Psychological manipulation is a type of social influence that aims to change the behavior or perception of others through indirect, deceptive, or underhanded tactics. By advancing the interests of the manipulator, often at another’s expense, such methods could be considered exploitative and devious.
Social influence is not necessarily negative. For example, people such as friends, family and doctors, can try to persuade to change clearly unhelpful habits and behaviors. Social influence is generally perceived to be harmless when it respects the right of the influenced to accept or reject it, and is not unduly coercive. Depending on the context and motivations, social influence may constitute underhanded manipulation.
According to psychology author George K. Simon in 1996, successful psychological manipulation primarily involves the manipulator:
- Concealing aggressive intentions and behaviors and being affable.
- Knowing the psychological vulnerabilities of the victim to determine which tactics are likely to be the most effective.
- Having a sufficient level of ruthlessness to have no qualms about causing harm to the victim if necessary.
According to Braiker
Harriet B. Braiker (2004) identified the following ways that manipulators control their victims:
- Positive reinforcement: includes praise, superficial charm, superficial sympathy (crocodile tears), excessive apologizing, money, approval, gifts, attention, facial expressions such as a forced laugh or smile, and public recognition.
- Negative reinforcement: involves removing one from a negative situation as a reward.
- Intermittent or partial reinforcement: Partial or intermittent negative reinforcement can create an effective climate of fear and doubt. Partial or intermittent positive reinforcement can encourage the victim to persist.
- Punishment: includes nagging, yelling, the silent treatment, intimidation, threats, swearing, emotional blackmail, guilt trips, sulking, crying, and playing the victim.
- Traumatic one-trial learning: using verbal abuse, explosive anger, or other intimidating behavior to establish dominance or superiority; even one incident of such behavior can condition or train victims to avoid upsetting, confronting or contradicting the manipulator.
According to Simon
George K. Simon (1996) identified the following manipulative techniques:
- Lying (by commission) : It is hard to tell if somebody is lying at the time they do it, although often the truth may be apparent later when it is too late. One way to minimize the chances of being lied to is to understand that some personality types (particularly psychopaths) are experts at lying and cheating, doing it frequently, and often in subtle ways.
- Lying by omission: This is a subtle form of lying by withholding a significant amount of the truth. This technique is also used in propaganda.
- Denial: Manipulator refuses to admit that they have done something wrong.
- Rationalization: An excuse made by the manipulator for inappropriate behavior. Rationalization is closely related to spin.
- Minimization: This is a type of denial coupled with rationalization. The manipulator asserts that their behavior is not as harmful or irresponsible as someone else was suggesting.
- Selective inattention or selective attention: Manipulator refuses to pay attention to anything that may distract from their agenda.
- Diversion: Manipulator not giving a straight answer to a straight question and instead being diversionary, steering the conversation onto another topic.
- Evasion: Similar to diversion but giving irrelevant, rambling, or vague responses.
- Covert intimidation: Manipulator putting the victim onto the defensive by using veiled (subtle, indirect or implied) threats.
- Guilt trip: A special kind of intimidation tactic. A manipulator suggests to the conscientious victim that they do not care enough, are too selfish or have it too easy. This can result in the victim feeling bad, keeping them in a self-doubting, anxious and submissive position.
- Shaming: Manipulator uses sarcasm and put-downs to increase fear and self-doubt in the victim. Manipulators use this tactic to make others feel unworthy and therefore defer to them. Manipulators can make one feel ashamed for even daring to challenge them. It is an effective way to foster a sense of inadequacy in the victim.
- Vilifying the victim: This tactic is a powerful means of putting the victim on the defensive while simultaneously masking the aggressive intent of the manipulator, while the manipulator falsely accuses the victim as being an abuser in response when the victim stands up for or defends themselves or their position.
- Playing the victim role: Manipulator portrays themself as a victim of circumstance or of someone else’s behavior in order to gain pity, sympathy or evoke compassion and thereby get something from another. Caring and conscientious people often cannot stand to see anyone suffering and the manipulator often finds it easy to play on sympathy to get cooperation.
- Playing the servant role: Cloaking a self-serving agenda in the guise of a service to a more noble cause.
- Seduction: Manipulator uses charm, praise, flattery or overtly supporting others in order to get them to lower their defenses and give their trust and loyalty to the manipulator. They will also offer help with the intent to gain trust and access to an unsuspecting victim they have charmed.
- Projecting the blame (blaming others): Manipulator scapegoats in often subtle, hard-to-detect ways. Often, the manipulator will project their own thinking onto the victim, making the victim look like they have done something wrong. Manipulators will also claim that the victim is the one who is at fault for believing lies that they were conned into believing, as if the victim forced the manipulator to be deceitful. All blame, except for the part that is used by the manipulator to accept false guilt, is done in order to make the victim feel guilty about making healthy choices, correct thinking and good behaviors. It is frequently used as a means of psychological and emotional manipulation and control. Manipulators lie about lying, only to re-manipulate the original, less believable story into a “more acceptable” truth that the victim will believe. Projecting lies as being the truth is another common method of control and manipulation. Manipulators may falsely accuse the victim of “deserving to be treated that way”. They often claim that the victim is crazy or abusive, especially when there is evidence against the manipulator.
- Feigning innocence: Manipulator tries to suggest that any harm done was unintentional or that they did not do something that they were accused of. Manipulator may put on a look of surprise or indignation. This tactic makes the victim question their own judgment and possibly their own sanity.
- Feigning confusion: Manipulator tries to play dumb by pretending they do not know what the victim is talking about or is confused about an important issue brought to their attention. The manipulator intentionally confuses the victim in order for the victim to doubt their own accuracy of perception, often pointing out key elements that the manipulator intentionally included in case there is room for doubt. Sometimes manipulators will have used cohorts in advance to help back up their story.
- Brandishing anger: Manipulator uses anger to brandish sufficient emotional intensity and rage to shock the victim into submission. The manipulator is not actually angry, they just put on an act. They just want what they want and get “angry” when denied. Controlled anger is often used as a manipulation tactic to avoid confrontation, avoid telling the truth or to further hide intent. There are often threats used by the manipulator of going to the police, or falsely reporting abuses that the manipulator intentionally contrived to scare or intimidate the victim into submission. Blackmail and other threats of exposure are other forms of controlled anger and manipulation, especially when the victim refuses initial requests or suggestions by the manipulator. Anger is also used as a defense so the manipulator can avoid telling truths at inconvenient times or circumstances. Anger is often used as a tool or defense to ward off inquiries or suspicion. The victim becomes more focused on the anger instead of the manipulation tactic.
- Bandwagon effect: Manipulator comforts the victim into submission by claiming (whether true or false) that many people already have done something, and the victim should as well. Such manipulation can be seen in peer pressure situations, often occurring in scenarios where the manipulator attempts to influence the victim into trying drugs or other substances.
According to Braiker’s self-help book, manipulators exploit the following vulnerabilities (buttons) that may exist in victims:
- the desire to please
- addiction to earning the approval and acceptance of others
- emotophobia (fear of negative emotion; i.e. a fear of expressing anger, frustration or disapproval)
- lack of assertiveness and ability to say no
- blurry sense of identity (with soft personal boundaries)
- low self-reliance
- external locus of control
According to Simon, manipulators exploit the following vulnerabilities that may exist in victims:
- Naïveté – victim finds it too hard to accept the idea that some people are cunning, devious and ruthless or is “in denial” if they are being victimized.
- Over-conscientiousness – victim is too willing to give manipulator the benefit of the doubt and see their side of things in which they blame the victim.
- Low self-confidence – victim is self-doubting, lacking in confidence and assertiveness, likely to go on the defensive too easily.
- Over-intellectualization – victim tries too hard to understand and believes the manipulator has some understandable reason to be hurtful.
- Emotional dependency – victim has a submissive or dependent personality. The more emotionally dependent the victim is, the more vulnerable they are to being exploited and manipulated.
Manipulators generally take the time to scope out the characteristics and vulnerabilities of their victims.
- Dependent – dependent people need to be loved and are therefore gullible and liable to say yes to something to which they should say no.
- Immature – has impaired judgment and so tends to believe exaggerated advertising claims.
- Naïve – cannot believe there are dishonest people in the world, or takes it for granted that if there are any, they will not be allowed to prey on others.
- Impressionable – overly seduced by charmers.
- Trusting – people who are honest often assume that everyone else is honest. They are more likely to commit themselves to people they hardly know without checking credentials, etc., and less likely to question so-called experts.
- Carelessness – not giving sufficient amount of thought or attention to harm or errors.
- Lonely – lonely people may accept any offer of human contact. A psychopathic stranger may offer human companionship for a price.
- Narcissistic – narcissists are prone to falling for unmerited flattery.
- Impulsive – make snap decisions.
- Altruistic – the opposite of psychopathic: too honest, too fair, too empathetic.
- Frugal – cannot say no to a bargain even if they know the reason it is so cheap.
- Materialistic – easy prey for loan sharks or get-rich-quick schemes.
- Greedy – the greedy and dishonest may fall prey to a psychopath who can easily entice them to act in an immoral way.
- Masochistic – lack self-respect and so unconsciously let psychopaths take advantage of them. They think they deserve it out of a sense of guilt.
- The elderly – the elderly can become fatigued and less capable of multi-tasking. When hearing a sales pitch they are less likely to consider that it could be a con. They are prone to giving money to someone with a hard-luck story. See elder abuse.
Manipulators can have various possible motivations, including but not limited to:
- the need to advance their own purposes and personal gain at (virtually any) cost to others
- a strong need to attain feelings of power and superiority in relationships with others – compare megalomania
- a want and need to feel in control
- a desire to gain a feeling of power over others in order to raise their perception of self-esteem
- furtherance of cult dynamics in recruiting or retaining followers
- boredom, or growing tired of one’s surroundings; seeing manipulation as a game more than hurting others
- covert agendas, criminal or otherwise, including financial manipulation (often seen when intentionally targetting the elderly or unsuspecting, unprotected wealthy for the sole purpose of obtaining victims’ financial assets)
- not identifying with underlying emotions (including experiencing commitment phobia), and subsequent rationalization (offenders do not manipulate consciously, but rather try to convince themselves of the invalidity of their own emotions)
- lack of self-control over impulsive and anti-social behaviour – leading to pre-emptive or reactionary manipulation to maintain image
Main article: Psychopathy
Being manipulative appears in Factor 1 of the Hare Psychopathy Checklist (PCL).
In the workplace
Main article: Psychopathy in the workplace
One approach to management in general identifies a very fine, almost non-existent dividing line between management and manipulation.
A workplace psychopath may rapidly shift between emotions to manipulate people or to cause high anxiety.
The authors of the book Snakes in Suits: When Psychopaths Go to Work describe a five-phase model of how a typical workplace psychopath climbs to and maintains power. In phase three (manipulation) the psychopath will create a scenario of “psychopathic fiction” where positive information about themselves and negative disinformation about others will be created, where one’s role as a part of a network of pawns or patrons will be utilised and one will be groomed into accepting the psychopath’s agenda.
Antisocial, borderline and narcissistic personality disorders
According to Kernberg, antisocial, borderline, and narcissistic personality disorders are all organized at a borderline level of personality organization, and the three share some common characterological deficits and overlapping personality traits, with deceitfulness and exceptional manipulative abilities being the most common traits among antisocial and narcissism. Borderline is emphasized by unintentional and dysfunctional manipulation, but stigma towards borderlines being deceitful still wrongfully persists. Antisocials, borderlines, and narcissists are often pathological liars. Other shared traits may include pathological narcissism, consistent irresponsibility, Machiavellianism, lack of empathy, cruelty, meanness, impulsivity, proneness to self-harm and addictions, interpersonal exploitation, hostility, anger and rage, vanity, emotional instability, rejection sensitivity, perfectionism, and the use of primitive defence mechanisms that are pathological and narcissistic. Common narcissistic defences include splitting, denial, projection, projective identification, primitive idealization and devaluation, distortion (including exaggeration, minimization and lies), and omnipotence.
Psychologist Marsha M. Linehan has stated that people with borderline personality disorder often exhibit behaviors which are not truly manipulative, but are erroneously interpreted as such. According to her, these behaviors often appear as unthinking manifestations of intense pain, and are often not deliberate as to be considered truly manipulative. In the DSM-V, manipulation was removed as a defining characteristic of borderline personality disorder.
Manipulative behavior is intrinsic to narcissists, who use manipulation to obtain power and narcissistic supply. Those with antisocial personalities will manipulate for material items, power, revenge, and a wide variety of other reasons.
Histrionic personality disorder
Main article: Histrionic personality disorder
People with histrionic personality disorder are usually high-functioning, both socially and professionally. They usually have good social skills, despite tending to use them to manipulate others into making them the center of attention.
Machiavellianism is a term that some social and personality psychologists use to describe a person’s tendency to be unemotional, uninfluenced by conventional morality and more prone to deceive and manipulate others. In the 1960s, Richard Christie and Florence L. Geis developed a test for measuring a person’s level of Machiavellianism (sometimes referred to as the Machiavelli test).
Mainstream media (MSM) is a term and abbreviation used to refer collectively to the various large mass news media that influence many people, and both reflect and shape prevailing currents of thought. The term is used to contrast with alternative media.
The term is often used for large news conglomerates, including newspapers and broadcast media, that underwent successive mergers in many countries. The concentration of media ownership has raised concerns of a homogenization of viewpoints presented to news consumers. Consequently, the term mainstream media has been used in conversation and the blogosphere, sometimes in oppositional, pejorative or dismissive senses, in discussion of the mass media and media bias.
Fear mongering – Wikipedia
Mind games – Wikipedia
The Frankfurt School and Critical Theory – Cultural Marxism