Comparing the Triarchic and Five-Factor Trait Models: Relations With Psychopathy and Other Clinical Criteria in an Incarcerated Offender Sample

Abstract

This study compared how normative personality dimensions of the Five-Factor Model (FFM) and neurobehavioral traits of the triarchic model relate to psychopathic tendencies and clinical outcomes in an incarcerated sample of 277 Italian male offenders. Associations between triarchic model traits, measured using the TriPM and the FFM dimensions, measured using the NEO-FFI, were consistent with prior studies. Scores on the TriPM, particularly the Disinhibition scale, were associated with substance abuse and self-harm behavior over and above the presence of psychopathy, and beyond the personality dimensions indexed by the NEO-FFI. By contrast, the Neuroticism and Extraversion scales showed incremental validity, over and above psychopathy and TriPM scores, in predicting depressive tendencies. Lastly, both NEO-FFI and TriPM scales contributed to prediction of staff ratings of behavior in prison and prognosis for release, above and beyond psychopathy. These findings highlight potential advantages of the FFM and triarchic trait models for predicting clinical outcomes.

Evaluating the validity of brief prototype‐based informant ratings of triarchic psychopathy traits in prisoners

“…Our finding that higher ratings of boldness were related to lower levels of hopelessness aligns with results for TriPM Boldness reported by Brislin et al. ( 2019 ) as well as with findings of negative relations between self‐reported boldness and measures of internalizing psychopathology in other studies (Latzman et al., 2019, 2020 ). In contrast, higher ratings of boldness were associated with more favorable ratings of behavior in prison, better social connectedness, and more positive expectations for reintegration into society.…”

“…As reported by Brislin et al. ( 2019 ) for TriPM Disinhibition, and consistent with findings from many other studies (Iacono et al., 1999 ; Joyner et al., 2019 , 2020 ), informant‐rated disinhibition was associated robustly with substance use problems in the current sample—both when examined in an individual‐trait regression model and when examined concurrently with informant‐rated boldness and meanness in a joint model. Informant‐rated disinhibition also showed positive, preferential relations with both frequency and diversity of self‐harm behavior, mirroring results for TriPM Disinhibition in the current sample (Brislin et al., 2019 ).…”

“…Correlations between self‐report triarchic trait scores and criterion variables in this sample were reported previously by Brislin et al. (2019) and thus are not presented in the current paper 1…”

“…The TriPM Disinhibition scale is composed of 20 items from the Externalizing Spectrum Inventory (ESI; Krueger et al., 2007 ) that index its general externalizing factor, and the TriPM Meanness scale consists of 19 ESI items designed to index its callous‐aggression subfactor. The Italian version of the TriPM (Sica et al., 2015 ) used in this study has shown good psychometric properties in other research (e.g., Brislin et al., 2019 ; Sica et al., 2015 ; Somma et al., 2019 ). Within the current sample, the TriPM scales exhibited satisfactory internal consistencies (Cronbach's alpha) and mean corrected item‐total correlations ( r ): αs for Boldness, Meanness, and Disinhibition = 0.70, 0.87, and 0.85, respectively, M item‐total r s = 0.28, 0.47, and 0.42.…”

Latent variable model of triarchic psychopathy constructs in an incarcerated offender sample: Factor reliability and validity.

“…The TriPM’s Meanness (19 items) and Disinhibition (20 items) scales index the callous-aggression and general externalizing (disinhibition) factors, respectively, of the Externalizing Spectrum Inventory (ESI; Krueger et al, 2007). The Italian version of the TriPM has shown excellent validity and reliability in both community and incarcerated samples (e.g., Brislin, Cernohorsky, et al, 2019; Sica et al, 2015). In the current sample, all three scales showed adequate to good internal consistency reliability (Boldness: α = .77, ω = .76; Meanness: α = .92, ω = .92; Disinhibition: α = .89, ω = .88) 1…”