I know if I put "strongly agree," it'll be more likely to call me a psychopath. At the same time, I'm thinking, "I look out for people I love - sometimes at risk to myself - but ultimately that's only because they matter to ME. Looking out for others is undeniably motivated by what matters to me."
Aside from the false dichotomies, surely any psychopath with even a shred of intelligence could answer strategically and defeat the test's intended purpose. And they use this in prison hearings?
Some of the questions were routine business questions, others were general questions about the material they read, and, the meat of the questions were ones on the moral consequences of executive decisions. It was expected that executives would answer all the questions correctly. Instead, the study scored based on how long it took them to answer the moral questions as opposed to the general questions. These scores were then compared against respondents from a control group of non-executives.
Gosh! I hope I'm representing her study accurately... "Business Experience and Moral Awareness: When Less May be More", Jennifer Jordan (2005)
More info needed ASAP.
Takes a bit of scrolling down the page of results, but people are actually pretty honest on that one, the mode response is "Agree somewhat" (this finding is from our initial, seed sample).
Also agree about the ease of getting around this. Particularly if you're a psychopath, and are therefore good at being manipulative. The version of this test used in parole settings deals with this by having professional interviewers who use the person's history and records to make assessments, in addition to the interview. (Note that I'm not actually defending that process; part of the point of this and NPR's recent discussions about psychopathy is to stimulate thinking about whether stuff like this should actually be used for important decisions like parole)
edit: clarified that results from  are from initial seed sample of respondents, not the HN sample.
Psychology is a science, just like pizza is a vegetable.
Of course I'm still just not-executing-my-nonexistent-utility-function, but the point is that said utility function cares about people other than myself. In aggregate, more so than myself.
I've had this exact same thought before. I love manipulating people's feelings in certain ways. I like making people have fun. If you're in a bad mood and someone goes out of their way to try and put you in a good mood they have intentionally manipulated you.
That apparently puts me in the 9th decile. Weird, because I usually come up as neutral or chaotic good on alignment tests.
Psychopath's don't care what the world calls them. They see it as an advantage. So if you tell a non-psychopath that he isn't a psychopath he is relieved, if you tell a psychopath that he is a psychopath he is also relieved.
So the only way this test can change someone's paradigm is if it is erroneous.
Everyone places somewhere on the spectrum, the question is only where.
The one exception is if that test or diagnosis makes it impossible for you to achieve your goals. For example, if somebody broadcasts to the world that you're a psychopath and that means you get turned down from jobs or the government starts a manhunt for you, then a psychopath would feel bad. But on a self-report questionnaire on the Internet? That has no consequence on your actual life? If you feel bad about your psychopathy score there, you're almost certainly not a psychopath.
If you're actually worried about being a psychopath, then clearly you want very badly to be a not-psychopath. If it's that important to you, then you're missing one of the critical markers of psychopathy.
I read the questions (Iphone vs Android? Is that a demographic question??? Really?) and I had a good laugh.
Regardless of the actual accuracy (which I doubt), what exactly is the interest of the result for a person with enough instropection (fancy word for self awareness) to care enough and take the test in the first place?
I don't think they would collect some dangerous info on those who do the survey, but, for instance, it could be an effort to provide targeted ads to my IP address.
Also perhaps 'demographic' is probably the wrong word on our part, point taken :)
> Complete the scientifically validated test below to see how psychopathic you are relative to others who have taken the test.
The validation given is the Wikipedia page on Psychopathy. Best laugh all day.
Second link (on the word 'validated') was to this article: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10497804
They've packaged some pretty standard questions (probably) based on DSM IV criteria that they think will tell them how psychopathic the survey responder is, then they're going to correlate that data with the demographic information at the bottom to say: "Look, Android/iPhone users are, on average, eleventy percent more psychotic than iPhone/Android users!"
It will be dumb, and only people who repost stupid text-on-image-wisdom stuff to their Facebook wall will believe it has any bearing on reality.
"Do you have a heart condition? Take this online questionnaire and find out!"
but then again i'm no doctor, i'm just some guy... who always scores really high on these things. (top 5% in this one).
Unless... I hope my choice of "Java" doesn't make me more psychopathic.
"We refer to individuals with a very high concentration of these features (perhaps 1% of the general population) as psychopaths" 
So there's no clear cutoff, it's not a bimodal distribution, but if you are in the top 1% (of a professionally administered version of this test) you might be considered a psychopath.
Psychopaths know that their driving traits are not perceived well, and they will consciously veer away from such overt questions.