ArticlePDF Available

Antisocial and psychopathic personalities in a sample of addicted subjects: Differences in psychological resources, symptoms, alexithymia and impulsivity

Authors:
Antisocial and psychopathic personalities in a sample of addicted subjects:
Differences in psychological resources, symptoms, alexithymia
and impulsivity
Alessio Gori
a
, Giuseppe Craparo
b,
, Giuseppe Iraci Sareri
c
, Vincenzo Caretti
d
,
Marco Giannini
a
, Patrizia Meringolo
a
a
University of Florence, Italy
b
Kore University of Enna, Italy
c
Cooperativa Incontro, Pistoia, Italy
d
University of Palermo, Italy
Abstract
Objective: Psychopathy and antisocial personality disorder (ASPD) are two constructs not interchangeable. Compared to the ASPD,
psychopathy is characterized by lack of anxiety, low withdrawal, and high levels of attention seeking.
Method: The sample of this study included 76 subjects with a substance use disorder. Subjects were aged between 18 and 59 years old (M = 32.87,
SD = 9.36). With respect to level of education 3 subjects are elementary school graduates, 49 have a middle school diploma, 21 own a high school
diploma, and 3 participants have a bachelor's degree. We administered the following measures: a) Psychopathic Personality Inventory-Revised
(PPI-R); b) Psychological Treatment Inventory (PTI); c) 20-Item-Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20); d) Barratt Impulsiveness Scale (BIS).
Results: Most of the significant correlations between the Psychopathic Index (PPI-R total score), and the measures administered are listed
below: PPI-R total score and Deviance (r = .482, p b.001), PPI-R total score and Hypomania (r = .369, p b.001), PPI-R total score and
Unresolved attachment (r = .293, p b.001), PPI-R total score and Manipulativeness (r = .550, p b.001), PPI-R total score and the TAS-20
total score (r = .230; p b.001), PPI-R total score and Difficulty in Identifying Feelings (DIF) factor (r = .250, p b.001), PPI-R total score
and Attentional Impulsiveness (r = .409, p b.001); PPI-R total score and Motor Impulsiveness (r = .526, p b.001). Results of MANOVAs
between the two groups also revealed significant differences on several variables analyzed.
Conclusions: Our study showed that addicted subjects with psychopathic tendencies are more likely to experience negative emotions and
have a peculiar cognitive style with respect to antisocial addicts. These results partially confirm those ones of previous studies underlining
that psychopathic population is generally characterized for a major need for stimulation, poor behavioral controls, lack of realistic long-term
goals, impulsivity, irresponsibility.
© 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
In the recent psychiatric literature, psychopathy has been
distinguished by antisocial personality disorder (ASPD).
Although, for many authors the terms psychopathy and
antisocial personality disorder (ASPD) are not interchange-
able, this difference is not present in the Diagnostic and
Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th Edition (DSM-
IV). According to the DSM-IV, the essential feature of
ASPD is a pervasive pattern of disregard for, and violation
of, the rights of others that begins in childhood or early
adolescence and continues into adulthood[1]. Individuals
diagnosed with this disorder can exhibit a range of behaviors,
including irresponsibility, lack of remorse, pathological
lying, lack of empathy, and aggressiveness, to name a few.
Rogers et al. [22] had this to say about the situation: DSM-
IV does considerable disservice to diagnostic clarity in its
equating of ASPD to psychopathy(pp. 236237). Unfor-
tunately, a diagnostic category of psychopathy is absent also
in the fifth version of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual
of Mental Disorders, although the psychopathy has been
included as a subtype of ASPD [2].
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect
Comprehensive Psychiatry xx (2014) xxx xxx
www.elsevier.com/locate/comppsych
Corresponding author at: University of Enna Kore, via Cittadella
Universitaria, 94100, Enna, Italy. Tel.: +39 0935 536 536.
E-mail address: giuseppe.craparo@unikore.it (G. Craparo).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.comppsych.2014.05.023
0010-440X/© 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Psychopathy is characterized by a constellation of affective,
interpersonal and behavioral traits including impulsivity, lack
of empathy and guilt, manipulativeness, lack of depth of
emotion, and a persistent violation of social norms [13].For
Hare, a significant contributor to the literature of psychopathy,
the failure to differentiate between psychopathy and ASPD
can have serious consequences for clinicians and for society,
in fact, most psychopaths meet the criteria for ASPD.most
individuals with ASPD are not psychopaths [14,15].
Compared to the ASPD, psychopathy (or Primary
Psychopathy) is characterized by lack of anxiety, low
withdrawal, and high levels of attention seeking. High attention
seeking and low withdrawal capture the social potency
(assertive/dominant) component of psychopathy, whereas low
anxiousness captures the stress immunity (emotional stability/
resilience) component[2].However,giventhelackofstudies
that analyze the differences between these two types of
personality structures, there is still a need for assessing the
differences in terms of psychological resources, attachment
styles, defense styles, and other psychopathological features
between these two domains. In particular this study wants to
examine the differences of these personality characteristics
between addicts with antisocial tendencies and addicts with
psychopathic tendencies. This study aims to assess if there are
psychological differences between two groups of addicts (with
psychopathic tendencies and with antisocial tendencies) with
regard to alexithymia, impulsiveness, defense mechanisms,
attachment styles, and symptoms. Expected hypotheses are:
a) higher scores on alexithymia, impulsiveness, deviance, and
hypomania in the group of addicts with psychopathic
tendencies; b) a greater level of traumatic experiences in
psychopathic addicts compared to antisocial addicts.
2. Method
2.1. Participants and procedure
The sample of this study included 76 subjects with a
substance use disorder. Subjects were aged between 18 and
59 years old (M=32.87,SD =9.36).Withrespecttothelevel
of education 3 subjects are elementary school graduates, 49 have
amiddleschooldiploma,21ownahighschooldiploma,and3
participants have a bachelor's degree. As regard to the
relationship status, 50 participants declared to be single, 4
declared to be engaged, 11 to be married, 10 to be divorced, and
1declaredtobewidower.Allparticipantswererecruitedatthe
Tuscan territorial unit of the National Health Service.
The study inclusion criteria included a diagnosis of
dependence in accordance to DSM-IV criteria. All subjects
of the sample have a history of antisocial behaviors and
claimed to have a criminal record. Exclusion criteria included a
co-morbid psychiatric disorder (eg, schizophrenia) and an
organic brain syndrome.
On the basis of the PPI-R total score, indexing global
psychopathic traits, participants were divided into two
groups: 1) addicted with antisocial tendencies; and
2) addicted with psychopathic tendencies. The group 1 was
composed of 51 subjects with a mean age of 34.5 years old
(SD = 8.06) and the group 2 was composed of 25 subjects
with a mean age of 29.56 years old (SD = 11.01).
The instruments listed below were administrated with a
separate form that allows to assess the information about
gender and age. The time for administration procedures was
about 90120 minutes for each participant. All participants
filled the questionnaires voluntarily and completed an
informed consent after the intake assessment. This study was
approved and partially financed by the Tuscan Region (Italy).
2.2. Measures
Psychopathic Personality Inventory-Revised (PPI-R; [19]).
The Psychopathic Personality Inventory (PPI) is a self-report
to evaluate traits associated with psychopathy in adults
developed by Lilienfeld and Andrews [17].ThePPIwas
revised in 2005 to become the PPI-R and now comprises 154
items organized into eight subscales. This self-report yields a
total psychopathy index (PPI-R Total score) as well as scores
on eight content scales (i.e. Machiavellian Egocentricity,
Rebellious Nonconformity, Blame Externalization, Carefree
Nonplanfulness, Social Influence, Fearlessness, Stress Immu-
nity, Coldheartedness), two validity scales (i.e. Virtuous
Responding, Deviant Responding) and three factors (i.e.
Self-Centered Impulsivity, Fearless Dominance, Coldhearted-
ness). The items are rated on a 4-point Likert scale (1 = false,
2 = mostly false, 3 = mostly true, and 4 = true). The Italian
version showed good internal reliability for the content scales
ranging from α= .78 (Coldheartedness) to α= .87 (Social
Influence, Fearlessness), for the community sample (PPI-R
Total score, α=.92), and from α= .71 (Social Influence,
Fearlessness) to α= .83 (Machiavellian Egocentricity) for the
offender sample (PPI-R Total score, α=.
84) [16].
Psychological Treatment Inventory (PTI; [11,12]). The
Psychological Treatment Inventory is a measure for assessing
personality composed of two different questionnaires: a self-
report measure (client version) and a clinician scale (clinician
version). In this study, we used the PTI client version that is
composed of 268 items scored on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = not
at all, 2 = somewhat, 3 = moderately, 4 = a good deal, and
5=verymuch).ThePTIclientversioniscomposedofseveral
higher order scales grouped in four areas: (1) validity; (2)
resources that includes two clusters: psychological resources
and quality of life; (3) clinical, which includes two clusters
(symptomatology and psychological types). Symptomatology is
articulated into internalized symptoms scales and externalized
symptoms scales; (4) psychological treatment that is com-
posed of four clusters: (a) attachment styles; (b) predominant
defence styles; (c) negative treatment indicators; and (d)
psychological mindedness. The PTI showed good psycho-
metric properties (Giannini, Gori, De Sanctis & Schuldberg,
2010; [12]). Alpha coefficients indicate a good internal
reliability for the majority of the PTI scales. Testretest
reliability showed good values ranging from .75 to .95. Each
2A. Gori et al. / Comprehensive Psychiatry xx (2014) xxxxxx
cluster showed a good construct validity, with robust
dimensions, verified with a series of exploratory and
confirmatory factor analysis. Some aspects of concurrent
validity were verified with the Millon Clinical Multiaxial
Inventory-III (MCMI-III; [20]), the Symptom Checklist-90-
Revised (SCL-90-R; [8]), the Psychopathic Personality
Inventory-Revised (PPI-R; [19]) and the Barratt Impulsiveness
Scale-11 (BIS-11; [21]).
20-Item-Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20; [3,4]). The
20-Item-Toronto Alexithymia Scale is a 20-item self-report
measure and a higher score indicates higher levels of
alexithymia. Items are rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranging
from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). In the TAS-20,
it is possible to distinguish three factors: 1) difficulty
modulating and identifying feelings (DIF), 2) difficulty
describing one's feelings to others (DDF), and 3) externally-
oriented thinking (EOT). Cut-off scores are as follow: 50 =
no alexithymia, 5160 = borderline alexithymia, and 61 =
alexithymia. The TAS-20 has shown adequate validity and
reliability (α= .81; r = .77). Likewise, the Italian version [5]
presents a good internal reliability (Cronbach's α=0.81).
Barratt Impulsiveness Scale (BIS-11; [21]). The Barratt
Impulsiveness Scale-11 is a 30 item self-report questionnaire
designed to assess general impulsiveness taking into account
the multi-factorial nature of the construct. The structure of the
instrument allows the assessment of six first-order factors
(attention, motor, self-control, cognitive complexity, perse-
verance, cognitive instability) and three second-order factors:
attentional impulsiveness; motor impulsiveness (motor and
perseverance); non-planning impulsiveness (self-control and
cognitive complexity). A total score is obtained by summing
the first or second-order factors. The items are scored on a four
point scale (rarely/never =1, occasionally = 2, often = 3,
almost always/always = 4). The Italian version presents a
good internal reliability (Cronbach's α=.79)[9].
2.3. Data analysis
Descriptive statistics for all variables were examined and
statistical results of demographic variables based on percent-
ages, scale means and standard deviations presented. A series
of two-tailed Pearson linear correlations were conducted to test
relationships among the variables under investigation. Fur-
thermore, a series of MANOVAs were used in order to verify
the differences between the two groups. The statistical package
SPSS 18 for Windows was used for all the analyses (SPSS,
Chicago, IL).
3. Results
Frequencies for each group as regard to the substance of
first use and to the favorite substance were calculated and
reported in Table 1 (see Table 1).
Pearson's r coefficients show statistically significant
positive correlations between the Psychopathic Index (PPI-R
total score) and PTI Self-Esteem scale (r = .280; p b.001) and
between PPI-R total score and PTI CreativityTendencies scale
(r = .241; p b.001). Significant correlations were also found
between the Psychopathic Index (PPI-R total score) and the
following PTI Clinical scales: Obsessiveness (r = .217;
pb.001); Bizarre Thought (r = .217; p b.001); Deviance
(r = .482; p b.001); Impulsiveness (r = .372; p b.001);
Hypomania (r = .369; p b.001), and the Cluster BPTI
index (r = .457; p b.001). Other significant correlations were
found among the Psychopathic Index (PPI-R total score), the
PTI Attachment Styles, the Predominant Defence Styles, and
the Negative Treatment Indicators Clusters, particularly with
the following scale: Unresolved attachment style scale (r =
.293; p b.001); Immature defence style scale (r = .448;
pb.001); Alexithymia scale (r = .202; p b.001) and
Manipulativeness scale (r = .550; p b.001).
Pearson's r correlations among the Psychopathic Index
(PPI-R total score), TAS-20 and BIS are listed below: PPI-R
total score and the TAS-20 total score (r = .230; p b.001),
PPI-R total score and Difficulty in Identifying Feelings (DIF)
factor (r = .250, p b.001), PPI-R total score and Attentional
Impulsiveness (r = .409, p b.001); PPI-R total score and
Motor Impulsiveness (r = .526, p b.001).
A series of MANOVAs, performed with the PTI
Resources Area scales as dependent variables and the
group variable (Antisocial vs. Psychopathic) as the indepen-
dent variable, showed significant differences in mean scores
for the following scales: Work Interference (WI) and
Distress (D) belonging to the cluster quality of life. There
was an overall main effect of group, Wilks' λ.83 (p = .022),
F (5,70), partial η
2
= .168. The psychopathic group obtained
higher scores on Work Interference (WI) (p = .019) and
Distress (D) (p = .047). No differences between the two
groups were found as regard to the other scales of this area
(see Table 2).
The psychopathic group obtained higher scores on
Depressive Aspects (DA) (p = .038) and Bizarre Thought
(BT) (p = .057) of Internalizing scales and, on Deviance
(Dev) (p b.001), Impulsiveness (Imp) (p = .016), and
Table 1
Frequencies of variables Substance of first use and Favorite substance for
each group.
Substance of first use Favorite substance
Antisocial
group
Psychopathic
group
Antisocial
group
Psychopathic
group
Heroin 6 0 15 8
Amphetamines 0 21 1
Cocaine 3 0 12 2
Hallucinogens 0 11 4
Alcohol 6 3 11 3
THC 25 12 2 4
Heroin + Alcohol 1 01 0
Alcohol + Cocaine 3 03 1
THC + Alcohol 4 52 1
Other 3 23 1
Total 51 25 51 25
3A. Gori et al. / Comprehensive Psychiatry xx (2014) xxxxxx
Hypomania (Hy) (p = .023) scales. Mean scores and effect
of interactions are reported in Table 3 (see Table 3).
Regarding the attachment styles, the psychopathic group
obtained higher scores on Unresolved (U) (p = .019) scale, a
dimension of attachment style related to traumatic experiences.
Other two dimensions of PTI in which the Psychopathic group
reported higher scores were the Immature (Imm) scale (p =
.035), related to a primitive (and impulsive) defense modality,
and the Manipulativeness (Man) scale (p = .028) which refers
to manipulate others to take advantages. Mean scores and
effect of interactions are reported in Table 4 (see Table 4).
For what concerns the dimensions of TAS-20 there were no
significant differences between the two groups. However, in this
regard, the psychopathic group obtained higher scores on TAS-
20 total score (M = 58.46, SD = 10.44) with respect to the
antisocial group (M = 53.26, SD = 12.79): these scores are
very close to the borderline range of alexithymia (see Table 5).
As regard to the BIS dimensions, the psychopathic group
reported higher scores on Attentional Impulsiveness (A) and
Motor Impulsiveness (M) scales, respectively (p = .022 and
p = .006). There was an overall main effect of group, Wilks'
λ.87 (p = .018), F (3,72), partial η
2
= .13 (Table 6).
Table 2
Differences in the PTI Resourses Area mean scores (MANOVAs) between the two groups.
Antisocial group
(n = 51)
Psychopathic group
(n = 25)
M SD M SD DoF F p
Psychological Resources (RES)
Self-Efficacy (SEf) 18.98 4.82 18.44 4.11 5,70 .23 .630
Self-Esteem (SE) 12.58 2.61 12.68 3.29 5,70 .02 .889
Perceived Social Support (PSS) 17.05 5.08 17.92 4.48 5,70 .52 .471
Creative Tendencies (CT) 19.04 5.05 19.49 5.47 5,70 .13 .721
Self-Regulation (SR) 18.59 5.59 20.32 5.49 5,70 1.63 .206
Quality of Life (QoL)
Life Satisfaction (LS) 15.74 5.06 15.68 4.91 5,70 .003 .958
Work Interference (WI) 10.20 3.56 12.56 4.86 5,70 5.75 .019
Family Interference (FI) 11.53 4.69 13.36 4.75 5,70 2.53 .116
Social Introversion (SI) 10.19 3.99 9.56 3.37 5,70 .46 .498
Distress (D) 13.54 3.58 15.46 4.45 5,70 4.08 .047
1) RES main effect: Wilks' λ.94 (p = .474), partial η
2
= .06.
2) QoL main effect: Wilks' λ.83 (p = .022), partial η
2
= .168.
Table 3
Differences in the PTI Clinical Area mean scores (MANOVAs) between the two groups.
Antisocial group
(n = 51)
Psychopathic group
(n = 25)
M SD M SD DoF F p
Internalizing Scales(INT)
Depressive Aspects (DA) 10.86 4.30 13.48 6.38 10,65 4.46 .038
General Anxiety (GA) 11.88 4.94 13.08 5.85 10,65 .87 .354
Obsessiveness (O) 11.82 3.89 13.44 5.01 10,65 2.39 .126
Somatization (So) 8.70 3.49 9.68 5.11 10,65 .97 .327
Phobic Traits (PhT) 9.29 4.07 10.40 4.09 10,65 1.23 .271
Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) 15.37 6.89 16.14 8.31 10,65 .18 .673
Risk of Eating Disorder (RED) 16.83 7.63 18.20 8.92 10,65 .48 .488
Paranoid Ideation(PaI) 15.19 4.22 15.56 5.08 10,65 .11 .743
Bizarre Thought (BT) 10.51 4.97 13.13 6.61 10,65 3.73 .057
Sexual Discomfort (SD) 7.39 4.02 6.67 2.74 10,65 .66 .419
Externalizing Scales(EXT)
Deviance (Dev) 17.99 4.72 23.64 6.61 3,72 18.27 .001
Impulsiveness (Imp) 15.72 5.30 19.32 7.20 3,72 6.07 .016
Hypomania (Hy) 13.43 4.79 16.15 4.81 3,72 5.39 .023
Clusters of Personality Types (PTypes)
Cluster A of Personality Disorders 7.92 2.94 7.68 2.65 3,72 .12 .729
Cluster B of Personality Disorders 13.31 3.05 13.72 3.03 3,72 .29 .587
Cluster C of Personality Disorders 6.65 2.14 6.56 2.86 3,72 .02 .882
1) INT main effect: Wilks' λ.84 (p = .270), partial η
2
= .16.
2) EXT main effect: Wilks' λ.79 (p = .001), partial η
2
= .21.
3) PTypes main effect: Wilks' λ.99 (p = .874), partial η
2
= .01.
4A. Gori et al. / Comprehensive Psychiatry xx (2014) xxxxxx
4. Discussion
The aim of this study was to investigate the differences
between addicts with psychopathic tendencies and addicts with
antisocial tendencies with regard to psychological resources,
symptomatology, alexithymia, impulsivity, attachment styles
and defense styles.
Results showed that psychopathic addicts have a different
psychopathological profile respect to the antisocial addicts
group. Particularly, the psychopathic group obtained higher
scores on Work Interference (WI) (p = .019), Distress (D)
(p = .047), Depressive Aspects (DA) (p = .038) and Bizarre
Thought (BT) (p = .057). These aspects related to general
psychopathology indicate that, in the sample under investi-
gation, addicted subjects with psychopathic tendencies are
more likely to experience negative emotions and have a
peculiar cognitive style respect toantisocialaddicts.Besides,
psychopathy seems to be more related to greater levels of
Deviance (Dev) (p b.001), Impulsiveness (Imp) (p = .016),
and Hypomania (Hy) (p = .023). These results partially confirm
those ones of several studies underlining that psychopathic
population is generally characterized for a major need for
stimulation, poor behavioral controls, lack of realistic long-term
goals, impulsivity, irresponsibility [15,23].
In accordance with Snowden and Gray [24],withrespectto
antisocial addicts, we found in psychopathic addicts an increasing
impulsivity in the Attentional Impulsiveness (A) and Motor
Impulsiveness (M) domains. These two domains were also
associated with an alexithymic mental state, and in particular
with a difficulty to identifying feelings.
Interesting was the presence among psychopathic addicts
of the variable unresolved attachment style. As suggested by
Table 4
Differences in the PTI Psychological Treatment Area mean scores (MANOVAs) between the two groups.
Antisocial group
(n = 51)
Psychopathic group
(n = 25)
M SD M SD DoF F p
Attachment Styles(AS)
Secure (Sec) 17.39 3.95 17.92 4.17 4,71 .28 .596
Anxious/Preoccupied (A/P) 13.41 5.45 14.84 6.33 4,71 1.03 .313
Avoidant (Av) 11.78 4.55 13.92 5.86 4,71 3.04 .085
Unresolved (U) 7.91 2.96 10.28 5.66 4,71 5.72 .019
Predominant Defence Styles (PDS)
Mature (Mat) 17.59 4.06 18.56 3.61 4,71 1.01 .319
Intermediate Neurotic/Anxious (I/Anx) 12.24 4.04 13.56 4.96 4,71 1.50 .223
Intermediate Neurotic/Avoidant (I/Avo) 12.09 2.96 13.32 3.18 4,71 2.87 .095
Immature (Imm) 13.73 4.85 16.12 4.71 4,71 4.61 .035
Negative Treatment Indicators (NTI)
Alexithymia (Alx) 12.76 4.91 14.16 5.19 5,70 1.35 .257
Frustration Intolerance (FrI) 11.43 3.45 11.68 4.61 5,70 .07 .793
Negative Impression (NI) 12.09 4.85 14.48 6.68 5,70 3.14 .081
Resistance to Change (RC) 7.45 2.61 7.84 3.27 5,70 .31 .577
Manipulativeness (Man) 11.35 4.45 13.73 4.01 5,70 5.05 .028
Psychological Mindedness (PM)
Empathy (Emp) 18.53 5.13 19.88 4.87 3,72 1.18 .279
Propensity to Insight (PI) 18.14 3.84 18.36 4.09 3,72 .06 .813
Treatment Expectation (TE) 15.67 6.01 16.29 4.16 3,72 .22 .664
1) AS main effect: Wilks' λ.90 (p = .117), partial η
2
= .09.
2) PDS main effect: Wilks' λ.93 (p = .269), partial η
2
= .06.
3) NTI main effect: Wilks' λ.90 (p = .192), partial η
2
= .09.
4) PM main effect: Wilks' λ.98 (p = .748), partial η
2
= .02.
Table 5
Differences in the TAS-20 mean scores (MANOVA) between the two groups.
Antisocial group
(n = 51)
Psychopathic group
(n = 25)
M SD M SD DoF F p
Difficulty identifying feelings (DIF) 19.19 6.70 21.60 6.68 3,72 2.15 .146
Difficulty describing ones feelings to others (DDF) 14.74 5.29 15.64 3.75 3,72 .71 .403
Externally-oriented thinking (EOT) 19.33 5.63 21.12 4.37 3,72 1.95 .167
TAS-20 Total Score 53.26 12.79 58.46 10.44 3,72 3.11 .082
1) TAS-20 main effect: Wilks' λ.95 (p = .323), partial η
2
= .05.
5A. Gori et al. / Comprehensive Psychiatry xx (2014) xxxxxx
several authors [6,7,10,25-27], this type of attachment style
is generally related to traumatic experiences. In this case it is
not clear if the trauma is linked with addictive behaviors or
with psychopathic traits.
In conclusion, results seem to indicate a condition of greater
severity of personality in the group of addicts with
psychopathic tendencies. In particular, it appears that addicts
with psychopathic tendencies seem to have a higher tendency
to externalization, to experience negative states, to use defense
mechanisms of the immature spectrum, and to declare
traumatic relational experiences (unresolved attachment style).
This study has several limitations that deserve attention.
First of all, the number of participants is restricted, also
because of the difficulty of recruiting subjects with these
characteristics. Nevertheless, the use of self-report instrument
to analyze psychological variables as psychopathy, may
induce some bias regarding to under-reporting the personality
conditions. In according to Lilienfeld and Fowler [18],there
are different disadvantages of using self-reports with psycho-
pathics, for example: a) dishonesty; b) to give a desirable
impression; c) loss of insight into the nature and extent of their
psychological problems(p. 109). Further studies are
required to better investigate the psychological and
psychopathological traits of these subjects using also a
semi-structured interview for psychopathy (e.g., Hare
Psychopathy Check-List-Revised): indeed, the PCL-R is widely
considered the gold standardmeasure for assessing the
interpersonal and affective variables of psychopathy [28,29].
References
[1] American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of
mental disorders. 4th ed. Washington, DC: American Psychiatry
Association; 1994.
[2] American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of
mental disorders. 5th ed. Washington, DC: American Psychiatry
Association; 2013.
[3] Bagby RM, Parker JDA, Taylor GJ. The twenty-item Toronto
Alexithymia Scale-I. Item selection and cross-validation of the factor
structure. J Psychosom Res 1994;38:23-32.
[4] Bagby RM, Taylor GJ, Parker JDA. The twenty-item Toronto
Alexithymia Scale-II. Convergent, discriminant, and concurrent
validity. J Psychosom Res 1994;38:33-40.
[5] Bressi C, Taylor G, Parker JDA, Bressi S, Brambilla V, Aguglia E, et
al. Cross validation of the factor structure of the 20-item Toronto
Alexithymia Scale: An Italian multicenter study. J Psychosom Res
1996;41:551-9.
[6] Bromberg P. Standing in the spaces: the multiplicity of self and the
psychoanalytic relationship. Contemp Psychoanal 1996;32:509-35.
[7] Craparo G, Schimmenti A, Caretti V. Traumatic experiences in
childhood and psychopathy: a study on a sample of violent offenders
from Italy. Eur J Psychotraumatol 2013;4:21471, http://dx.doi.org/
10.3402/ejpt.v4i0.21471.
[8] Derogatis LR. Symptom Checklist-90-R: Administration, scoring, and
procedures manual. 3rd ed. Minneapolis, MN: National Computer
Systems; 1994.
[9] Fossati A, Di Ceglie A, Acquarini E, Barratt ES. Psychometric
properties of an Italian version of the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale-11
(BIS-11) in nonclinical subjects. J Clin Psychol 2011;57:815-8.
[10] Giannini M, Gori A, De Sanctis E, Schuldberg D. A Comparative
analysis of Attachment: Psychometric Properties of the PTI Attach-
ment Styles Scale (ASS). J Psychother Integrat 2011;21:363-81.
[11] Gori A, Giannini M, Schuldberg D. Mind and body together? A new
measure for planning treatment and assessing psychotherapy outcome.
Paper presented at the SEPI XXIV Annual Meeting, Boston; 2008.
[12] Gori A, Giannini M, Schuldberg D. PTI - Psychological Treatment
Inventory. Manual and Questionnaires. Florence: Giunti OS-Organizza-
zioni Speciali; 2013 [PTI - Psychological Treatment Inventory. Manuale
e Questionari. Firenze: Giunti OS-Organizzazioni Speciali; 2013].
[13] Hare RD. The Psychopathy Checklist-Revised manual. Toronto,
Ontario, Canada: Multi-Health Systems; 1991.
[14] Hare RD. Psychopathy: a clinical construct whose time has come. Crim
Justice Behav 1996;23:25-54.
[15] Hare RD. The Psychopathy Checklist-Revised manual. 2nd ed.
Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Multi-Health Systems; 2004.
[16] La Marca S, Berto D, Rovetto F. PPI-R Psychopathic Personality Inventory
Revised. Adattamento Italiano. Firenze: Giunti OS; 2008. p. 1-114.
[17] Lilienfeld SO, Andrews BP. Development and preliminary validation
of a self-report measure of psychopathic personality traits in
noncriminal populations. J Pers Assess 1996;66:488-524.
[18] Lilienfeld SO, Fowler KA. The self-report assessment of psychopathy.
Problems, pitfalls, and promises. In: & Patrick CJ, editor. Handbook of
psychopathy. New York: Guildford Press; 2006. p. 107-32.
[19] Lilienfeld SO, Widows MR. Psychopathic Personality Inventory-
Revised: Professional Manual. Lutz, Florida: Psychological Assess-
ment Resources, Inc; 2005.
[20] Millon T, Davis R, Millon C. MCMI-III, Millon Clinical Multiaxial
Inventory-III; 1997 [Tr. it. Giunti OS Organizzazioni Speciali,
Firenze, 2008].
[21] Patton JH, Stanford MS, Barratt ES. Factor structure of the Barratt
impulsiveness scale. J Clin Psychol 1995;51:768-74.
[22] Rogers R, Salekin RT, Hill C, Sewell KW, Murdock ME, Neumann
CS. The Psychopathy Checklist-Screening Version: an examination of
criteria and subcriteria in three forensic samples. J Asses 2000;7:1-15.
[23] Rutherford MJ, Cacciola JS, Alterman AI, McKay JR. Reliability and
validity of the Psychopathy Checklist in women methadone patients. J
Am Stat Assoc 1996;3:145-56.
Table 6
Differences in the BIS mean scores (MANOVA) between the two groups.
Antisocial group
(n = 51)
Psychopathic group
(n = 25)
M SD M SD DoF F p
Attentional Impulsiveness (A) 18.72 3.21 20.66 3.61 3,72 5.50 .022
Motor Impulsiveness (M) 25.82 4.99 29.36 5.29 3,72 8.11 .006
Non-planning Impulsiveness (Np) 27.57 5.05 29.56 4.67 3,72 2.74 .102
1) BIS main effect: Wilks' λ.87 (p = .018), partial η
2
= .13.
6A. Gori et al. / Comprehensive Psychiatry xx (2014) xxxxxx
[24] Sowden RJ, Gray NS. Impulsivity and psychopathy: associations
between the Barrett Impulsivity Scale and the Psychopathy Checklist
revised. Psych Res 2011;187:414-7.
[25] van der Kolk BA. Developmental trauma disorder. Towards a
rational diagnosis for chronically traumatized children. Psych An
2005;35:401-8.
[26] Craparo G, Gori A, Petruccelli I, Cannella V, Simonelli C. Intimate
partner violence: relationships between alexithymia, depression,
attachment styles, and coping strategies of battered women. J Sex
Med 2014;11:1484-94.
[27] Craparo G, Faraci P, Fasciano S, Carrubba S, Gori A. A factor analytic
study of the Boredom Proneness Scale (BPS). Clin Neuropsyc
2013;10:164-70.
[28] Schimmenti A, Passanisi A, Pace U, Manzella S, Di Carlo G, Caretti V.
The relationship between attachment and psychopathy: a study with a
sample of violent offenders. Curr Psychol, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/
s12144-014-9211-z.
[29] Caretti V, Manzi GS, Schimmenti A, Seragusa L. The psychopathy
checklist-revised manual. Adattamento Italiano. Firenze: Giunti OS
2011:1-234.
7A. Gori et al. / Comprehensive Psychiatry xx (2014) xxxxxx
... The nature of the relationship between psychopathy and alexithymia is not well-understood and has been particularly understudied among SDIs. To our knowledge, only one study to date has addressed the relationship between psychopathy and alexithymia in SDIs, which found positive correlation between the two constructs (Gori et al., 2014). However, participants in Gori et al. (2014) study consisted of individuals diagnosed with different types of SUDs (e.g., alcohol-, amphetamine-, heroin use disorder, etc.), which prevents the identification of possible substancespecific associations between the two constructs. ...
... To our knowledge, only one study to date has addressed the relationship between psychopathy and alexithymia in SDIs, which found positive correlation between the two constructs (Gori et al., 2014). However, participants in Gori et al. (2014) study consisted of individuals diagnosed with different types of SUDs (e.g., alcohol-, amphetamine-, heroin use disorder, etc.), which prevents the identification of possible substancespecific associations between the two constructs. Since opioid addiction is associated both with higher levels of psychopathy and predominance of negative reinforcement mechanisms, our goal was to examine the relationship between alexithymia and psychopathy among HDIs. ...
... To our knowledge, the only study, which explored the correlations between these constructs in a sample of SDIs (Gori et al., 2014) found positive relationships between psychopathy as measured by the Psychopathic Personality Inventory -Revised (PPI-R; Lilienfeld and Widows, 2005) and alexithymia, assessed with the TAS-20. Our results are in line with these findings and suggest that psychopathy and alexithymia play a key role in SUDs. ...
Article
Full-text available
Background Psychopathy and substance use disorders are highly co-morbid and their co-occurrence is associated with higher severity of addictive behavior and increased risk of violent offending. Both substance use disorders and psychopathy are related to prominent impairments in emotion processing, which are also central features of alexithymia. The nature of the relationship between psychopathy and alexithymia is not well-understood and has been particularly understudied among substance dependent individuals.AimOur goal was to evaluate the levels of psychopathy and alexithymia in a relatively homogeneous sample of heroin dependent individuals (HDIs) and healthy controls and to examine group differences in the pattern of associations between these constructs.Methods We examined 62 participants (31 heroin dependent individuals and 31 healthy controls) with the Psychopathy Checklist: Screening version (PCL:SV, Hart et al., 1995) and the Toronto Alexithymia Scale-20 (TAS-20, Bagby et al., 1994).ResultsHeroin dependent individuals were characterized by higher levels of both psychopathy and alexithymia as compared to the control group. In addition, HDIs with higher levels of psychopathy reported more difficulties in identifying and verbalizing emotional states. In the heroin group, alexithymia was more strongly associated with the impulsive/antisocial characteristics (impulsivity, irresponsibility, antisocial behavior) than with the interpersonal/affective features of psychopathy (grandiosity, manipulativeness, lack of empathy, and remorse).Conclusion Our findings suggest that alexithymia may be one potential mechanism linking psychopathy with opioid use disorders. The development of interventions targeting alexithymia could have significant applications in relapse prevention programs and psychotherapy of substance use disorders with concurrent psychopathy.
... However, the studies reviewed earlier addressing impairments in higher-order metacognitive functions (especially related to understanding of and reasoning about emotions) seem to suggest that psychopathy could be related to both deficits in the ability to identify emotions and deficits in connecting emotions to bodily sensations. This is consistent with studies reporting negative associations between psychopathy and emotional awareness, according to which, when upset, psychopathic individuals would pay little attention to their emotional reactions (Garofalo, Neumann, & Velotti, 2018;Gori et al., 2014;Ridings & Lutz-Zois, 2014). This perspective is also in line with predictions of the ART, as well as with Cleckley's (1941) original conceptualization of psychopathy, which included as one of the 16 criteria a specific lack of true insight, that is, an inability to see oneself as others do. ...
Chapter
It is widely acknowledged that profound abnormalities in emotional functioning lie at the heart of psychopathy. Over the years, several theories of psychopathy have been developed that include an emphasis on the nature and manifestation of the emotional dysfunctions that characterize psychopathic personality. The present chapter provides an overview of the main approaches that have been adopted to conceptualize psychopathy and discusses the extent to which these perspectives can account for the growing body of research on the emotional functioning associated with psychopathic traits. Subsequently, a contemporary, comprehensive perspective on emotional functioning is presented, in which emotion is constituted by a number of related, yet dissociable components. For each of these components, we briefly outline what is already known from the empirical literature in relation to psychopathy. The present review suggests that psychopathy is associated with psychophysiological abnormalities in emotional contexts, as well as with nonspecific difficulties in the recognition of others’ emotions. It also appears that there is substantial variability across studies, and a relative scarcity of empirical research in other emotion domains. Specifically, extant knowledge is far from conclusive regarding: the interpretative processes that underlie emotional appraisals; facial expressiveness, action potentials; subjective emotional experiences; the regulation of emotions; and the motivational processes that can influence each of these components. We conclude by outlining a number of avenues that are in need of further research to reach a more comprehensive understanding of emotional functioning in psychopathy, stressing the importance of the dynamic nature of this disorder.
... Narcissism is a sort of malignant attitude that principally manifests itself as personal responsibility, forcefulness, and violence (Wu et al. 2019). Psychopathy refers to inability to perceive, understand, or address emotions due to lack of emotional intelligence and empathy (Gori et al. 2014;Granieri et al. 2017;Schimmenti et al. 2019;Smith et al. 2018). Machiavellianism is characterized by interpersonal manipulation and is related to a unique pattern of talents (Clouse et al. 2017;Mathieu and St-Jean 2013). ...
Article
Full-text available
The impact of negative personality traits on entrepreneurial intention and entrepreneurial behavior has become a research focus in the field of entrepreneurship. This study aimed to identify the influence of dark tetrad personality traits on the nascent entrepreneurial behavior and the mediating role of entrepreneurial intention. This study used partial least square-structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) to test the hypotheses on a sample of 347 undergraduate and postgraduate university students from China. The results of this study revealed that narcissism, psychopathy, Machiavellianism, and sadism have a positive and significant influence on nascent entrepreneurial behavior and entrepreneurial intention, which significantly partially mediates the relationship between dark tetrad and nascent entrepreneurial behavior. The finding of the study implies China's higher education and policymakers to unlock the hidden potential of its youth. This study contributes to the emerging literature on psychology and entrepreneurship and provides evidence that individuals with a high level of dark tetrad are more likely to be involved in entrepreneurial action.
... The dark triad contains three arrangements; narcissism "is a sort of malignant attitude that principally shows as personal responsibility, forcefulness, and violence" (Wu, Wang, Zheng, & Wu, 2019); psychopathy "is associated with the reserved character of personality which is comparable. However extraordinary traits in character investigate the psychopathy to recognize" (Granieri et al., 2017;Schimmenti et al., 2019); psychopathy also defined as character issues depicted by lack of social standards, compassion, and regret (Bashir, Tufail, Ishtiaq, & Khan, 2017;Gori et al., 2014). ...
Article
Full-text available
This study aimed to identify the impact of entrepreneurial attitude orientation on the entrepreneurial intention with the mediating effect of the dark triad. Entrepreneurial attitude refers to an individual's attitude toward creating a new business with personal factors and entrepreneurial acceptability. Previous researches focus on the positive personality traits e.g., the big five models for measuring the attitude of individuals, and negative personality traits such as narcissism, psychopathy, and Machiavellianism, which was neglected. Therefore, this study considers the new generation of entrepreneurs who has diverse thinking of mind towards business start-up. The study used SEM-structural equation modeling to test the hypotheses on a sample of 327 university undergraduate and postgraduate students from Pakistan. The output of this study revealed that entrepreneurial attitude orientation has a positive and significant effect on entrepreneurial intention and dark triad traits were also significantly mediates in the relationship between entrepreneurial attitude orientation and entrepreneurial intention. The study contributes to the literature of entrepreneurship and provides evidence that individuals with a high level of a dark triad are more intended to involve in entrepreneurial action.
... Numerous studies (Gori et al., 2014(Gori et al., , 2017 have shown that psychopathic traits are present among individuals with SUD who commit crimes. In particular, these impulsive-antisocial traits include impulsivity, irresponsibility, weak behavioral control, and criminal versatility (Hare, 2003). ...
Preprint
Abstract SUBMITTED DECEMBER 2019, ACCEPTED MARCH 2020 © 2020 Giovanni Fioriti Editore s.r.l. 11 Introduction There have been a large number of studies conducted on the link between drug addiction and crime. A metaanalysis of 30 studies showed that individuals with substance use disorder (SUD) are between 2.8 and 3.8 times more likely to commit crimes than non-drug users (Bennett, Holloway, & Farrington, 2008). Indeed, people with SUD get involved in the criminal justice system for diverse types of crimes, and many of these off enses are related to the use of drugs (UNODC, 2013). The three drugs that are most frequently associated with criminal conduct are crack, heroin, and cocaine. People abusing these drugs are more likely to commit crimes (6, 3, and 2.5 times greater, respectively) than the users of other drugs (Bennett, Holloway, & Farrington, 2008). Furthermore, the relationship between criminal activity and drug use varies according to the type of substance. Property crimes, prostitution, shoplifting, and theft are the crimes most frequently associated with users of crack, heroin, and cocaine (Mc Bride, 1981; Hunt, Lipton, & Spunt, 1984; Kuhns, Heide, & Silverman, 1992; Graham & Wish, 1994; Yacoubian et al., 2001; Holloway & Bennett, 2004). The link between addiction and felony is complex and multifaceted. An individual with a substance use disorder may commit a crime as a direct result of the eff ects of drug intoxication, but these individuals may also commit crimes as a result of withdrawal symptoms, especially if he or she exhibits specifi c personality traits, such as antisocial or narcissistic ones (Echeburúa & Fernández-Montalvo, 2007). In light of this, the clinical literature has set forth multiple theories that try to explain the nature of the relationship between the use of drugs and criminal behavior. Some theoretical models proposed a direct causal relationship, where one of the variables causes the other. According to the Economic Compulsive Model (Goldstein, 1985), heavy drug users engage in criminal conduct to raise funds to purchase drugs. Other hypotheses argue an indirect causal connection. Here, the theory of “common cause” indicates that diff erent kinds of variables (sociological, psychological, or environmental factors) foster both substance dependence and crime, which are therefore linked by common causal roots (White, 1990; White, Brick, & Hansell, 1993). Finally, the third group of theories includes the Objective: Several studies have been conducted to investigate the relationship between addiction and crimes, but little is known about the treatment of individuals with substance use disorder (SUD) with criminal records. This study aimed to assess the treatment progress of a group of individuals with SUD who underwent treatment within a residential community, and to analyze their personality profi les to identify drop-out predictors. Method: We evaluated 49 subjects using the Psychopathic Personality Inventory- Revised (PPI-R), the Psychological Treatment Inventory (PTI), the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale-11 (BIS-11), and the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20) and carrying out various statistical analyses, including the t-test, Cohen’s d, analysis of variance (ANOVA), and discriminant analysis. Results: Results are discussed within the context of previous studies on this topic. Our results showed that variables such impulsiveness, cold-heartedness, alexithymia, and psychopathic traits infl uenced the premature treatment abandonment of individuals with SUD and criminal records. Conclusions: This study provides a further piece for the understanding of subjects with SUD and criminal records, suggesting the importance of a psychodynamic integrated approach, and showing the impact of some psychopathological features on treatment drop-out
... Numerous studies (Gori et al., 2014(Gori et al., , 2017 have shown that psychopathic traits are present among individuals with SUD who commit crimes. In particular, these impulsive-antisocial traits include impulsivity, irresponsibility, weak behavioral control, and criminal versatility (Hare, 2003). ...
Article
Full-text available
Objective: Several studies have been conducted to investigate the relationship between addiction and crimes, but little is known about the treatment of individuals with substance use disorder (SUD) with criminal records. This study aimed to assess the treatment progress of a group of individuals with SUD who underwent treatment within a residential community, and to analyze their personality profiles to identify drop-out predictors. Method: We evaluated 49 subjects using the Psychopathic Personality Inventory-Revised (PPI-R), the Psychological Treatment Inventory (PTI), the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale-11 (BIS-11), and the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20) and carrying out various statistical analyses, including the t-test, Cohen's d, analysis of variance (ANOVA), and discriminant analysis. Results: Results are discussed within the context of previous studies on this topic. Our results showed that variables such impulsiveness, cold-heartedness, alexithymia, and psychopathic traits influenced the premature treatment abandonment of individuals with SUD and criminal records. Conclusions: This study provides a further piece for the understanding of subjects with SUD and criminal records, suggesting the importance of a psychodynamic integrated approach, and showing the impact of some psychopathological features on treatment drop-out.
Article
Full-text available
In this randomized controlled study, the effect of eight sessions of psychoeducation given to individuals with antisocial personality disorder on anger behaviors was examined. The sample of the study consisted of 62 patients with a diagnosis of antisocial personality disorder, who applied to the psychiatry outpatient clinic of a military hospital, by selecting by simple random sampling method (experimental group=32, control group=30). The data of the study were collected using the Introductory Information Form and the Trait Anger and Anger Expression Style Scale. After the pretest applied to the experimental and control groups, psychoeducation consisting of eight sessions was applied to the experimental group. No intervention was applied to the control group. At the end of the training of the experimental group, the posttest and follow-up test were applied to both the experimental and control groups in the first month and the third month after the posttest. A significant difference was found when the STAXI scores of the patients in the experimental and control groups were compared in the posttest and follow-up. The change in the mean scores of the individuals in the experimental group from all sub-dimensions of the STAXI in repeated measurements was statistically highly significant. Psychoeducation was found to be effective in controlling anger behavior and expressing it appropriately in patients with antisocial personality disorder. Teaching anger management affects individuals' ability to be more productive and controlled individuals. It is thought that the continuity of this education will benefit individuals..
Article
Full-text available
No presente artigo pretendeu-se encontrar e explorar relações entre psicopatia, alexitimia e sintomatologia psicopatológica na amostra em estudo (estudantes universitários) e a adição química (álcool). Pretendue-se também compreender se a psicopatia, alexitimia e sintomatologia psicopatologica constituem fatores preditores e/ou mediadores da adição ao álcool. A amostra em estudo é constituída por 260 participantes (estudantes universitários). A idade média é de 20.54, ou seja, 21 anos e, varia entre os 18 e os 51 anos. Relativamente ao sexo, 32 (12.5%) são do sexo masculino e 224(87.5%) do sexo feminino (N=258). A psicopatia avaliada através da LSRPS, alexitimia através da TAS-20, e a sintomatologia psicopatológica pelo BSI. A adição ao álcool pelo AUDIT. Os resultados mostraram evidência empírica sobre a relação entre a psicopatia, alexitimia e sintomatologia psicopatológica com a adição ao álcool. Alexitimia e psicopatia não medeiam a relação entre sintomatologia psicopatológica e adição álcool. Além disso, a psicopatia não medeia a relação entre alexitimia e a adição ao álcool. The literature has shown evidence between alexithymia, psychopathy and symptom- atology, and alcohol addiction. The present study aims to find and explore relation- ships between alexithymia, psychopathy, and psychopathological symptomatology and alcohol addiction. It is also intended to understand if alexithymia psychopathy, and psychopathological symptomatology are predictors and/or mediators of alcohol addiction. The study sample consists of 260 college students, age ranging between 18 and 51 years (M = 20.54), 12.5% are male and 87.5% female. Alexithymia is validated by Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20), Psychopathy by Levenson Self-Report Psychop- athy Scale (LSRPS), psychopathological symptomatology by Brief Symptoms Inventory (BSI) and alcohol addiction by Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT). The results showed empirical evidence on the relationship between alexithymia, psychop- athy, and psychopathological symptomatology, and alcohol addiction. Alexithymia and psychopathy do not mediate the relationship between psychopathological symp- tomatology and alcohol addiction. Also, psychopathy does not mediate the relationship between alexithymia and alcohol addiction.
Article
Full-text available
Impulsivity is strongly associated with aggression and antisocial conduct. Although self-report measures are a time-efficient means to assess impulsivity, they may be susceptible to socially desirable responding, particularly in forensic psychiatry. The current study aimed to investigate the predictive validity of three measures of impulsivity in predicting self- and informant-reported antisocial behavior: the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale, the Self-Centered Impulsivity scale of the Psychopathic Personality Inventory-Revised and the general Disinhibition factor of the Externalizing Spectrum Inventory. Next, the mediating role of a measure of self-deception, the Virtuous Responding scale, was examined in these associations. Participants (N = 94) were inpatients from addiction care and forensic psychiatry. Two regression analyses were conducted using self-reported antisocial behavior in the first, and informant-reported antisocial behavior in the second analysis as outcome variables. In addition, a mediated regression analysis was conducted, using the Virtuous Responding scale as a mediator. The impulsivity measures showed a substantially lower predictive validity when informant-reported behavior was predicted. The Virtuous Responding scale appeared to be unreliable in the current sample and showed no mediation effect. The results showed insufficient support for the predictive validity of the three measures of impulsivity. Alternative time-efficient assessments for impulsivity are needed, such as informant-based measures.
Article
Full-text available
The purpose of the present study was to revise the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale Version 10 (BIS-10), identify the factor structure of the items among normals, and compare their scores on the revised form (BIS-11) with psychiatric inpatients and prison inmates. The scale was administered to 412 college undergraduates, 248 psychiatric inpatients, and 73 male prison inmates. Exploratory principal components analysis of the items identified six primary factors and three second-order factors. The three second-order factors were labeled Attentional Impulsiveness, Motor Impulsiveness, and Nonplanning Impulsiveness. Two of the three second-order factors identified in the BIS-11 were consistent with those proposed by Barratt (1985), but no cognitive impulsiveness component was identified per se. The results of the present study suggest that the total score of the BIS-11 is an internally consistent measure of impulsiveness and has potential clinical utility for measuring impulsiveness among selected patient and inmate populations.
Article
Full-text available
Addressing shortcomings of the self-report Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS), two studies were conducted to reconstruct the item domain of the scale. The first study resulted in the development of a new twenty-item version of the scale—the TAS-20. The TAS-20 demonstrated good internal consistency and test-retest reliability, and a three-factor structure theoretically congruent with the alexithymia construct. The stability and replicability of this three-factor structure were demonstrated in the second study with both clinical and nonclinical populations by the use of confirmatory factor analysis.
Chapter
The Psychopathy Checklist (PCL; Hare, 1980) and its revision (PCL-R; Hare, 1985a, in press) are clinical rating scales that provide researchers and clinicians with reliable and valid assessments of psychopathy. Their development was spurred largely by dissatisfactions with the ways in which other assessment procedures defined and measured psychopathy (Hare, 1980, 1985b).
Article
At the center of therapeutic work with terrified children is helping them realize that they are repeating their early experiences and helping them find new ways of coping by developing new connections between their experiences, emotions and physical reactions. Unfortunately, all too often, medications take the place of helping children acquire the skills necessary to deal with and master their uncomfortable physical sensations. To "process" their traumatic experiences, these children first need to develop a safe space where they can "look at" their traumas without repeating them and making them real once again.15.
Article
Although the evolution of psychopathy as a formal clinical disorder began more than a century ago, it is only recently that scientifically sound psychometric procedures for its assessment have become available. The result has been a sharp increase in theoretically meaningful and replicable research findings, both in applied settings and in the laboratory. The construct of psychopathy is proving to be particularly useful in the criminal justice system, where it has important implications for sentencing, diversion, placement, and treatment options and for the assessment of risk for recidivism and violence. Although the etiology of the predatory, cold-blooded nature of psychopathy remains obscure, the theories and methods of cognitive neuroscience and behavioral genetics promise to greatly increase our understanding of this disorder.