The People Who Expect Less From Love: What Dark Triad Research Reveals About Intimacy
Saturday, May 23, 2026.
There are people who enter relationships hoping to be deeply known.
Then there are people who enter relationships hoping things remain emotionally manageable, strategically calm, and preferably free from unnecessary vulnerability.
A new study suggests those differences are not random personality quirks.
They may reflect fundamentally different expectations about intimacy itself.
The research, published in the journal Personality and Individual Differences, examined how Dark Triad personality traits, attachment styles, and romantic beliefs shape what people expect from emotional closeness in relationships.
And honestly, it explains a surprising amount about modern dating.
Some people are searching for emotional connection.
Others are essentially trying to run intimacy through Risk Management.
What the Researchers Actually Studied
Researchers Silvija Ručević and Josipa Antunović surveyed 900 adults between ages 18 and 74 who were currently in romantic relationships.
Participants completed questionnaires measuring:
Dark Triad personality traits.
attachment anxiety and avoidance.
romantic beliefs.
and intimacy expectations.
That last category is important.
The study was not simply measuring whether the study subjects currently felt close to their partners. It examined whether people fundamentally expected relationships to involve:
emotional disclosure.
trust.
vulnerability.
responsiveness.
and mutual understanding.
In other words:
Do you believe intimacy is supposed to involve genuine emotional closeness?
Or do you think relationships work best when everyone remains reasonably composed and slightly guarded like diplomats at a trade summit?
The Dark Triad, Explained Without Sounding Like a Batman Movie
The “Dark Triad” refers to three socially antagonistic personality traits:
narcissism.
psychopathy.
and Machiavellianism.
Narcissism involves grandiosity and a need for admiration.
Psychopathy involves impulsivity, emotional coldness, and lack of remorse.
Machiavellianism is the strategic one — cynical, manipulative, emotionally calculating.
Machiavellian people tend to approach social relationships with the energy of someone quietly asking:
“What is everyone really after here?”
Which, to be fair, is not always inaccurate. It is just not especially relaxing.
Attachment Theory Arrives, As It Always Does
The researchers also examined attachment styles, building on the work of John Bowlby and later adult attachment researchers.
Securely attached people generally feel comfortable with emotional closeness.
Anxiously attached people fear abandonment and become highly sensitive to rejection.
Avoidantly attached people tend to minimize vulnerability and maintain emotional distance.
If you have ever watched one partner attempt a serious emotional conversation while the other suddenly becomes extremely interested in reorganizing the garage, you have witnessed avoidant attachment in action.
The researchers used a statistical approach called hierarchical regression, which essentially allows them to determine which psychological factors are doing the heaviest lifting once everything is analyzed together.
And the results were revealing.
The Strongest Predictor of Low Intimacy Expectations
The strongest predictor of expecting less intimacy in relationships was avoidant attachment.
Not psychopathy.
Not narcissism.
Avoidance.
That matters because avoidant people are often misunderstood.
Many are not indifferent to closeness. They are cautious about dependency. Emotional vulnerability feels risky, exposing, or destabilizing.
So instead of consciously thinking:
“I fear intimacy,”
the nervous system quietly develops a preference for emotional efficiency.
These are the couples where life appears functional:
bills are paid.
schedules coordinated.
vacations planned.
children successfully transported to activities.
Yet emotionally, something feels oddly sterile.
The relationship slowly becomes operational rather than intimate.
Machiavellianism and the Strategic View of Love
Among the Dark Triad traits, Machiavellianism emerged as the strongest predictor of low intimacy expectations.
Which makes sense.
If you fundamentally view relationships as strategic environments, emotional openness starts to feel less like connection and more like exposure.
People high in Machiavellianism often expect:
manipulation.
hidden motives.
power imbalances.
and emotional asymmetry.
Trust feels naive.
Vulnerability feels dangerous.
Dependence feels costly.
Romance becomes less:
“Come know me.”
And more:
“Let us maintain acceptable emotional boundaries while avoiding unnecessary leverage shifts.”
Not exactly poetry, but psychologically coherent.
The Narcissism Finding Was Surprisingly Nuanced
One of the more interesting findings involved narcissism.
Initially, narcissism seemed associated with lower intimacy expectations. But once researchers statistically separated narcissism from Machiavellian manipulation, narcissism actually predicted slightly higher intimacy expectations.
This makes more sense than it first appears.
Narcissistic individuals often crave admiration, attention, validation, and emotional affirmation.
They may genuinely desire closeness.
The difficulty is reciprocity.
Some narcissistic structures want emotional connection while still keeping the emotional spotlight primarily focused on themselves.
Which is why certain relationships slowly evolve into one partner becoming the emotional audience for the other.
The Most Striking Demographic Finding
The researchers also found that older women high in Machiavellianism reported the lowest intimacy expectations of any demographic group studied.
The authors suggest that repeated disappointments or relational injuries over time may gradually produce more emotionally pragmatic expectations.
In plain English:
some people stop expecting closeness because life taught them closeness often comes with disappointment, imbalance, or exhaustion.
That is an important distinction.
Many emotionally guarded adults are not incapable of intimacy.
They have simply become skeptical of its reliability.
FAQ
Does this study mean people with Dark Triad traits cannot love?
No. The findings suggest some individuals with higher Dark Triad traits — especially Machiavellianism — may expect less emotional closeness or trust from relationships. That is different from being incapable of attachment or affection.
What exactly is Machiavellianism?
Machiavellianism refers to a manipulative, strategic, and often cynical interpersonal style. People high in this trait may view relationships through the lens of leverage, control, or self-protection rather than mutual vulnerability.
Why was avoidant attachment such a strong predictor?
Avoidant attachment is closely associated with discomfort around dependency and emotional vulnerability. People with avoidant tendencies often minimize closeness because closeness itself feels psychologically risky.
Did psychopathy predict low intimacy expectations?
Interestingly, psychopathy did not independently predict intimacy expectations once the other traits were statistically accounted for.
Why did narcissism predict slightly higher intimacy expectations?
Once researchers separated narcissism from manipulative traits, narcissism showed a weak positive association with intimacy expectations. This may reflect a desire for admiration, attention, and emotional validation.
Can intimacy expectations change?
Yes. The study suggests attachment habits and relational beliefs play a major role in intimacy expectations. Those patterns can evolve through healthier relational experiences, therapy, and increased emotional safety.
Why This Research Matters
The study’s most hopeful finding may actually be this:
Attachment styles and relational beliefs predicted intimacy expectations more strongly than Dark Triad traits themselves.
That means personality alone is not destiny.
Relational expectations can change.
Attachment patterns can evolve.
People can learn that vulnerability is survivable.
But usually not through insight alone.
Insight is not interruption.
Many couples understand their dynamic perfectly while continuing to reenact it with remarkable consistency:
one pursues.
one withdraws.
one escalates.
one shuts down.
both become increasingly defensive.
Eventually the relationship organizes itself around self-protection instead of connection.
High-conflict systems become self-protective.
And once that happens, intimacy often starts shrinking quietly rather than collapsing dramatically.
Not explosive endings.
Not cinematic betrayals.
Just gradual emotional downsizing.
Two people sharing a life while slowly expecting less and less from each other emotionally.
Which may be one of the lonelier features of modern adulthood.
Be Well, Stay Kind, and Godspeed.
REFERENCES:
Ručević, S., & Antunović, J. (2026). Behind the mask of love: Associations among dark triad traits, attachment avoidance and anxiety, romantic beliefs, and intimacy expectations. Personality and Individual Differences.
Bowlby, J. (1988). A secure base: Parent-child attachment and healthy human development. Basic Books.
Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2016). Attachment in adulthood: Structure, dynamics, and change (2nd ed.). The Guilford Press
Campbell, W. K., & Foster, C. A. (2002). Narcissism and commitment in romantic relationships: An investment model analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28(4), 484–495.
Jonason, P. K., & Webster, G. D. (2010). The dirty dozen: A concise measure of the Dark Triad. Psychological Assessment, 22(2), 420–432.
Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. (1987). Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(3), 511–524.