This study aimed to assess whether groups of aggressive children differed on psychopathic traits, and neuropsychological and neurobiological measures of prefrontal functioning consistent with the objectives of their aggression—reactive or proactive. Including 110 typically developing children (9–11 years), a latent class analysis identified a low aggression group, a high reactive aggression group, and a mixed (high reactive and proactive) aggression group. Results show high callous–unemotional traits and low resting respiratory sinus arrhythmia increased the likelihood of children being in the mixed aggression group, when compared to the reactive and low aggression groups. However, deficits in planning and inhibitory control increased the likelihood of children being in the reactive aggression group, when compared to the mixed and low aggression groups. Executive functioning deficits did not differentiate the mixed group from the low aggression group. These findings highlight psychobiological and executive functioning differences that may explain heterogeneity in childhood aggression.
A group of 12 authors (GA) shared a statement of concern (SoC) warning against the use of the Hare Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R; Hare, 1991, 2003) to assess risk for serious institutional violence in US capital sentencing cases (DeMatteo et al., 2020). Notably, the SoC was not confined to capital sentencing issues, but included institutional violence in general. Central to the arguments presented in the SoC was that the PCL-R has poor predictive validity for institutional violence and also inadequate field reliability. The GA also identified important issues about the fallibility and inappropriate use of any clinical/forensic assessments, questionable evaluator qualifications, and their effects on capital sentencing decisions. However, as a group of forensic academics, researchers, and clinicians, we are concerned that the PCL-R represents a psycholegal red herring, while the SoC did not address critical legislative, systemic, and evaluator/rating issues that affect all risk assessment tools. We contend that the SoC's literature review was selective and that the resultant opinions about potential uses and misuses of the PCL-R were ultimately misleading. We focus our response on the evidence and conclusions proffered by the GA concerning the use of the PCL-R in capital and other cases. We provide new empirical findings regarding the PCL-R's predictive validity and field reliability to further demonstrate its relevance for institutional violence risk assessment and management. We further demonstrate why the argument that group data cannot be relevant for single-case assessments is erroneous. Recommendations to support the ethical and appropriate use of the PCL-R for risk assessment are provided.
Despite the longstanding discussion around the link between psychopathy and fearlessness, few studies have explicitly tested this association, and results have been mixed. This may be due, in part, to the lack of specificity in fear assessment. Further, the relation between psychopathy and fear may be better understood using the two-factor model because, in theory, fear has opposing associations with interpersonal-affective (Factor 1) and impulsive-antisocial (Factor 2) traits. The present study aimed to test if the two factors of psychopathy are deferentially related to fear reactivity. To examine this, we collected sympathetic (SNS; skin conductance) and parasympathetic (PNS; respiratory sinus arrhythmia) nervous system reactivity to an interactive virtual reality horror video in a nonclinical sample (N = 103). Also, we included measures of emotional reactivity to fear and self-report of situational fear. Results indicated that coinhibition (i.e., low PNS and SNS) of the two physiological systems predicted Factor 1, suggesting that individuals high on Factor 1 showed little change in both branches of the autonomic nervous system in response to fear. In contrast, Factor 2 was predicted by high PNS reactivity, suggesting a vulnerability to emotion dysregulation. On emotional reactivity, Factor 1 was related to feeling happier after the fear condition, whereas Factor 2 was related to feeling less in control. Factor 1 was inversely associated with situational fear, specifically, lower scores of social phobias, fear of aggression, and physical injury. In summary, the results provide evidence that psychopathy is related to fearlessness; however, this is unique to the personality features of psychopathy.
Psychopathy is a multifaceted construct that has been linked to aggression. Yet, few studies have explored the association between physical, verbal, and indirect aggression using the 4‐facet model of psychopathy in community samples, and to date, no studies exist that test for male and female differences. The present study aimed to understand what facets of psychopathy predict aggressive behavior for men and women, while controlling for important risk factors, such as Antisocial Personality Disorder (ASPD). Drawing from a large Bulgarian community sample (N = 565), a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) supported the use of the 4‐facet model of the Psychopathy Checklist: Screening Version (PCL:SV; Hart et al., ). Hierarchical linear regressions revealed that physical aggression was predicted by affective and antisocial psychopathic traits, and ASPD. Verbal aggression was predicted by the interpersonal facet, and indirect aggression was predicted by the antisocial psychopathy facet and ASPD. Sex significantly moderated the associations among facets of psychopathy and physical and indirect aggression. Specifically, the affective facet was positively associated with physical aggression only for women, whereas the antisocial facet was positively associated with indirect aggression only for men. Results suggest that the 4‐facet model of psychopathy is sensitive to capture important similarities and differences between males and females when predicting forms of aggression in community samples. These findings underscore the importance of understanding how men and women differ in their risk‐factors for aggressive behavior, which will better inform violence interventions based on sex‐specific needs.
Use policyThe full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-pro t purposes provided that:• a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.Please consult the full DRO policy for further details.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.