Psychopathic personality traits: Heritability and genetic overlap with internalizing and externalizing pathology

Department of Psychology, University of Minnesota, Twin Cities Campus, Minneapolis, MN 55455-0344, USA.
Psychological Medicine (Impact Factor: 5.94). 06/2005; 35(5):637-48. DOI: 10.1017/S0033291704004180
Source: PubMed


Little research has examined genetic and environmental contributions to psychopathic personality traits. Additionally, no studies have examined etiological connections between psychopathic traits and the broad psychopathological domains of internalizing (mood and anxiety) and externalizing (antisocial behavior, substance abuse). The current study was designed to fill these gaps in the literature.
Participants were 626 pairs of 17-year-old male and female twins from the community. Psychopathic traits were indexed using scores on the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire (MPQ). Symptoms of internalizing and externalizing psychopathology were obtained via structured clinical interviews. Structural equation modeling was used to estimate genetic and environmental influences on psychopathic personality traits as well as the degree of genetic overlap between these traits and composites of internalizing and externalizing.
Twin analyses revealed significant genetic influence on distinct psychopathic traits (Fearless Dominance and Impulsive Antisociality). Moreover, Fearless Dominance was associated with reduced genetic risk for internalizing psychopathology, and Impulsive Antisociality was associated with increased genetic risk for externalizing psychopathology.
These results indicate that different psychopathic traits as measured by the MPQ show distinct genetically based relations with broad dimensions of DSM psychopathology.

Download full-text


Available from: Brian M Hicks,
1 Follower
38 Reads
    • "Results from differing studies have provided support for each of these hypotheses. For example, evidence for the deficient reward-system sensitivity hypothesis was provided by Buckholtz et al. (2010), who used positron emission tomography (PET) along with functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to examine brain responses in a monetary incentive delay task as a function of varying levels of impulsive-antisocial tendencies [closely akin to trait disinhibition (Blonigen et al., 2005)]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Externalizing proneness, or trait disinhibition, is a concept relevant to multiple high-impact disorders involving impulsive-aggressive behavior. Its mechanisms remain disputed: Major models posit hyperresponsive reward circuitry or heightened threat-system reactivity as sources of disinhibitory tendencies. This study evaluated alternative possibilities by examining relations between trait disinhibition and brain reactivity during preparation for and processing of affective stimuli.40 females participated in a functional neuroimaging procedure with stimuli presented in blocks containing either pleasurable or aversive pictures interspersed with neutral, with each picture preceded by a preparation signal.Preparing to view elicited activation in regions including nucleus accumbens, whereas visual regions and bilateral amygdala were activated during viewing of affective pictures. High disinhibition predicted reduced nucleus accumbens activation during preparation within pleasant/neutral picture blocks, along with enhanced amygdala reactivity during viewing of pleasant and aversive pictures. Follow-up analyses revealed that the augmented amygdala response was related to reduced preparatory activation.Findings indicate that participants high in disinhibition are less able to process implicit cues and mentally prepare for upcoming stimuli, leading to limbic hyperreactivity during processing of actual stimuli. This outcome is helpful for integrating findings from studies suggesting reward-system hyperreactivity and others suggesting threat-system hyperreactivity as mechanisms for externalizing proneness. © The Author (2015). Published by Oxford University Press. For Permissions, please email:
    Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience 06/2015; DOI:10.1093/scan/nsv080 · 7.37 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Further, operationalization of the Triarchic constructs from item sets of existing inventories can provide a basis for examining their correlates and etiological bases in existing datasets, including genetically informed (i.e., twin) datasets (cf. Benning, Patrick, & Iacono, 2005; Blonigen, Hicks, Krueger, Patrick, & Iacono, 2005). In an initial effort along this line, Hall et al. (2014) developed Triarchic subscales using the items of the PPI and demonstrated convergent and discriminant validity for these subscales in relation to external variables of various types, including corresponding subscales of the TriPM. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The Triarchic model of psychopathy characterizes this complex condition in terms of distinct phenotypic constructs of boldness, meanness, and disinhibition. The current study evaluated the coverage of these constructs provided by a well-established inventory for assessing psychopathy in adolescents, the Youth Psychopathic Traits Inventory (YPI). A consensus rating approach was used to identify YPI items relevant to each Triarchic model construct, and convergent and discriminant validity of the resulting YPI-Triarchic scales were examined in relation to criterion measures consisting of scores on other psychopathy measures and relevant personality trait variables (N = 618, M age = 18.8). The YPI-Triarchic scales showed good internal consistency and exhibited properties largely consistent with predictions based on the Triarchic model, aside from somewhat greater than expected covariance between boldness and other facet scales. Findings are discussed in terms of their implications for interpreting scores on the YPI and for investigating distinctive components of psychopathy in youth.
    Journal of Personality Disorders 02/2015; 29(1):15-41. DOI:10.1521/pedi_2014_28_144 · 2.31 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "These findings have provided major insights into the biological mechanisms of common genetic variants underlying complex traits, especially human diseases. Susceptibility genes common to different related diseases are found in numerous studies (Hindorff et al., 2009; Jawaheer et al., 2001; Danoy et al., 2010; Smyth et al., 2008; Scherrer et al., 2003; Blonigen et al., 2005; Toulopoulou et al., 2007; Kalaria and Ballard, 1999; Eyre et al., 2010), providing evidence in neurology, psychiatry, and some other autoimmune diseases that several different diseases may share a certain extent of genetic overlap. These studies suggest that exploring the "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To understand disease relationships in terms of their genetic mechanisms, it is important to study the common genetic basis among different diseases. Although discoveries on pleiotropic genes related to multiple diseases abound, methods flexibly applicable to various types of datasets generated from different studies or experiments are needed to gain big pictures on the genetic relationships among a large number of diseases. We develop a set of genetic similarity measures to gauge the genetic overlap between diseases, as well as several estimators of the number of overlapping disease genes between diseases. These methods are based on ranked gene lists so that they could be flexibly applied to different types of data. We first investigate the performance of the genetic similarity measure for evaluating the similarity between human diseases in simulation studies. Then we apply the method to diseases in the OMIM database. We show that our proposed genetic measure achieves superior performance in explaining phenotype similarities between diseases compared to simpler methods. Furthermore, we identified common genes underlying the genetic overlap between disease pairs. With an example of five vision-related diseases, we demonstrate how our methods can provide insights into the relationships among diseases based on their shared genetic mechanisms.
    Journal of computational biology: a journal of computational molecular cell biology 02/2015; 22(2):111-23. DOI:10.1089/cmb.2014.0149 · 1.74 Impact Factor
Show more