The role of psychopathic features and developmental risk factors in trajectories of physical intimate partner violence.

Abstract

Objective: Limited research has examined the association between different dimensions of psychopathy and membership in trajectories of physical intimate partner violence (IPV) while also considering developmental precursors. Thus, the current study examined the role of adolescent unidimensional, interpersonalaffective, and lifestyle-antisocial psychopathic features and developmental risk factors in trajectories of physical IPV in young adulthood. Method: Data were derived from 885 male offenders who participated in the Pathways to Desistance Study and were assessed using the Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Version (PCL: YV). Results: Semiparametric group-based modeling identified three trajectories of physical IPV from ages 18 through 25: (a) a no physical IPV trajectory (70.5%, n = 624), (b) a low-level physical IPV trajectory (21.9%, n = 194), and (c) a high-level decreasing physical IPV trajectory (7.6%, n = 67). In multinomial logistic regression models controlling for exposure to violence, substance abuse, and peer delinquency, PCL: YV Total scores were associated with an increased likelihood of membership in the low-level and high-level physical IPV trajectories compared to the no physical IPV trajectory. In addition, Factor 2 scores (lifestyle-antisocial features) were associated with an increased likelihood of membership in the high-level decreasing physical IPV trajectory compared to the no physical IPV trajectory. Factor 1 scores (interpersonal-affective features) were unrelated to trajectory group assignment. Conclusions: Psychopathic features in adolescents should be considered in prevention and intervention strategies targeting physical IPV.

Adolescent Psychopathic Traits, Early Adversity, and Intimate Partner Violence

“…Early adversity can also affect perpetrating IPV (McKinney et al, 2009), but our findings showed that psychopathic traits were associated with the different forms of IPV in adolescents beyond these factors. The findings are in line with previous studies using the Pathways to Desistance Study that showed adolescents who were classified as engaging in IPV over time (both low-level and high-level decreasing) were higher in psychopathic traits than those who did not engage in IPV (Shaffer et al, 2021; Sweeten et al, 2016). Our study adds to this research by adopting a variable-centered analysis of psychopathic traits and IPV.…”

“…Two studies that we are aware of have examined IPV and psychopathic traits assessed with the PCL:YV in adolescence, both using the Pathways to Desistance Study (Shaffer et al, 2021; Sweeten et al, 2016). These studies used person-centered analyses to examine IPV trajectories and found that adolescents categorized as perpetrating the highest amount of physical and psychological IPV in adolescence that subsequently declined into adulthood as well as those who engaged in a smaller number of physical and psychological IPV—but consistently over time—both scored higher on psychopathic traits compared with adolescents who did not perpetrate IPV.…”

Predictive validity of the SAVRY, YLS/CMI, and PCL:YV is poor for intimate partner violence perpetration among adolescent offenders.

“…Additionally, among adults, psychopathy is prominent in conceptual models of intimate partner violence (e.g., Holtzworth-Munroe & Stuart, 1994), and some researchers have proposed that there is a subtype of intimate partner violence perpetrators who engage in more frequent and severe intimate partner violence than other types and score higher on measures of psychopathic traits (Holtzworth-Munroe et al, 2003). Furthermore, research has indicated that total scores on the PCL:YV are associated with an increased likelihood of membership in more serious trajectories of intimate partner violence perpetration in early adulthood (Shaffer et al, 2018, 2021; Sweeten et al, 2016). Taken together, psychopathy may be a valuable source of information in intimate partner violence assessments.…”

“…increased likelihood of membership in more serious trajectories of intimate partner violence perpetration in early adulthood (Shaffer et al, 2018(Shaffer et al, , 2021Sweeten et al, 2016). Taken together, psychopathy may be a valuable source of information in intimate partner violence assessments.…”

Triarchic Model of Psychopathy and Intimate Partner Violence: An Empirical Study on the Italian Community

“…A meta-analysis including 43 studies with adults (13,476 participants, 67% men) across 10 countries, evidenced that psychopathy typically emerged as the strongest predictor of IPV above other known risk factors, but the relationship between psychopathy factors (1 and 2) and IPV was inconclusive (Robertson et al, 2020). Shaffer and Colleagues (2021) examined the role of 885 male adolescents interpersonal-affective, and impulsive-antisocial psychopathic features and developmental risk factors in trajectories of physical IPV in young adulthood. Results showed that only the lifestyle-antisocial features (Factor 2) were associated with IPV.…”