. Психологічне благополуччя та патерни онлайн-поведінки користувачів соціальних мереж у повсякденності та під час пандемії COVID-19. Інсайт: психологічні виміри суспільства. 2021. Вип. 5. С. 133-147.
Jonason P. K., Tome J. How happiness expectations relate to the Dark Triad traits. The Journal of Social Psychology. 2019. Vol. 159 (4). P. 371-382.
Jonason P. K., Sherman R. A. Personality and the perception of situations: The Big Five and Dark Triad traits. Personality and Individual Differences. 2020. Vol. 163. P. 110081.
Jonason P. К. Webster G. The Dirty Dozen: A Concise Measure of the Dark Triad. Psychological assessment. 2010. Vol. 22 (2). P. 420-32.
Keles B., McCrae N., Grealish A. A systematic review: the influence of social media on depression, anxiety and psychological distress in adolescents. International Journal of Adolescence and Youth. 2020. Vol. 25 (1). P. 79-93.
Kim S., Lee H., Connerton T. P. How psychological safety affects team performance: mediating role of efficacy and learning behavior. Frontiers in psychology. 2020. Vol. 11. P. 15-81.
Muris P., Merckelbach H., Otgaar H., Meijer E. The malevolent side of human nature: A meta-analysis and critical review of the literature on the dark triad (narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy). Perspectives on psychological science. 2017. Vol. 12 (2). P. 183-204.
Newman A., Donohue R., Eva N. Psychological safety: A systematic review of the literature. Human resource management review. 2017. Vol. 27 (3). P. 521-535.
Орап М. О., Акімова Н. В., Кальба Я. Є. Суб’єктивне благополуччя та рівень тривожності під час кризи COVID-2019: дослідження українського юнацтва. Інсайт: психологічні виміри суспільства. 2021. Вип. 6. С. 28-39.
Ortega A., Van den Bossche P., Sánchez-Manzanares M., Rico R., Gil F. The influence of change-oriented leadership and psychological safety on team learning in healthcare teams. Journal of Business and Psychology. 2014. Vol. 29 (2). P. 311-321.
Paulhus D. L., Williams K. M. The dark triad of personality: Narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy. Journal of research in personality. 2002. Vol. 36 (6). P. 556-563.
Szabó E., Jones D. N. Gender differences moderate Machiavellianism and impulsivity: Implications for Dark Triad research. Personality and Individual Differences. 2019. Vol. 141. P. 160-165.
Crysel L. C., Crosier B. S., Webster G. D. The Dark Triad and risk behavior. Personality and individual differences. 2013. Vol. 54 (1). P. 35-40.
Maneiro L., Navas M. P., Van Geel M., Cutrín O., Vedder P. Dark triad traits and risky behaviours: Identifying risk profiles from a person-centred approach. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2020. Vol. 17 (17). P. 6194.
Литвинчук А. І. Схильність до маніпулятивного впливу осіб з різним рівнем психологічної безпеки. Науковий вісник Ужгородського національного університету. Серія: Психологія. 2022. № 2. С. 15-19.
Zhuravlova L., Chebykin O. The Development of Empathy. Phenomenology, Structure and Human Nature. Abindon, Oxon; New York. NY: Routledge. 2021. P. 276
Zhuravlova L., Pomytkina L., Lytvynchuk A., Mozharovska T., Zhuravlov V. Psychological Security in the Conditions of using Information and Communication Technologies. In Proceedings of the 1st Symposium on Advances in Educational Technology - Volume 2: AET. 2020. P. 216-223. ISBN 978-989-758-558-6.
Zhuravlova L., Lytvynchuk A., Mozharovska T., Bedny I. Environmental sustainability and perception of safety of vaccine in the COVID-19 pandemic. Scientific Horizons. 2022. P. 67-74.
How to Cite
Zhuravlova L. P., Lytvynchuk A. I., Grechukha I. A., & Bedny I. S. (2023). Subclinical personal correlates of psychological safety. Insight: The Psychological Dimensions of Society, (9), 94-111.