The dance world has long normalised intensity. High standards, emotional pressure, perfectionism, hierarchy and sacrifice have all formed part of traditional dance culture.
Dancers are taught from an early age that discomfort can be part of becoming excellent, and there is truth in this. Training requires discipline, repetition, frustration tolerance, accountability and resilience. However, some environments move beyond demanding training into patterns of leadership that are psychologically harmful.
Within these environments, humiliation may be justified as motivation, fear used as a form of discipline, control mistaken for commitment, and silence interpreted as professionalism. Because these environments can still produce technically brilliant dancers, harmful leadership can remain protected and normalised for years.
As conversations around psychological safety, coercive control and wellbeing continue to grow within dance, another area deserves careful examination: dark personality patterns within leadership.
This article is not intended to diagnose individual teachers. It explores patterns of behaviour and power that may help us understand why some harmful leadership systems become so difficult to recognise, challenge or leave.
From the Dark Triad to Dark Personality
Before exploring Dr Karen Mitchell’s model, it is useful to understand the personality constructs that preceded it.
In personality psychology, the Dark Triad refers to three overlapping, socially aversive personality traits: narcissism, Machiavellianism and psychopathy. These constructs are generally studied as personality traits and should not automatically be interpreted as clinical diagnoses.
Narcissism
Within Dark Triad research, narcissism generally involves grandiosity, entitlement, a heightened sense of importance, desire for admiration or status, and sensitivity to threats to self-image. Interpersonally, this can involve expecting preferential treatment, using relationships to support self-esteem or status, and reacting strongly when superiority or entitlement is challenged.
Narcissistic traits exist to varying degrees within the general population. Their presence does not by itself mean that someone has Narcissistic Personality Disorder.
Machiavellianism
Machiavellianism describes a strategic, calculating and manipulative interpersonal style. A person high in Machiavellian traits may approach relationships according to what can be gained from them, use deception or manipulation instrumentally, and prioritise personal objectives over transparency, reciprocity or relational ethics.
Unlike more impulsive forms of harmful behaviour, Machiavellian behaviour can be highly deliberate. The person may be skilled at reading social situations, managing impressions and adjusting their behaviour according to what is most advantageous.
Psychopathy
Psychopathy is generally associated with callousness, low empathy, limited remorse, shallow emotional experience and exploitative interpersonal behaviour. Some conceptualisations also include impulsivity, irresponsibility, sensation seeking and antisocial behaviour.
Importantly, psychopathy does not necessarily mean violence or criminality. This distinction is particularly relevant to Mitchell’s work because her research considers socially integrated individuals who may function successfully within families, organisations and communities.
Sadism
Later research expanded the Dark Triad into what became known as the Dark Tetrad, adding everyday sadism.
Everyday sadism refers to a tendency to experience pleasure, gratification or enjoyment from causing or witnessing another person’s suffering, discomfort or humiliation. This can involve psychological and relational forms of cruelty as well as physical harm.
Sadism is particularly relevant when examining environments where humiliation can be normalised or disguised as an acceptable method of discipline.
Mitchell’s Different Proposition
Australian researcher Dr Karen Mitchell takes a different approach to these traditionally separated constructs.
Her doctoral research asks whether psychopaths, narcissists, Machiavellians, toxic leaders and coercive controllers may represent subsets of one overarching Dark Personality, rather than entirely distinct categories of harmful individuals.
From her research, Mitchell developed the Persistent Predatory Personality (PPP) model, a three-dimensional framework comprising 20 attributes, 25 tactics, and differentiating features involving capabilities and values.
Among the attributes identified in Mitchell’s model are a drive for control, power and dominance; superiority and entitlement; vengeance; predatory and exploitative behaviour; sadism and cruelty; dishonesty; manipulation; cultivation of a socially acceptable façade; lack of empathy; lack of remorse; self-interest; and unwillingness to accept responsibility for harm caused.
There is an important difference regarding sadism. While Dark Tetrad research treats everyday sadism as an additional dark trait, Mitchell’s findings propose that sadism may be an attribute common to people of Dark Personality.
Mitchell’s model is relatively new and requires further replication and testing. It is best understood as an emerging framework contributing to a much broader scientific discussion about dark personality, coercive control and socially harmful behaviour.
Her findings become particularly interesting when considered within environments characterised by strong hierarchy, dependency and significant differences in power.
Dance is one of those environments.
Control, Power and Dominance
One of Mitchell’s most significant findings was that control, power and dominance emerged as the strongest driver of Dark Personality behaviour.
This is particularly relevant to dance because teachers naturally hold considerable authority. They give corrections, establish expectations, determine choreography and may influence casting, competition opportunities, advancement and professional recommendations.
Problems can develop when the pursuit of control begins shaping the relationship itself. A leader may expect increasing levels of obedience, interpret questions as disrespect, respond poorly to boundaries, or perceive growing independence as disloyalty. Students who provide admiration or compliance may receive greater warmth or attention, while those who challenge the system may find themselves increasingly marginalised.
Over time, dancers can learn to monitor the emotional state of the person in authority and adjust their own behaviour accordingly. Their attention gradually shifts from learning and artistic development towards maintaining relational safety.
This is where authority can begin moving towards coercion.
The Public Leader and the Private Experience
Another characteristic within Mitchell’s model is the deliberate cultivation of a façade of normality. Her research describes individuals who may be socially adaptive and capable of presenting differently according to the environment and audience.
Outsiders may therefore experience an entirely different person from the one experienced by those lower in the hierarchy. A teacher may be charismatic with parents, respected by colleagues, generous publicly and deeply invested in their students’ success, while dancers experience intimidation, humiliation, manipulation or emotional unpredictability in situations that others do not witness.
This discrepancy can make disclosure particularly difficult. A dancer may eventually find the courage to describe what is happening, only to hear:
“Really? She has always been lovely to me.”
The person saying this may be telling the truth. Their experience of the teacher may genuinely have been positive.
For a young dancer, however, hearing that response can deepen their confusion. When parents, colleagues and the wider community admire the person causing them distress, the dancer may begin questioning their own interpretation of what is happening.
Maybe I am the problem.
That uncertainty can become part of what keeps harmful relationships intact.
When Humiliation Becomes Something More
One of the more confronting aspects of Mitchell’s research concerns sadism.
Traditional Dark Tetrad research generally conceptualises everyday sadism as a separate dark trait. Mitchell’s findings propose that sadism may instead be an attribute common to people of Dark Personality. Her conceptualisation encompasses causing pain, suffering, discomfort or humiliation, making this aspect of her work particularly relevant to dance.
Humiliation has historically been normalised within some training environments. A dancer may be mocked in front of a class, have their body discussed publicly, or have a mistake repeatedly exposed. A frightened or overwhelmed dancer may find that pressure continues despite their distress being clearly visible.
The existence of these behaviours alone does not establish sadism. Similar behaviours may arise from harmful training traditions, poor emotional regulation or entrenched beliefs about what produces excellence.
A more concerning pattern emerges when another person’s distress appears to become rewarding in itself. A leader may appear energised or satisfied by someone’s discomfort, escalate humiliation once distress becomes visible, or repeatedly create situations in which particular people are diminished in front of others.
This distinction matters because similar outward behaviour can arise from very different underlying psychological processes.
Manipulation, Exploitation and Dependency
Mitchell’s model also identifies manipulation, dishonesty, exploitation, entitlement, lack of empathy, lack of remorse, vengeance and unwillingness to accept responsibility for negative impacts.
Dependency can amplify the power of these behaviours within dance. A young dancer may rely upon one teacher, director or institution for opportunities, recommendations, advancement, validation and belonging.
When a developing identity is deeply connected to dance, losing the approval of an influential teacher can feel like considerably more than a relational rupture. The dancer may believe their future, community and sense of self are also at risk.
Manipulation does not always require an explicit threat when one person already controls something another person deeply values.
Why Harm Can Be So Difficult to Recognise
Psychologically harmful dance environments rarely contain only harmful experiences. They may also contain passion, artistry, friendship, mentorship, community, extraordinary opportunities and genuine moments of care.
This is part of what makes them so difficult to understand.
A dancer may have some of the most meaningful experiences of their life inside an environment that is also causing them harm. They may develop enormously as an artist, form lifelong friendships, travel, perform, win competitions, receive opportunities they never imagined, and feel deeply seen by a teacher at particular moments.
Some of these dynamics are also familiar to me personally. During the ten years I spent at my first dance studio as a child, I experienced physical and emotional harm alongside praise, opportunity and belonging. I deeply loved dance, and I was also terrified within the environment in which I was learning it. The coexistence of these experiences made the relationship with that environment particularly complex to understand as a child.
Across the decades since, as both a dancer and educator, I have witnessed how admiration, fear, loyalty, gratitude, artistic growth, opportunity and dependency can become deeply intertwined within high-performance environments.
Students may also become frightened of disappointing that same teacher, carefully monitor their moods, feel uncertain about where they stand, or experience withdrawal of warmth and approval when they fail to meet expectations.
When affection, attention, validation or opportunity become unpredictable, intermittent reinforcement can strengthen attachment to the relationship. The return of approval after a period of criticism, distance or uncertainty can feel particularly powerful because the dancer does not know when it will come again. They may work harder, become increasingly attentive to the teacher’s emotional state, or search for what they need to do to restore the connection.
This can create an emotionally confusing experience in which the dancer is genuinely able to say:
“But they did so much for me.”
And they may be right.
One of the most difficult realities is that dancers may deeply love an environment that is simultaneously harming them.
Recognising harm does not require erasing everything meaningful that happened there. A dancer can value what they learned, acknowledge opportunities they received, remember moments of genuine connection and still recognise that other aspects of the relationship were psychologically harmful.
Sometimes it is precisely this mixture that makes the experience so difficult to name.
Harmful Leadership and Dark Personality
Care needs to be taken when applying any personality framework to real people.
Unhealthy leadership behaviours can emerge through unresolved trauma, stress, rigid training traditions, emotional immaturity, poor leadership education or institutional conditioning. A teacher may lose their temper, become defensive, struggle with boundaries or repeat practices that were used on them. These behaviours can still cause considerable harm and require accountability.
Mitchell’s model examines a broader and more persistent configuration involving exploitation, manipulation, dominance, deception, predatory behaviour, limited empathy or remorse, and the repeated use of other people for personal purposes.
For this reason, patterns matter more than isolated incidents.
The response to accountability can also provide valuable information. A leader who has caused harm may be capable of reflection, genuine apology, behavioural change and repair. Persistent retaliation, blame shifting, image protection or further manipulation when challenged may indicate a very different relational pattern.
When the System Protects the Behaviour
The structure of dance can make unhealthy power dynamics easier to sustain. Strong hierarchy, young participants, intense competition, public evaluation, physical vulnerability and cultural traditions that have historically celebrated toughness can all influence whether harmful behaviour is questioned.
The surrounding ecosystem matters too. Parents may remain silent because they fear jeopardising their child’s opportunities. Teachers may hesitate to challenge respected colleagues. Students can learn to police one another, and institutions may prioritise reputation or results when concerns are raised.
Over time, prestige itself can become a form of protection.
If the teacher produces winners, successful professionals or technically exceptional dancers, people may interpret those outcomes as evidence that the methods are justified.
This is one of the more difficult cultural assumptions for dance to examine, because achievement tells us very little about the psychological health of the process that produced it.
Healthy High-Performance Leadership
High standards remain entirely compatible with psychological safety. Dance training can be demanding, corrections can be direct, teachers can hold appropriate boundaries, and students can be held accountable. Disappointment, frustration, pressure and discomfort are inevitable parts of serious artistic development.
Psychologically healthy leadership also involves emotional regulation, consistency, transparency, awareness of power, appropriate boundaries and the capacity for repair. A dancer can be challenged without being humiliated, corrected without fearing relational punishment, and expected to work hard while retaining psychological autonomy.
Perhaps one of the most useful questions we can ask is:
What happens to the person while we are developing the dancer?
Healthy training should progressively build a dancer’s capacity to think independently, tolerate mistakes, communicate when something feels wrong, manage disappointment and maintain a sense of self when a teacher is dissatisfied with their performance.
Excellence and selfhood can coexist.
Final Reflection
Dr Karen Mitchell’s research provides one lens through which some of the more persistent forms of exploitative leadership can be examined. It invites us to pay closer attention to patterns of control, manipulation, humiliation and the ways power is used within relationships.
Within dance, this means looking beyond talent, reputation and results when considering the health of a training environment. It means paying attention to what happens when boundaries are expressed, concerns are raised, authority is questioned, or someone no longer serves the interests of the person holding power.
Extraordinary dancers can emerge from harmful environments.
The presence of excellence tells us what was produced. It does not tell us what it cost.
References
- Paulhus, D. L., & Williams, K. M. (2002). The Dark Triad of personality: Narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy. Journal of Research in Personality, 36(6), 556–563.
- Wikipedia: Dark Triad Overview
- Dr Karen Mitchell Thesis: Persistent Predatory Personality Model
- Stirling, A. E., & Kerr, G. A. (2014). Initiating and sustaining emotional abuse in the coach-athlete relationship: An ecological transactional model of vulnerability. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 23(2), 116–135.
- Safe in Dance International
- Discussion of Dr Karen Mitchell’s Research
Disclaimer:
This article is intended for educational and reflective discussion around leadership, culture, and relational dynamics within dance environments. It is not intended as psychological diagnosis, mental health advice, or legal advice.