Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice

There has been considerable interest in the identification of putative subtypes of psychopathy over the past several years although none of this research has focused on juveniles who are high in psychopathic traits. Using a statewide sample of juvenile offenders, the present study sought to identify subtypes consistent with theoretical notions of primary and secondary psychopathy. Among those youths high in psychopathic traits (n = 132), finite mixture modeling of various indicators of psychological distress resulted in a two-class solution. Consistent with theory, one subtype was characterized by higher levels of distress (e.g., anxiety, depression, suicidal ideation), whereas the other subgroup was lower on these dimensions and generally similar to nonpsychopathic control juveniles (n = 135). Analyses of theoretically relevant external correlates (e.g., offense history, drug use, victimization) suggested that the two subtypes differed from each other on certain key variables as well as differed from the nonpsychopathic controls.

The study focused on the incremental predictive utility of psychopathy assessed at age 13 with the Childhood Psychopathy Scale (CPS) in predicting arrests and convictions between the ages of 18 and 26. Data from 338 men from the middle sample of the Pittsburgh Youth Study were used. A variety of control variables were included: demographics (race, family structure, socioeconomic status (SES), and neighborhood SES), parenting (physical punishment, inconsistent discipline, lax supervision, and low positive parenting), peer delinquency, and individual difference variables (impulsivity, verbal IQ, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, and conduct disorder). CPS scores at age 13 predicted the variety of arrests and convictions 5 to 13 years later, even after controlling for other well-established and well-measured risk factors. The study concluded that juvenile psychopathy is an important and useful risk factor for future antisocial behavior and also considered the implications of the findings and reasons for resistance to the juvenile psychopathy construct.

Using data from the Cincinnati Lead Study, this study examines the effects of postnatal blood lead concentrations in early childhood (78 months) on adult psychopathy and six subscales of the Psychopathic Personality Inventory. Results reveal that higher blood lead concentrations in early childhood are associated with higher levels of psychopathic symptoms in adulthood, controlling for the effects of gender, race, mother's IQ, child's intellectual achievement, and the quality of the home environment. Childhood lead levels predicted variation in Machiavellian Egocentricity, Social Potency, Impulsive Nonconformity, and Blame Externalization. Overall, these results implicate lead exposure in the etiology of psychopathy.

Behavioral genetic research has consistently revealed that antisocial behaviors are due partially to genetic factors and partially to environmental factors. Even in light of these findings, researchers have failed to examine the genetic and environmental contributors to adolescent victimization. The current study addressed this gap in the literature by analyzing a sample of twin pairs drawn from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (Add Health). The results of the statistical models revealed that genetic factors explained about 40% to 45% of the variance in adolescent victimization, with the remaining variance attributable to the nonshared environment. Moreover, additional analyses revealed that 64% of the variance in repeat victimization was due to genetic factors. The implications that these findings have for victimization researchers are discussed.

This review paper discusses the construct of child and adolescent psychopathy and outlines controversy about the topic as well as some of the reasons that it might be developmentally appropriate. Past research has suggested that child psychopathy may be inapplicable to youth because the symptoms cannot be reliably distinguished from features of normative adolescent development. Concerns have also been raised regarding the possibility that the syndrome does not closely resemble the adult construct of psychopathy. We conclude that there is some truth to both sides of this story. Research shows that child psychopathy has a considerable degree of reliability and construct validity; however, there are also some important developmental differences. Furthermore, emerging evidence indicates potential changes in psychopathic symptoms over time and the important role of protective factors. Although, current research suggests that the concept of child psychopathy may be like an impressionist painting (i.e., clearer from a distance but messier as one gets closer), we argue this is not necessarily problematic from a developmental perspective. However, we conclude that a rigorous set of research studies will be needed to further advance our understanding of child psychopathy and the way it manifests itself over time.

Psychopathy is an important clinical construct that has been studied for more than 200 years and has exploded in recent years as a guiding explanatory concept for a range of antisocial behaviors across a range of populations and subgroups. In this review essay, I advance that psychopathy is the purest and the best explanation of antisocial behavior. Indeed, psychopathy is the unified theory of crime because it mirrors the elemental nature and embodies the pejorative essence of antisocial behavior, accommodates dimensional and categorical conceptualizations and examinations of antisocial behavior, facilitates the study of antisocial phenotypes over the life span, accommodates the general overlap of antisocial behaviors among diverse populations, and facilitates emerging biosocial explanations of antisocial behavior.