Research Review: What do we know about psychopathic traits in children?

Callous-Unemotional Traits Only Versus the Multidimensional Psychopathy Construct as Predictors of Various Antisocial Outcomes During Early Adolescence

The aim of this study was to compare callous-unemotional (CU) traits versus the multidimensional psychopathy construct in their ability to predict future and stable antisocial behavior. At baseline, a community sample of 996 Cypriot 12-year old adolescents (52% girls) completed measures that tap conduct problems (CP) and psychopathic traits, including CU. CP, aggression, and substance use were self-reported at 1–3 year follow-ups. Youths were assigned to six mutually exclusive groups based on their baseline levels of CP and psychopathic traits. Youth with CP scoring high on all three psychopathic traits dimensions (Psychopathic Personality + CP) showed the most robust and highest risk for future and stable CP, aggression, and substance use, followed by youth who were high on all three psychopathic traits dimensions but displayed no concurrent CP (Psychopathic Personality Only) and CP youth with low levels of psychopathic traits (CP Only). Youth with CP who merely manifested callous-unemotional traits (Callous-Unemotional + CP) were only at risk for future CP. The findings suggest that the CU traits-based approach for subtyping children with CP is less informative compared to a subtyping approach using various psychopathic traits dimensions in predicting future and stable forms of various antisocial outcomes. These findings and their consistency with prior work indicate the need for additional research to examine the various psychopathic traits dimensions rather than focusing solely on CU traits, especially for CP subtyping purposes.

Comparing Different Approaches for Subtyping Children with Conduct Problems: Callous-Unemotional Traits Only Versus the Multidimensional Psychopathy Construct

The aim of this study was to compare two youth psychopathy models (i.e., callous-unemotional versus multidimensional model) in their ability to predict future and stable conduct problems (CP). At baseline, mothers and fathers of 321 boys and 369 girls (ages 7-12) completed measures that tap callous-unemotional and other psychopathic traits. Parent-reported CP was collected at baseline and at 6- and 12 month follow-ups. Children were assigned to mutually exclusive groups based on their levels of CP and psychopathic traits. Children with CP who manifested callous-unemotional traits (Callous-Unemotional + CP) were occasionally at risk for future and stable CP. Yet, across gender, children with CP scoring high on all psychopathic trait dimensions (Psychopathic Personality + CP) showed the most robust and highest risk for future and stable CP. Also, Callous-Unemotional + CP children, and children who were only high in CP, often were at similar risk for future CP. The findings suggest that the callous-unemotional model is less sufficient than the multidimensional model in predicting future and stable CP. This can be concluded for both boys and girls and calls for more research reconsidering the multidimensional nature of psychopathy for CP subtyping purposes.

Characterising youth with callous-unemotional traits and concurrent anxiety: evidence for a high-risk clinical group

Growing evidence supports the existence of two variants of youth with high callous-unemotional (CU) traits who present with markedly different risk profiles and outcomes, with potential implications for risk assessment and treatment formulation. So far, studies have identified variants of CU youth mainly using data-driven cluster approaches based on levels of CU traits and co-occurring anxiety. Yet, the extent to which this knowledge may be translated into clinical practice is unclear. To this end, the present study employed a severity-based, cut-off approach to systematically characterise CU groups across a range of clinically informative domains, including trauma history, psychiatric symptomatology, affective functioning, attachment style and behavioural risk. Analyses were based on multi-rated data from a community sample of high-risk youths (n = 155, M = 18 years). Consistent with previous studies, we found that, whereas variants show comparable levels of antisocial behaviour, those who present with both high CU and high anxiety report more severe childhood maltreatment, psychological distress, ADHD symptomatology and behavioural risk-including substance use, suicidal ideation and unsafe sex. In addition, these youth show greater attachment insecurity and affective dysregulation, as indexed by levels of irritability and alexithymia. Together, findings indicate that (1) trauma history is a key factor that differentiates variants of CU youth high vs. low on anxiety, and (2) differences in individual functioning across variants point to the need for tailored clinical assessment tools and intervention strategies. Importantly, the present findings indicate that variants of CU youth can be meaningfully differentiated using cut-off based approaches that parallel methods used in clinical assessments.

Concurrent and developmental correlates of psychopathic traits using a triarchic psychopathy model approach

Psychopathy refers to a heterogeneous set of harmful dark traits and behaviors, including superficial charm, callousness, irresponsibility, and antisocial behavior. The triarchic psychopathy model (TriPM) posits that psychopathy is the combination of 3 traits: boldness, disinhibition, and meanness. However, little research has examined the concurrent and developmental correlates of these traits. We developed TriPM scales from the NEO Personality Inventory-Revised using an empirical-derived approach in a high-risk sample of 561 young adults (ages 17-25; 70.2% male). Concurrent correlates and developmental precursors of each scale were examined longitudinally using cross-informant reports from 3 critical developmental periods (ages 3-5; 9-11; 15-17). Using this approach, we identified consistent developmental precursors and concurrent correlates of boldness, including lower reactive control, fewer internalizing traits, and greater resiliency. Additionally, starting in adolescence we found that disinhibition was related to lower reactive control, more externalizing problems, substance use, and internalizing traits. Finally, although meanness demonstrated some expected concurrent relationships with criterion variables in early adulthood (e.g., lower adaptive functioning), we identified few consistent developmental precursors of meanness. Thus, a NEO-based approach to measuring the TriPM was successful in delineating boldness, disinhibition, and, to a lesser extent, meanness cross-sectionally during early adulthood. However, only boldness showed relative stability from developmental precursors in early childhood to our TriPM scale in early adulthood. (PsycINFO Database Record