Introduction

Work fundamentally influences adult lives, actively shaping their identity, self-esteem, and social standing. It establishes a secure, predictable, and fulfilling environment that instills structure and coherence in one’s life. Participating in work activities fosters positive emotions associated with accomplishment and imparts a sense of control and purpose to individuals (Andreassen, 2014). From a developmental perspective, work serves as a manifestation of generativity, showcasing the innate drive to engage in productive endeavours and to witness the tangible outcomes of one’s efforts, which adults realize during their lifetime (Poole & Snarey, 2011). Work holds crucial importance in human existence by satisfying essential psychological needs (Ryan & Deci, 2000), which include the need for competence (a sense of capability, efficiency, and control), autonomy (self-directed and meaningful behaviour), and relatedness (fostering harmonious relationships with significant others). As a result, individuals often idealize those who dedicate themselves intensively to work, as such commitment exhibits their enhanced competence, autonomy, and indispensability. Furthermore, it is natural for individuals to associate busyness with desirable qualities such as ambition, determination, importance, and an enhanced sense of presentation (Andreassen, 2014). These associations may escalate concerns about work, sparking uncontrolled work motivation and leading to the emergence of a phenomenon known as workaholism (Gomes et al., 2022).

Workaholism and Irrational Beliefs

Workaholism manifests as an obsessive-compulsive preoccupation with work, compelling individuals to constantly engage in work-related activities, harbour persistent thoughts about work, dedicate extensive hours to work whenever possible, and immerse themselves excessively in their work tasks, often leading to addiction (Andreassen, 2014; Ng et al., 2007; van Wijhe et al., 2013). Numerous studies show that we cannot determine the presence of workaholism solely by the number of hours an individual spends working; rather, it depends on the individual’s attitude towards work (Machlowitz, 1980). Based on Ajzen’s (1989) multidimensional concept of attitude, which includes affective, cognitive, and behavioural dimensions, Ng et al. (2007) assert that even an excessive attitude towards work encompasses these dimensions. Affectively, it involves finding pleasure in the work process itself and experiencing feelings of guilt and anxiety when not working. Cognitively, it includes an obsessive preoccupation with work, an uncontrollable urge to work, an internal push to overwork, and irrational overcommitment. Behaviourally, it results in excessive work involvement, disrupting personal life and replacing personal activities with work tasks, all rooted in specific antecedents as detailed in comprehensive reviews by Andreassen (2014) and Ng et al. (2007). We can categorize these antecedents into three types: (1) predisposing factors, including unsatisfied needs, values, personality traits, psychological and physiological mechanisms, and cognitive schemas; (2) socio-cultural factors, such as cultural influences, interpersonal experiences, and family dynamics; and (3) behavioural reinforcements, which involve social learning and conditioning that result in work-related rewards, praise, and complaints. However, Albert Ellis’ rational-emotional behavioural therapy (1995) states that the mere presence of antecedents does not automatically trigger consequences. Instead, individuals’ emotional and behavioural reactions originate from their beliefs, which form cognitive representations of reality and stem from cognitive schemas (David et al., 2005). The approach to understanding belief formation varies across scholarly literature, and several prominent theories explore this phenomenon. Beck (1991), from the cognitive-behavioural perspective, maintains that specific beliefs profoundly influence individuals’ perception of the world, information processing, and subsequent behavioural, emotional, motivational, and cognitive responses, integrating these beliefs into cognitive schemas that become integral to an individual’s personality. In essence, how individuals process situations cognitively dictates their emotional and behavioural reactions (González-Prendes et al., 2019). Conversely, the Theory of Planned Behaviour (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975) suggests that personal, social, and cognitive factors form our beliefs, which then determine an individual’s attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioural control. These elements subsequently shape behavioural intentions and lead to specific behaviours (Fishbein & Ajzen, 2011). This theory asserts that an individual’s perception and interpretation of their environment are shaped by their personality. Thus, according to this theory, an individual’s personality structure influences their beliefs.

Beliefs fall into two categories: rational and irrational (Ellis et al., 2010). Rational beliefs match objective reality, showcasing logical coherence, flexibility, non-extremism, and a constructive orientation towards oneself and others. They encompass preferences, a high tolerance for frustration, acceptance of oneself and others, and a tendency to avoid catastrophizing situations (Samar et al., 2013; Turner, 2016). Conversely, irrational beliefs originate from cognitive distortions that cause individuals to perceive and interpret reality inaccurately. These beliefs display extremism, rigidity, and absolutism, making them unrealistic and illogical. As a result, they frequently lead to counterproductive behaviours and outcomes. They involve tendencies toward excessive demandingness, depreciation of self and others, low frustration tolerance, catastrophic thinking, blaming oneself and others, a strong need for comfort, approval, and achievement, as well as a tendency towards excessive self-condemnation (Kaya, 2023; Samar et al., 2013; Turner, 2016; van Wijhe et al., 2013).

Van Wijhe et al. (2013) postulate that irrational beliefs, which contribute to an irrational commitment to work, are the roots of workaholism. Therefore, their research aimed at identifying irrational beliefs about work as antecedents to workaholism. They identified four distinct categories of irrational beliefs: (1) Performance demands, which involve the irrational conviction that one must achieve high levels of performance to maintain self-worth; (2) Co-workers’ approval, which entails the irrational belief that one must excessively meet others’ expectations in the workplace to gain social acceptance; (3) Failure, which involves catastrophizing the potential consequences of work-related failures; and (4) Control, which pertains to the obsessive-compulsive irrational belief that one must exert control over every aspect of one’s work circumstances.

Personality and Irrational Beliefs

As mentioned above, approaches to delineating beliefs vary, particularly in their explanations of the relationship between beliefs and an individual’s personality. These approaches differ in their views on whether an individual’s personality structure shapes beliefs or if cognitive schemas play a decisive role in developing personality (Beck, 1991; Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975). In scholarly literature, researchers find empirical support for both the cognitive-behavioural approach (Dozois & Beck, 2008) and the Theory of Planned Behaviour, with studies backing each perspective (Samar et al., 2013; Schofield et al., 2022; Zhao et al., 2016). In the context of workaholism and associated irrational beliefs, we adopt Andreassen’s (2014) proposed assumption that personality and cognitive schemas serve as predisposing antecedents to workaholism. Moreover, researchers consider cognitive schemas essential components of an individual’s personality structure (Beck, 1991). If cognitive schemas, as part of the personality structure, influence beliefs (Dozois & Beck, 2008), then personality should also act as a precursor to beliefs, as the Theory of Planned Behaviour suggests (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975).

Further studies, including those by Zhao et al. (2016), support the assumption that personality traits influence cognitive beliefs. Individuals with distinct personality characteristics typically maintain specific sets of beliefs (Schofield et al., 2022). Samar et al. (2013) synthesize research focused on associations with the Big Five personality traits (McCrae & Costa, 1987), a standard in personality research—extraversion (characterized by excitability, sociability, talkativeness, assertiveness, and high emotional expressiveness), neuroticism (marked by emotional instability and a tendency to experience negative emotions), agreeableness (noted for cooperation, trust, altruism, kindness, affection), openness (involving creativity and a willingness to engage with new ideas), and conscientiousness (defined by self-discipline, organization, and striving for success). In these studies, Samar et al. (2013) find that neuroticism, extraversion, and conscientiousness correlate positively with irrational beliefs, whereas openness and agreeableness tend to correlate negatively with irrational beliefs. Their findings also indicate that personality traits predict both rational and irrational beliefs. Specifically, neuroticism correlates negatively with rational beliefs, while the other Big Five traits correlate positively with rationality. Conversely, neuroticism correlates positively with irrational beliefs, while the other personality traits tend to correlate negatively with them. As Samar et al. (2013) highlight, these findings indicate inconsistencies across different studies.

Researchers have consistently linked irrational beliefs to various forms of maladjustment (Watson & Morris, 1990) and psychopathology (Samar et al., 2013). Moreover, since personality traits influence irrational beliefs and since aversive personality traits associate with dysfunctional reactions bordering on psychopathology (Paulhus & Williams, 2002), exploring the connections between irrational beliefs and traits included in the Dark Triad construct becomes relevant. Additionally, extensive evidence highlights the relationships between the Big Five traits and the Dark Triad (Furnham et al., 2013; Jakobwitz & Egan, 2006; Malesza et al., 2019; Paulhus & Williams, 2002), suggesting that Dark Triad traits might also predict irrational beliefs.

The Dark Triad comprises three aversive personality traits: Machiavellianism, narcissism, and psychopathy (Paulhus & Williams, 2002). Even though the terms narcissism and psychopathy are commonly associated with psychopathology describing certain personality disorders, it is important to distinguish these from their conceptualization in the Dark Triad, which reflects a trait approach in personality theory.

The differentiation between clinical and subclinical personality profiles hinges upon the impact of personality structures on individual functioning and social interaction. Clinical personality profiles are characterized by traits that substantially impair either personal functioning or the social environment (Furnham et al., 2013). In contrast, subclinical personality traits are prevalent within the general population. Although these traits are serious enough to warrant consideration for personality disorder diagnoses, they are typically less intense and fail to meet the thresholds required for pathological classifications. LeBreton et al. (2006) contend that the distinction between subclinical and clinical personality profiles primarily depends on the degree to which these traits disrupt various life domains, rather than the specific nature of the behaviours or interpersonal relationships involved.

Delroy Paulhus and Kevin Williams (2002) introduced the lexicons “Machiavellians,” “narcissists,” and “psychopaths” within their formulation of the Dark Triad construct, aimed at delineating individuals exhibiting notable albeit non-pathological levels of these traits.

Machiavellianism typically involves manipulating others to achieve personal gains, often at others’ expense (Al Aïn et al., 2013). Machiavellian individuals often display emotional detachment, cynicism, and an aspiration for power and status, predisposing them to leadership roles. They exhibit a suspicious nature, distrust others, bend rules, and skilfully adapt to social situations to benefit themselves (Paulhus & Williams, 2002). Narcissism mainly features excessive self-love, egocentrism, and an inflated yet fragile self-image (Morf & Rhodewalt, 2001). Individuals with narcissistic traits show a heightened sense of grandiosity, superiority, self-importance, and self-centeredness. Moreover, they depend on external validation and acceptance to maintain their self-worth (Paulhus & Williams, 2002). Like Machiavellians, subclinical psychopaths also show emotional detachment, but they additionally display shallow emotional experiences. They often see others as rivals or potential threats (LeBreton et al., 2006). Psychopaths typically lack feelings of guilt or remorse, show limited concern for others’ well-being, and exhibit a low level of empathy (Forsyth & O’Boyle, 2013).

Dark Triad and Irrational Beliefs

The above analysis indicates that individuals with dark features commonly share specific characteristics. Researchers widely assume that dark traits represent specific manifestations of a general dispositional tendency that forms the core of the dark personality—the dark factor (Moshagen et al., 2018). While the dark factor offers a holistic approach, researchers more frequently use the Dark Triad in studies aiming to identify associations with specific dark traits. We also adopted this second approach in our presented study.

Previous research shows that individuals high in dark traits tend to orient their behaviour toward support and self-assertion. They exhibit aggression and antisocial behaviour, notably marked by emotional coldness, limited empathy, lack of honesty and humility, and unstable self-esteem (Lee & Ashton, 2005; Paulhus & Williams, 2002). Furthermore, these individuals pursue status, control, achievement, power, acceptance from others, approval by others, and prestige (Jonason et al., 2015; Kajonius et al., 2015). These findings imply that the characteristics associated with the dark factor connect to impaired self-regulatory mechanisms, potentially contributing to addiction development (Jauk & Dieterich, 2019). Kiziloğlu et al. (2022) have summarized comprehensively that workaholism and dark traits share several characteristics, including excessive ambition, a strong desire for power, inadequate fulfilment of basic psychological needs, strained social relationships in the workplace, and a strong drive to climb higher in hierarchical ranks. Furthermore, Szabó et al. (2023) note that narcissism associates with the highest level of work motivation, followed by Machiavellianism, and psychopathy. In narcissism, motivation stems from intrinsic factors, whereas Machiavellianism and psychopathy are driven by extrinsic factors.

According to Paleczek et al. (2018), one potential motivation for Machiavellians to engage excessively in work is their desire for status, power, and financial rewards. As a result, they actively strive to climb the hierarchical ladder, aiming for leadership positions and prioritizing career achievements. This effort enables them to assert dominance and cultivate an image of success and significance (Kiziloğlu et al., 2022). On the other hand, narcissists seek recognition from others and therefore invest additional effort in their work to stand out from their peers. They project an image of superior efficiency and competence compared to their colleagues (Paleczek et al., 2018). Narcissism is primarily linked to a performance orientation, and similar to Machiavellians, individuals with narcissistic traits also aim to reach the highest levels of the organizational hierarchy through overworking (Kiziloğlu et al., 2022). Subclinical psychopaths, characterized by low self-control, tolerate the potential negative consequences of their work-related behaviours (Paleczek et al., 2018). Moreover, their self-assurance and emotional detachment facilitate their advancement to top managerial positions (Kiziloğlu et al., 2022).

When examining irrational beliefs, we must consider the cognitive functioning characteristic of the Dark Triad.

O’Boyle et al. (2013) offer a dual perspective on intellectual ability in relation to dark traits. They suggest that the exploitative behavioural strategies of individuals with the Dark Triad might stem from their intellectual prowess. On the other hand, some counterarguments propose that individuals with Dark Triad traits might use manipulative social behaviours to compensate for intellectual deficits. Supporting this idea, Kowalski et al. (2018) associate the manipulative abilities of Machiavellians with higher intelligence levels, which they use to exploit social situations. Consistent with prior research, their findings show that fluid intelligence does not predict narcissism or psychopathy.

Jonason et al. (2018) explored the relationship between dichotomous thinking and the Dark Triad, finding significant positive correlations between all three dark traits and dichotomous thinking, which often underpins extreme behaviours with negative outcomes. This type of thinking simplifies decision-making by eliminating ambiguities and simplifying the complexities of social situations.

Zhao et al. (2016) highlighted the presence of unrealistic beliefs about success and their association with dark traits. Machiavellians often overestimate the likelihood of gain and underestimate the probability of loss. Similarly, narcissists, fuelled by their self-confidence, unrealistically overestimate their chances of success and underestimate risks. Psychopaths also typically disregard the probability of loss, maintaining irrational beliefs about favourable outcomes.

Kaya (2023) demonstrated that Dark Triad traits positively associate with irrational beliefs in romantic relationships. This finding aligns with earlier research, such as the studies by Chakhssi et al. (2014), Shultz and Lepper (2022), and Zeigler-Hill et al. (2011), which also reveal connections between the Dark Triad and irrational beliefs.

Present Study

We can deduce a positive association between Dark Triad traits and irrational beliefs from the established connections between the Dark Triad and the Big Five personality traits. Specifically, Machiavellianism and psychopathy correlate positively with neuroticism, while narcissism shows positive correlations with extraversion and openness. Furthermore, agreeableness and conscientiousness correlate negatively with all three dark traits (Furnham et al., 2013; Jakobwitz & Egan, 2006; Malesza et al., 2019; Paulhus & Williams, 2002). Given the link between irrational beliefs and the Big Five traits (Samar et al., 2013), which suggests that neuroticism and extraversion associate positively with irrational beliefs, it is reasonable to hypothesize that Dark Triad traits will also correlate positively with irrational beliefs. Moreover, considering the Dark Triad’s associations with occupational behaviour and work addiction (Jauk & Dieterich, 2019), it is plausible to postulate that this relationship extends to irrational beliefs about work.

As several studies indicate, gender plays an indispensable role in this context. Sun et al. (2010) identify biological, cognitive, and behavioural differences between men and women that could influence their personality and thinking styles. Additional studies support these findings, showing that men tend to process information more selectively and analytically and exhibit more rational behaviour characterized by competitiveness, independence, dominance, achievement orientation, and individual goals. In contrast, women generally engage in more complex, intuitive, and experiential thinking and are more cooperative, dependent, nurturing, less dominant, and focused on affiliation and group goals (Feingold, 1994; Hartung et al., 2022; Jonason et al., 2022; Sun et al., 2010). Cross-cultural studies further suggest that women report themselves as more neurotic, agreeable, and open to feelings, while men are more open to ideas and assertive (Costa et al., 2001). Numerous studies provide evidence of darker personality traits more frequently in men (Furnham et al., 2013; Jonason et al., 2010, 2013; Jones & Paulhus, 2014; Malesza et al., 2019; Miller et al., 2008; Paulhus & Williams, 2002; Rahafar et al., 2017; Roeser et al., 2016). Traits such as caution or empathy often associate more with femininity, while traits like assertiveness or dominance link more closely to masculinity (Jonason et al., 2022; Weisberg et al., 2011). However, the gender differences in workaholism and irrational beliefs are not entirely clear. Ellis and Grieger (1977) noted that social factors, such as adopting social roles, lead women to form distinct beliefs from men. In the study by van Wijhe et al. (2013), women appeared more workaholic, while Dudek and Szpitalak (2019) and Beiler-May et al. (2017) observed no gender differences in workaholism. They highlight the importance of considering the cultural context and the specific work domain in which individuals operate. This notion aligns with the idea that social factors may drive workaholism in women as an effort to balance work-life conflict, whereas men may be motivated by the belief that they need to provide for the family (Dudek & Szpitalak, 2019). Regarding irrational beliefs, Balkıs and Duru (2020) demonstrate that gender differences in irrational beliefs are not straightforward. These findings are supported by Browne et al. (2010), who report that both genders hold irrational beliefs, albeit of different natures. Men tend to hold irrational beliefs associated with high achievement, avoidance tendencies, and low social anxiety, while women are more prone to catastrophizing and excessive anxiety concerns.

Based on the mentioned associations between irrational beliefs and Big Five traits, the links between Big Five traits and Dark Triad traits, and the biological, cognitive, and behavioural gender differences, the current study investigates the associations between Dark Triad traits and work-related irrational beliefs, considering gender as a significant factor in this relationship.

Method

Participants

The research sample included 355 employed individuals, ranging in age from 18 to 67, with an average age of 36.57 years (SD = 10.70). Of the total respondents, 47.90% were male (N = 170) and 52.10% were female (N = 185). Males had an average age of 37.30 years (SD = 10.50), while females had an average age of 35.91 years (SD = 10.86). Most participants, 78.60% (N = 279), worked in the private sector, and 21.40% (N = 76) in the public sector. In the private sector, respondents had an average age of 36.39 years (SD = 10.63), while in the public sector, they had an average age of 37.26 years (SD = 11.00). Specifically, in the private sector, 168 males (60.21%) with an average age of 37.39 years (SD = 10.46) and 111 females (39.79%) with an average age of 34.86 years (SD = 10.75) were employed. In the public sector, 74 females (97.39%) with an average age of 37.47 years (SD = 10.91) and 2 males (2.61%) with an average age of 29.50 years (SD = 16.26) participated. The average employment duration was 13.2 years.

The primary requirement for participation in the study was active employment with at least one employer. Data collection occurred between April and November 2023, using convenience and purposive sampling methods. We distributed the questionnaire set electronically via the Google Docs-Form application through email and social networks focused on the business community. We did not collect identification data from participants. We informed participants about the voluntary nature and confidentiality of their participation. They gave their consent by acknowledging a statement about anonymity, voluntariness, absence of financial compensation, and the use of their data solely for research purposes. We also informed them that they could discontinue the questionnaire at any time, thus opting out of the study.

Materials

Demographics

The demographic questionnaire collected information on participants’ gender (male/female/other), age, and occupational sector (private/public).

Work-related Irrational Beliefs (van Wijhe et al., 2013)

To measure irrational beliefs concerning work, we used a 20-item questionnaire divided into four subscales: performance demands (items 1–5; e.g., “In order to feel satisfied with myself at work, I must achieve certain goals.“); co-workers’ approval (items 6–10; e.g., “To perform well in my job, I need the approval of my colleagues.“); failure (items 11–15; e.g., “When I make a mistake, the consequences are catastrophic.“); and control (items 16–20; e.g., “I can only handle work situations when they are predictable.“). Participants rated each item on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (completely disagree) to 5 (completely agree). We calculated individual scores for each subscale by summing the points. We reverse-scored one item in the “control” subscale (“I am capable of dealing with unexpected events in my work.“) before calculating the scores. We assessed the internal consistency of the questionnaire using McDonald’s coefficient omega, which yielded the following values: performance demands ω = 0.77, co-workers’ approval ω = 0.81, failure ω = 0.78, control ω = 0.63, and the overall questionnaire ω = 0.84.

Short Dark Triad (Jones & Paulhus, 2014; Slovak translation by Čopková & Šafár, 2021)

We used the Slovak version of the original questionnaire developed by Jones and Paulhus (2014) to assess dark traits. The scale includes 27 statements, divided into three subscales: Machiavellianism (items 1–9; e.g., “I enjoy using clever manipulation to achieve my goals.“), narcissism (items 10–18; e.g., “I know I am special because people constantly tell me so.“), and psychopathy (items 19–27; e.g., “People who cross me always regret it.“). Participants indicated their level of agreement or disagreement with each statement on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). We computed scores separately for each subscale by summing the points assigned to the items. Before scoring, we needed to reverse the responses for three items in the narcissism subscale (e.g., “I feel embarrassed when someone compliments me.“) and two items in the psychopathy subscale (e.g., “I have never been in trouble with the law.“). We assessed the internal consistency of the questionnaire using McDonald’s omega coefficient, which yielded the following values: Machiavellianism ω = 0.74, narcissism ω = 0.73, psychopathy ω = 0.81.

Procedure and Design

We conducted data analysis using the statistical software Jamovi 0.8.1.13. Since we collected the data electronically, there were no instances of missing data, as the questionnaire settings prevented the submission of incomplete responses. We did not exclude any forms. We used McDonald’s omega coefficient to estimate the internal consistency of the questionnaires. Before performing statistical analyses, we assessed the normality of data distribution using the Shapiro-Wilk test, along with descriptive statistics for kurtosis and skewness. The results indicated a violation of data normality, as the Sig. value was lower than 0.05 for all variables, prompting the use of nonparametric tests in further analyses. We described sample characteristics using descriptive statistics, such as mean and standard deviation. We used Spearman’s correlation coefficient to examine the strength and significance of relationships between variables. This correlation analysis laid the groundwork for conducting multiple regression analysis, where we evaluated the assumptions. We coded the gender variable as follows: 1 = male, 2 = female, and the sector variable as follows: 1 = private, 2 = public.

Results

The statistical analysis unfolded in multiple steps. Table 1 shows the descriptive analysis of Dark Triad traits (Machiavellianism, narcissism, psychopathy) and overall irrational beliefs about work, broken down by gender and occupational sector. Among the Dark Triad traits, respondents scored highest on average in Machiavellianism. The data show that males and private sector workers achieved higher mean scores compared to females and those employed in the public sector. Similar patterns emerged for narcissism and psychopathy, with males and private sector workers achieving higher average scores. Conversely, for overall work-related irrational beliefs, females and public sector individuals recorded higher overall average scores. Across all respondents, performance demands received the highest average score, while control scored the lowest. When analysing the data based on gender, we inferred that average scores for all four types of irrational beliefs were approximately equivalent between males and females. In the public sector, respondents scored slightly higher in performance demands and failure, while in the private sector, scores were higher in co-workers’ approval and control.

Table 1 Descriptive analysis of dark triad and work-related irrational beliefs
Full size table

In the second phase of the statistical analysis, we primarily focused on examining the associations between Dark Triad traits and work-related irrational beliefs. Table 2 presents the findings, which reveal significant positive correlations between Machiavellianism and overall work-related irrational beliefs (rs = 0.164; p < 0.01), as well as with the failure subscale (rs = 0.180; p < 0.01) and control subscale (rs = 0.139; p < 0.01). Additionally, narcissism showed significant positive correlations with the co-workers’ approval subscale (rs = 0.194; p < 0.001) and overall work-related irrational beliefs (rs = 0.13; p < 0.05). Moreover, psychopathy demonstrated significant positive correlations with the co-workers’ approval subscale (rs = 0.152; p < 0.01) and the control subscale (rs = 0.168; p < 0.01), but it showed a significant negative correlation with the performance demands subscale (rs = -0.183; p < 0.001). However, it is important to note that we characterized all of these relationships as weak.

Table 2 Spearman correlation analysis of dark triad and work-related irrational beliefs
Full size table

The next step in the analysis involved multiple regression analysis, building upon the results of the correlation analysis. This analysis aimed to determine whether the Dark Triad traits could predict work-related irrational beliefs, both overall and at the subscale level. We also included other variables such as gender, age, and occupational sector in the analysis. All tested models produced significant results, and we present the detailed outcomes in Table 3.

The regression analysis outcomes showed that the model explained 5.5% of the variance in work-related irrational beliefs (R2 = 0.055; F(6, 348) = 3.37; p = 0.003). Significant predictors of work-related irrational beliefs included Machiavellianism (β = 0.137; t(355) = 2.314; p = 0.021) and narcissism (β = 0.143; t(355) = 2.410; p = 0.016), both positively influencing work-related irrational beliefs. However, psychopathy did not emerge as a significant predictor in this model. Additionally, gender proved to be a significant predictor of work-related irrational beliefs (β = 0.285; t(355) = 2.349; p = 0.019), with the female gender, based on the coding used, showing a stronger association with overall work-related irrational beliefs.

In subsequent analyses, we conducted regression analyses for each subscale individually. The model accounted for 6.5% of the variance in performance demands (R2 = 0.065; F(6,348) = 4.09; p < 0.001). Machiavellianism showed a positive association with performance demands (β = 0.156; t(355) = 2.643; p = 0.009), while psychopathy demonstrated a negative association (β = -0.283; t(355) = -4.465; p < 0.001). However, narcissism did not emerge as a significant predictor for performance demands.

For the co-workers’ approval subscale, the model explained 6.0% of the variance (R2 = 0.060; F(6,348) = 3.70; p = 0.001). Among the Dark Triad traits, only narcissism significantly predicted co-workers’ approval, positively influencing it (β = 0.220; t(355) = 3.729; p < 0.001). Conversely, neither Machiavellianism nor psychopathy significantly predicted co-workers’ approval.

The tested model accounted for 5.4% of the variance in failure (R2 = 0.054; F(6,348) = 3.32; p = 0.003). In this case, Machiavellianism was the only significant predictor (β = 0.191; t(355) = 3.219; p = 0.001), while narcissism and psychopathy did not significantly predict failure.

The final analysis revealed that the model explained 8.3% of the variance in control (R2 = 0.083; F(6,348) = 5.28; p < 0.001). Among the Dark Triad traits, psychopathy (β = 0.15; t(355) = 2.619; p = 0.009) emerged as the sole significant predictor, positively associated with control. Additionally, the sector in which respondents worked was a positive predictor (β = 0.481; t(355) = 4.030; p < 0.001), indicating that control issues are more significant for individuals in the public sector. Gender showed a negative association with control (β = -0.380; t(355) = -2.653; p = 0.008), suggesting that males are more likely to harbour irrational beliefs about control, based on the coding used.

It is important to note, however, that the proportion of explained variance in work-related irrational beliefs was consistently low across all models.

Table 3 Regression analysis of Dark triad and Work-related irrational beliefs
Full size table

Discussion

Different approaches exist regarding whether an individual’s personality structure shapes beliefs or if cognitive schemas play a decisive role in personality development (Beck, 1991; Fishbein & Ajzen, 2011). In the current study, we adopted an approach inspired by the Theory of Planned Behavior (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975), which posits that an individual’s personality influences their beliefs. This approach also receives support from other scholars (Schofield et al., 2022; Samar et al., 2013; Zhao et al., 2016).

The primary objective of the present study was to explore the associations between the Dark Triad personality construct, which includes Machiavellianism, narcissism, and psychopathy (Paulhus & Williams, 2002), and work-related irrational beliefs. We based the selection of this construct on several assumptions: (1) findings from Samar et al. (2013) study indicate that the Big Five personality traits (neuroticism, extraversion, openness, agreeableness, conscientiousness) predict irrational beliefs; (2) substantial connections between the Big Five traits and Dark Triad traits have emerged consistently in previous research (Furnham et al., 2013; Jakobwitz & Egan, 2006; Malesza et al., 2019; Paulhus & Williams, 2002); (3) irrational beliefs contribute to various forms of maladjustment and psychopathology (Samar et al., 2013; Watson & Morris, 1990); (4) maladjustment correlates with Dark Triad features (Paulhus & Williams, 2002); (5) work addiction and dark traits share common characteristics such as excessive ambition, power-seeking tendencies, inadequate satisfaction of basic psychological needs, disrupted social relationships in the workplace, and a strong drive to ascend the hierarchical ladder (Kiziloglu et al., 2022); (6) excessive work involvement associates with irrational beliefs (van Wijhe et al., 2013). These considerations led us to hypothesize that Dark Triad traits could serve as predictors of work-related irrational beliefs. Given the inconsistent findings regarding gender differences, we also included this variable in our analyses for further examination. We acknowledge recent developments in research concerning the dark factor of personality, which offers a comprehensive view of the darker aspects of personality. However, considering the abundance of studies focused on the Dark Triad, along with established methodologies for assessing specific dark traits—Machiavellianism, narcissism, and psychopathy—we chose to concentrate our study on the Dark Triad concept.

The research conducted on a sample of 355 employed individuals substantiated these assumptions. Initially, we examined the associations between work-related irrational beliefs and Dark Triad traits. Machiavellianism showed a positive correlation with overall work-related irrational beliefs, particularly in relation to control and failure. Concerning work-related irrational beliefs, control involves an obsessive-compulsive inclination to avoid uncertainty, risk, and ambiguity, or to establish a sense of security through the maintenance of a predictable environment. Conversely, failure pertains to negative emotions linked to the possibility of experiencing failure (van Wijhe et al., 2013). Given that individuals with Machiavellian tendencies pursue power, status, achievement, prestige, and control (Jonason et al., 2015; Kajonius et al., 2015), and exhibit excessive ambition and extrinsic motivation, such as praise or recognition in the occupational domain, which reinforces their power position, the potential loss of control and failure may threaten this position. Hence, it is reasonable to infer that Machiavellians’ drive to engage excessively in work stems from their endeavour to uphold a position of power, reinforced by irrational beliefs that perceive failure in performance as unacceptable while simultaneously emphasizing the necessity of maintaining control. Additionally, Machiavellianism shows a positive correlation with neuroticism (Paulhus & Williams, 2002), which, in turn, is positively associated with irrational beliefs (Samar et al., 2013). In the current study, narcissism was positively correlated with co-workers’ approval. Within the context of work-related irrational beliefs, this finding corresponds with the belief that individuals are only accepted by their social environment if they exhibit high levels of performance (van Wijhe et al., 2013). This result aligns with the idea that narcissists heavily rely on self-presentation for their self-image (Baka, 2019) and seek acceptance from others (Jonason et al., 2015; Paulhus & Williams, 2002). Consequently, narcissists endeavour to invest greater effort at work to distinguish themselves (O’Boyle et al., 2013; Paleczek et al., 2018) and demonstrate their competence to their social surroundings. Surprisingly, psychopathy showed a positive association with irrational beliefs related to the need for control. This finding is unexpected since psychopaths are typically characterized by impulsivity and a propensity for risk-taking (O’Boyle et al., 2013; Paulhus & Williams, 2002), often prioritizing their own desired outcomes, even at the expense of others or causing harm. Simultaneously, psychopathy showed a negative correlation with performance demands, which, within the context of work-related irrational beliefs, signifies the belief that one must work diligently to experience personal satisfaction (van Wijhe et al., 2013). This result corresponds with the low ambition typically displayed by psychopaths, their extrinsic motivation (Szabó et al., 2023), and their lack of interest in impressing the social environment (Forsyth & O’Boyle, 2013), as they do not feel the need to gain approval. The associations identified between the Dark Triad traits and work-related irrational beliefs receive further support from research on the cognitive functioning of individuals exhibiting Dark Triad traits, characterized by dichotomous thinking (Jonason et al., 2018), unrealistic expectations of success (Zhao et al., 2016), and irrational beliefs in romantic relationships (Kaya, 2023).

Inspired by the study conducted by Samar et al. (2013), we performed multiple regression analyses on the collected data. The predictors included Machiavellianism, narcissism, psychopathy, as well as age, gender, and the employment sector of the respondents. The predicted variables were overall work-related irrational beliefs and its respective subscales. All models demonstrated significant explanatory power, accounting for variances in work-related irrational beliefs ranging from 5.4 to 8.3%. However, it’s important to note that the explained variance was relatively modest compared to the findings of the aforementioned authors, who observed variances in general irrational beliefs explained by the Big Five model ranging from 4.0 to 19.0%. Notably, the presence of Machiavellianism and narcissism emerged as predictors of overall work-related irrational beliefs, aligning with the significance they place on achievement, status, self-presentation, and the concurrent existence of irrational beliefs in both traits. The female gender also emerged as a significant predictor, aligning with findings from Michel-Kröhler and Turner (2022). The predictors for performance demands, co-workers’ approval, and failure were based on the results of the correlation analysis. As expected, psychopathy predicted control, which was also associated with the public sector. Additionally, control was negatively predicted by the male gender, aligning with the concept of male dominance and the desire for power (Jonason & Davis, 2018). These results are consistent with findings by Tahir and Aziz (2019) and Nissinen et al. (2022), indicating a higher prevalence of workaholism and irrational beliefs within the public sector compared to the private sector. The results regarding the gender effect are consistent with previous studies that indicated either absent or less significant differences between men and women in irrational beliefs (Balkıs & Duru, 2020; Browne et al., 2010).

We should interpret the findings of this study within the context of certain limitations. Firstly, we conducted data collection online using purposive and convenience sampling, which did not allow us to verify if the questionnaire reached respondents who met the eligibility criteria for participation. Additionally, the research methodology relied on self-reported measures, introducing potential response biases, especially concerning dark traits, as individuals often aim to maintain a positive self-image (Rhodewalt & Tragakis, 2002). Therefore, it is plausible that responses, particularly regarding these traits, might be distorted. Moreover, we did not include employees from the non-profit sector in the research group, a notable omission that could have provided valuable insights, especially considering the observed sector-related effects on work-related irrational belief control. Furthermore, it is important to acknowledge that dividing the sample dichotomously into two sectors might oversimplify the complexity of the occupational landscape, thus warranting a more nuanced examination of the specific sectors involved.

In future research, it would be valuable to explore the interplay between work-family conflict, irrational beliefs about work, and the Dark Triad in domains such as parenting or romantic relationships, which represent other significant areas of individuals’ lives.

While caution is necessary when generalizing the findings of this study, its contributions are significant, especially in light of prior research on the association between personality and irrational beliefs. Unlike previous studies that predominantly focused on the Big Five traits, this study delved into the darker aspects of personality, which are closely intertwined with maladjustment and socially undesirable work behaviours. The results show that despite the perception of Dark Triad trait carriers as displaying calculated, rational, and well-thought-out behaviour, these traits can also foster the development of cognitive irrational beliefs, which exert negative consequences on both the individual and their environment.

From a clinical standpoint, it is crucial to identify and modify maladaptive beliefs when treating individuals with dark personality traits, who may harbour beliefs about their indispensability, superiority, or paranoia regarding others’ motives. Accurately assessing these traits and irrational beliefs enables clinicians to tailor interventions more effectively, particularly for those whose dark traits complicate their interpersonal and professional relationships. Regular testing throughout therapy offers insights into treatment responses, which is essential for clients in high-stakes or leadership roles where preventing unethical behaviours and conflicts is critical. Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) proves particularly effective in this context. CBT techniques like thought records, cognitive restructuring, and behavioural experiments actively challenge and modify harmful beliefs. Additionally, practices in mindfulness and role-playing enhance self-awareness and interpersonal skills. This comprehensive approach not only helps clients better manage their work interactions but also fosters personal and professional growth by equipping them with strategies to recognize and adjust maladaptive behaviours over the long term.

In organizational settings, addressing the disruptive impact of individuals with dark traits on team dynamics and their contribution to a toxic work environment is crucial. The focus on “corporate psychopaths,” who achieve their goals at others’ expense, underscores the need for interventions to curb such behaviours and manage affected employees effectively. Beyond addressing overt problematic behaviours, it is also vital to consider these individuals’ mental health, recognizing that they may engage in counterproductive behaviours on an intrapersonal level. Training programs that emphasize healthy work habits, the necessity of breaks, and fostering self-reflection are essential, particularly for those with high levels of aversive traits. Leadership and management training should equip leaders to integrate such personalities into the workforce thoughtfully and to be mindful of their mental health needs, promoting a healthier and more inclusive workplace.