Psychopathy in Bulgaria: The cross-cultural generalizability of the Hare Psychopathy Checklist

Comparing psychopathy across measurement modalities

Psychopathy is a collection of personality traits and behaviors that are associated with costly personal, interpersonal, and societal outcomes. The nature of this construct has been widely debated across decades of literature, and such debates have produced a multitude of instruments for the measurement of psychopathy. These measures include self-reports and clinical interviews, yet little work has examined the degree to which measurements of psychopathy may differ across these modalities and whether such potential differences may impact the associations commonly found with psychopathy (e.g., impulsivity). To this end, we applied psychometric network and item response theory analyses to data obtained from the interview-based Psychopathy Checklist: Screening Version and the Levenson Self-Report of Psychopathy in the same sample. Our results revealed similarities and differences across measurement modalities. Regarding the Psychopathy Checklist: Screening Version, Factor 2 items were more important to the psychopathy construct (i.e., the most central and contributed more information than Factor 1 items), whereas Factor 1 items were more important to the Levenson Self-Report of Psychopathy. Factor 1 items were positively linked with Positive Urgency and were either negatively associated or not associated with Negative Urgency. In contrast, Factor 2 items were positively linked with Negative Urgency in both networks. Our analyses also revealed that dishonesty and irresponsibility served as the primary bridges connecting the factors of psychopathy in both networks. We make suggestions for improving the assessment of psychopathy by implementing self-report and interview measures that allow scores to be compared directly. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Is it good to be bad? An evolutionary analysis of the adaptive potential of psychopathic traits

Although psychopathy is widely conceptualised as a mental disorder, some researchers question the maladaptive nature of psychopathy, and argue that it might be advantageous from an evolutionary point of view. According to this view, psychopathy can be seen as an evolutionary adaptative strategy that relies on deception and manipulation to gain short-term reproductive benefits. Psychopathy is also identified as a fast life strategy in response to early life stress and an adaptation to harsh environments. This paper investigates the evidence that psychopathic traits are adaptive, while also addressing the limitations of current evolutionary models of psychopathy based on frequency-dependent selection and life history theory. We review recent studies on the fitness correlates of psychopathy and find that psychopathic traits present potential adaptive trade-offs between fertility and mortality, and offspring quantity and quality. On a proximate level, individual differences in stress reactivity and environmental risk factors in early development predispose to psychopathy through gene-environment interactions. We propose that environmental, developmental, social and cultural factors can mediate the relationship between psychopathic traits and fitness and therefore should be considered to make accurate predictions on the adaptive potential of psychopathy. We end by outlining gaps in the literature and making recommendations for future evolutionary research on psychopathy.

Fluid Intelligence Moderates the Link Between Psychopathy and Aggression Differently for Men and Women

Research on sex differences in the association of psychopathy with fluid intelligence is limited, and it remains unknown if fluid intelligence plays a meaningful role in explaining the psychopathy-aggression link for men and women. The present study aimed to test for sex differences in the relation between the four-facet model of psychopathy and intelligence, and to assess whether fluid intelligence moderates the link between psychopathy and aggression. In a community sample of men (n = 356) and women (n = 196), we assessed psychopathy using the Psychopathy Checklist: Screening Version (PCL:SV), fluid intelligence using the Raven's Progressive Matrices, and types of aggression using the Aggression Questionnaire (AQ). Hierarchical regressions showed that the psychopathy lifestyle facet was negatively associated with intelligence and there were no sex differences. Our analyses for types of aggression revealed sex differences and similarities. For both men and women, total AQ scores were predicted by higher antisocial facet scores. Lower intelligence moderated the link between higher antisocial facet scores and aggression in men, but not for women. Physical aggression in women was associated with higher interpersonal, affective, and antisocial facet scores, whereas for men, it was only associated with higher antisocial facet scores. Verbal and indirect aggression were associated with higher intelligence in both men and women. For men only, higher antisocial facet scores were associated with verbal and indirect aggression. Higher intelligence moderated the link between the lifestyle facet and indirect aggression for women, whereas for men, it moderated the link between the affective facet and indirect aggression. This study further highlights sex differences in mechanisms of psychopathy-related aggression, which need to be considered in the development of violence interventions and risk assessment.

Physical Abuse Explains Sex Differences in the Link Between Psychopathy and Aggression

Psychopathy has long been associated with aggression. However, few studies have looked at differences between men and women. Studies that do exist demonstrate that psychopathy differentially relates to aggression in men and women and indicate that environmental factors may play a significant role in influencing these associations. A key environmental factor is a history of lifetime physical abuse (LPA), which has been linked to aggressive behavior in both men and women. The aim of the present study was to test if psychopathy differentially predicted physical, verbal, and indirect aggression in men and women, and if these associations were moderated by LPA. In a large community sample of men (n = 369) and women (n = 204), we assessed the 4-facet model of psychopathy (Interpersonal, Affective, Lifestyle, Antisocial) with the Psychopathy Checklist: Screening Version, LPA with the Addiction Severity Index, and self-report aggression with the Aggression Questionnaire. Results revealed sex differences and similarities. Physical aggression was associated with the affective facet of psychopathy in both men and women, though in different directions based on the moderating effects of LPA. Verbal aggression was associated with higher antisocial facet scores and LPA for men and not women. Finally, indirect aggression was associated with the antisocial facet of psychopathy for men, and the interpersonal facet for women, and these associations were not moderated by LPA. In women, low antisocial facet scores and no LPA were found to be protective for indirect aggression. These results show that LPA and psychopathy generally increase the risk of aggression, but the interaction between LPA and psychopathy differentiates the risk of aggression forms for men and women. These sex differences highlight the need for female-responsive interventions to target sex-specific risk factors for aggressive behavior.

Testing the Factor Structure of the Psychopathy Checklist: Screening Version (PCL:SV) in an Australian Violent Offender Population

Although psychopathy is a correlate of recidivism, including violent offending, the inclusion of antisocial behavior items in the Psychopathy Checklist (PCL) assessment instruments has been debated. Further, the latent factor structure underpinning the PCL measures has not been comprehensively validated in Australia. This study examined the construct validity of the PCL:SV in a sample of 192 Australian male violent offenders using structural equation modeling. The incremental validity of including the antisocial behavior items for predicting recidivism was also assessed. Approximately one-third of the sample had high scores on the PCL:SV. Construct analyses indicated strongest support for two distinct three-factor models of PCL psychopathy, with the established two- and four-factor models demonstrating poorer fit. The Antisocial factor improved predictive accuracy incrementally relative to the other three factors (Interpersonal, Affective, and Lifestyle). Area under the curve analyses revealed predictive accuracy for recidivism only for factors containing the antisocial behavior items. Findings contribute to the construct and predictive validity of the PCL measures and are discussed relative to contemporary forensic risk assessment practice.

Effects of Psychopathy on Neurocognitive Domains of Impulsivity in Abstinent Opiate and Stimulant Users

Background: Psychopathy and substance use disorders (SUDs) are both characterized by neurocognitive impairments reflecting higher levels of impulsivity such as reward-driven decision-making and deficient inhibitory control. Previous studies suggest that psychopathy may exacerbate decision-making deficits, but it may be unrelated to other neurocognitive impairments among substance dependent individuals (SDIs). The aim of the present study was to examine the role of psychopathy and its interpersonal-affective and impulsive-antisocial dimensions in moderating the relationships between dependence on different classes of drugs and neurocognitive domains of impulsivity. Method: We tested 693 participants (112 heroin mono-dependent individuals, 71 heroin polysubstance dependent individuals, 115 amphetamine mono-dependent individuals, 76 amphetamine polysubstance dependent individuals, and 319 non-substance dependent control individuals). Participants were administered the Psychopathy Checklist: Screening Version (PCL:SV) and seven neurocognitive tasks measuring impulsive choice/decision-making (Iowa Gambling Task; Cambridge Gambling Task; Kirby Delay Discounting Task; Balloon Analog Risk Task), and impulsive action/response inhibition (Go/No-Go Task, Immediate Memory Task, and Stop Signal Task). Results: A series of hierarchical multiple regressions revealed that the interpersonal-affective dimension of psychopathy moderated the association between decision-making, response inhibition and both amphetamine and heroin dependence, albeit differently. For amphetamine users, low levels of interpersonal-affective traits predicted poor decision-making on the Iowa Gambling Task and better response inhibition on the Stop Signal task. In contrast, in heroin users high interpersonal-affective psychopathy traits predicted lower risk taking on the Cambridge Gambling Task and better response inhibition on the Go/No-Go task. The impulsive-antisocial dimension of psychopathy predicted poor response inhibition in both amphetamine and heroin users. Conclusions: Our findings reveal that psychopathy and its dimensions had both common and unique effects on neurocognitive function in heroin and amphetamine dependent individuals. Our results suggest that the specific interactions between psychopathy dimensions and dependence on different classes of drugs may lead to either deficient or superior decision-making and response inhibition performance in SDIs, suggesting that psychopathy may paradoxically play a protective role for some neurocognitive functions in specific subtypes of substance users.

Validation of the Levenson Self-Report Psychopathy Scale in Bulgarian Substance-Dependent Individuals

The co-occurrence of psychopathy and substance use disorders (SUDs) is associated with higher relapse rates and increased risk of violent offending. Studies on the validity of psychopathy measures in community samples and substance-dependent individuals (SDIs) are scarce. The aim of the current study was to examine the psychometric properties of the Levenson Self-Report Psychopathy Scale (LSRP) in a sample of Bulgarian SDIs and non-dependent controls. We tested 615 participants: 106 heroin users, 91 amphetamine users, 123 polysubstance users, and 295 controls. Confirmatory factor analyses replicated the tri-factor structure of the LSRP (egocentric, antisocial, callous). The scale demonstrated acceptable reliability and validity. SDIs scored significantly higher than controls on the total scale and subscales of the LSRP, indicating good discriminant validity. Overall, results indicate that the LSRP is a valid instrument for measuring psychopathy in Bulgarian community samples.

Neurocognitive and Psychiatric Markers for Addiction: Common vs. Specific Endophenotypes for Heroin and Amphetamine Dependence

BACKGROUND

The differential utility of neurocognitive impulsivity and externalizing/ internalizing traits as putative endophenotypes for dependence on heroin vs. amphetamine is unclear.

OBJECTIVE

This exploratory study aims to determine: (1) whether neurocognitive impulsivity dimensions and externalizing/internalizing traits are correlated between siblings discordant for heroin and amphetamine dependence; and (2) which of these associations are common across substances and which are substance- specific.

METHODS

Pearson correlations between individuals with 'pure' heroin and amphetamine dependence and their unaffected biological siblings (n = 37 heroin sibling pairs; n = 30 amphetamine sibling pairs) were run on 10 neurocognitive measures, 6 externalizing measures, and 5 internalizing measures. Sibling pair effects were further examined using regression.

RESULTS

Siblings discordant for heroin dependence were significantly correlated on delay aversion on the Cambridge Gambling Task, risk-taking on the Balloon Analogue Risk Task, sensation seeking, and hopelessness. Siblings discordant for amphetamine dependence were significantly correlated on the quality of decision-making on the Cambridge Gambling Task, discriminability on the Immediate Memory Task, commission errors on the Go/No Go Task, trait impulsivity, ADHD and anxiety sensitivity.

CONCLUSION

Dimensions of impulsivity and externalizing/internalizing traits appear to aggregate among siblings discordant for substance dependence. Risk-taking propensity, sensation seeking and hopelessness were specific for heroin sibling pairs. Motor/action impulsivity, trait impulsivity, and anxiety sensitivity were specific to amphetamine sibling pairs. Decisional/choice impulsivity was common across both heroin and amphetamine sibling pairs. These findings provide preliminary evidence for the utility of neurocognitive impulsivity and externalizing/ internalizing traits as candidate endophenotypes for substance dependence in general and for substance-specific dependencies.

Relationships Between Alexithymia and Psychopathy in Heroin Dependent Individuals

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.

AIM

Our 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).

RESULTS

Heroin 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.

Which features of psychopathy and impulsivity matter most for prison violence? New evidence among female prisoners

Prison violence is a complex and multifaceted phenomenon. While a great deal of research has been conducted in male samples, very few studies are dedicated to understanding violence committed by female offenders. Two constructs that have emerged as important predictors of violence are psychopathy and impulsivity. These constructs may be an important line of inquiry due to the close association between psychopathy, impulsivity, and violence. In a sample of 166 female offenders, we used the 3-facet model of psychopathy and 3-factor model of trait impulsivity with the goal to statistically explain two types of prison violence: official reports of violent misconducts over a 12-month period, and self-report of deliberately instigating a violent altercation. We conducted three separate regression models to test the independent contribution of psychopathy and impulsivity, as well as accounting for the overlap between psychopathy and impulsivity. When impulsivity and psychopathy were not competing within the same model, affective and behavioral psychopathic traits, and nonplanning impulsiveness predicted violent misconducts. However, when accounting for impulsivity and psychopathy within the same model, only affective psychopathic traits remained significant. When predicting if an offender deliberately started a violent altercation, separate statistical models showed affective and interpersonal psychopathic traits, and nonplanning impulsiveness were significant. When competing for variance within the same statistical model, only affective and interpersonal psychopathic traits remained as significant predictors. This suggests an overlap between psychopathic traits and nonplanning impulsivity when understanding violent misconducts in female offenders, while affective psychopathic explains female prison violence, regardless of impulsivity.

Sex differences on the four-facet model of psychopathy predict physical, verbal, and indirect aggression

Psychopathy is a multifaceted construct that has been linked to aggression. Yet, few studies have explored the association between physical, verbal, and indirect aggression using the 4-facet model of psychopathy in community samples, and to date, no studies exist that test for male and female differences. The present study aimed to understand what facets of psychopathy predict aggressive behavior for men and women, while controlling for important risk factors, such as Antisocial Personality Disorder (ASPD). Drawing from a large Bulgarian community sample (N = 565), a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) supported the use of the 4-facet model of the Psychopathy Checklist: Screening Version (PCL:SV; Hart et al., ). Hierarchical linear regressions revealed that physical aggression was predicted by affective and antisocial psychopathic traits, and ASPD. Verbal aggression was predicted by the interpersonal facet, and indirect aggression was predicted by the antisocial psychopathy facet and ASPD. Sex significantly moderated the associations among facets of psychopathy and physical and indirect aggression. Specifically, the affective facet was positively associated with physical aggression only for women, whereas the antisocial facet was positively associated with indirect aggression only for men. Results suggest that the 4-facet model of psychopathy is sensitive to capture important similarities and differences between males and females when predicting forms of aggression in community samples. These findings underscore the importance of understanding how men and women differ in their risk-factors for aggressive behavior, which will better inform violence interventions based on sex-specific needs.

Validation of the Substance Use Risk Profile Scale (SURPS) With Bulgarian Substance Dependent Individuals

Background: The Substance Use Risk Profile Scale (SURPS) is a 23-item self-report questionnaire that assesses four well-validated personality risk factors for substance misuse (Impulsivity, Sensation Seeking, Anxiety Sensitivity, and Hopelessness). While the SURPS has been used extensively with adolescents at risk for substance dependence, its properties with adult substance-dependent populations have been understudied. Further, the validity of the Bulgarian version of the SURPS has not been evaluated. The aims of the present study were to examine the factor structure of the Bulgarian version of the SURPS, its psychometric properties, and its ability to distinguish individuals with substance dependence from healthy controls. Methods: Participants included 238 individuals ages 18 to 50 (45% female): 36 "pure" (i.e., mono-substance dependent) heroin users, 34 "pure" amphetamine users, 32 polysubstance users, 64 controls with no history of substance dependence, 43 unaffected siblings of heroin users, and 29 unaffected siblings of amphetamine users. We explored the factor structure of the Bulgarian version of the SURPS with confirmatory factor analyses, examined its reliability and validity, and tested for group differences between substance dependent and non-dependent groups. Results: Confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) replicated the original four-factor model of the SURPS. The four subscales of the SURPS demonstrated good internal consistency (Cronbach's alphas ranged from 0.71 to 0.85) and adequate concurrent validity. Significant group differences were found on the Impulsivity and Sensation Seeking subscales, with the three substance dependent groups scoring higher than controls. Conclusions: The SURPS is a valid instrument for measuring personality risk for substance use disorders in the Bulgarian population. The Bulgarian version of the SURPS demonstrates adequate to good reliability, concurrent validity, and predictive validity. Its ability to distinguish between groups with and without a history of substance dependence was specific to externalizing traits such as Impulsivity and Sensation Seeking, on which opiate, stimulant, and polysubstance dependent individuals scored higher than non-dependent controls.

Psychometric Properties in Forensic Application of the Screening Version of the Psychopathy Checklist

The Psychopathy Checklist: Screening Version (PCL: SV) is a short form of the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R), an expert-rated assessment that measures psychopathic personality traits in research, clinical, and community settings. The PCL-R is an extensively relied upon tool in psycho-legal contexts. The screening version is also widely used; however, it has received far less empirical attention than the PCL-R. This review examines the psychometric properties of the PCL: SV, specifically in relation to forensic samples, and evaluates its comparability with the full PCL-R. Previously reported similarity in the reliability and validity of the PCL: SV as established for the PCL-R was supported through further testing in forensic samples. However, limitations in terms of available normative data are highlighted, and the review engages with wider debate concerning the measurement of psychopathy.

Neurocognitive and psychiatric dimensions of hot, but not cool, impulsivity predict HIV sexual risk behaviors among drug users in protracted abstinence

BACKGROUND

Impulsivity is an important risk factor for HIV risky drug and sexual behaviors. Research identifies hot (i.e. affectively-mediated, reward-based) and cool (motoric, attentional, independent of context) neurocognitive and psychiatric dimensions of impulsivity, though the impact of specific drugs of abuse on these varieties of impulsivity remains an open question.

OBJECTIVES

The present study examined the associations of neurocognitive and psychiatric varieties of hot and cool impulsivity with measures of lifetime and recent sexual risk behaviors among users of different classes of drugs.

METHODS

The study sample was comprised of drug users in protracted (> 1 year) abstinence: heroin mono-dependent (n = 61), amphetamine mono-dependent (n = 44), and polysubstance dependent (n = 73). Hot impulsivity was operationalized via neurocognitive tasks of reward-based decision-making and symptoms of psychopathy. Cool impulsivity was operationalized via neurocognitive tasks of response inhibition and symptoms of attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).

RESULTS

Hot impulsivity was associated with sexual risk behaviors among heroin and amphetamine users in protracted abstinence, whereas cool impulsivity was not associated with sexual risk behaviors among any drug-using group. Neurocognitive hot impulsivity was associated with recent (past 30-day) sexual risk behaviors, whereas psychopathy was associated with sexual risk behaviors during more remote time-periods (past 6 month and lifetime) and mediated the association between heroin dependence and past 6-month sexual risk behaviors.

CONCLUSION

Assessments and interventions aimed at reducing sexual risk behaviors among drug users should focus on hot neurocognitive and psychiatric dimensions of impulsivity, such as decision-making and psychopathy. Cool dimensions of impulsivity such as response inhibition and ADHD were not related to sexual risk behaviors among drug users in protracted abstinence.