THE READING QUESTION
A six-domain model is useful only when its distinctions are clear and informative. A new domain name does not, by itself, show that a new questionnaire measures something distinct.
Read the theoretical argument
Ashton and Lee discuss empirical and theoretical arguments for the HEXACO model. The source is useful for examining how a model organizes personality content and why its authors distinguish particular domains. Read each proposed advantage alongside the evidence offered for it. A theoretical account can motivate a research question without establishing the quality of every questionnaire that borrows its terminology.
A fictional fairness example
In a fictional consulting partnership, Ellis returns an accidental overpayment without being asked but becomes impatient during slow group discussions. A colleague wonders whether fairness and patience should be combined into one good-character score. Another colleague notes that Ellis may cooperate differently when the situation involves personal gain versus interpersonal irritation. The example is deliberately simplified, but it illustrates a useful question: are the behaviors distinct enough to deserve separate examination? Calling both good conduct might be morally understandable while being too broad for a precise account of behavioral tendencies.
Compare competing maps
For this exercise, create two possible diagrams. One places all cooperative behaviors together. The other distinguishes avoidance of exploitation from patience during conflict. Write two original behavioral examples under each category without copying any inventory items. Then ask what response pattern would support keeping the categories separate. If people consistently differ across the two kinds of behavior, a single score may hide meaningful variation. If the distinction depends mainly on wording or evaluative tone, the apparent separation may be less useful. The exercise should permit either result; otherwise, the proposed model has become a conclusion before the observations have been collected.
Questions for evaluating an argument
Ask which claims concern descriptive organization and which propose an explanation for behavior. How are alternative models compared? What would show that a distinction adds useful information rather than merely adding complexity? For Ellis, could different incentives or role expectations explain the contrast without requiring a broad personality inference? Consider whether observers and self-reports would capture the same behaviors. Record where the source's argument is strongest and where your own fictional application goes beyond it. This protects against treating a persuasive theoretical explanation as direct evidence about one person's motives or future conduct.
Keep the original instrument distinct
Machiavelli Six-Domain Character is an independently written reflection framework. It is not an official HEXACO instrument and has not inherited the model's published findings. Ellis could use the questions to examine specific situations involving fairness and patience. Stronger claims about the new scores require direct studies of their content, structure, consistency, and interpretation, with room for the proposed distinctions to be revised.
FOLLOW THE ORIGINAL SOURCES
Ashton and Lee (2007) ↗