Psychopathy Aggression and Emotion Proce
Psychopathy Aggression and Emotion Proce
Psychopathy Aggression and Emotion Proce
Brief Report
a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t
Article history: Emotion processing is pivotal during development and deficient processing of certain emotions disrupts
Available online 13 June 2009 normal socialization increasing risk for violent behavior later in life. Psychopathy has been linked to both
of these phenomena in men; however, the study of such relations has been relatively neglected in
Keywords: women. In the present study, 88 collegiate women completed measures of psychopathy, aggression,
Psychopathy and a lexical-decision-task (LDT) assessing the processing of affective words. Participants were primed
Emotion processing by viewing images of violence or prosocial behavior immediately before completing the LDT. Psychopa-
Aggression
thy was unrelated to emotion processing in the positive image condition, however, following exposure to
Women
violent imagery, emotional detachment (F1), but not social deviance (F2) predicted decreased processing
of sadness words. This deficit mediated the relationship between F1 and proactive aggression. Results
suggest that F1 may relate to deficient activation of sadness in response to inciting events and, therefore,
may inform the risk of proactive aggression in emotionally detached women.
Published by Elsevier Inc.
1. Introduction a review see Blair, Mitchell, & Blair, 2005; Blair, Richell, et al.,
2005; Frick & Marsee, 2006; Porter & Woodworth, 2006).
Theorists hypothesize that deficient emotion processing is the The two factors of psychopathy (Hare, 2003), Factor 1 (i.e., emo-
core deficit of psychopathy (Blair, 2003; Herba et al., 2007). Blair, tional detachment) and Factor 2 (i.e., social deviance), appear to
Colledge, Murray, and Mitchell (2001) suggest that emotion pro- demonstrate diverging patterns of association with emotion pro-
cessing is pivotal during early development, and that deficits in cessing and attendant forms of aggression. Factor 1 (F1) seems to
such processing can disrupt normal socialization. For example, be associated with a pattern most similar to that described in the
Kimonis, Frick, Fazekas, and Loney (2006) found that decreased IES. Specifically, F1 is related to deficient experience and process-
emotion processing of distressing imagery was associated with ing of emotional distress and negative affect (e.g., Hicks & Patrick,
proactive aggression in a sample of children. Proactive aggression, 2006; Reidy, Zeichner, Hunnicutt-Ferguson, & Lilienfeld, 2008) and
a ‘‘cold-blooded” goal-directed form of aggression motivated by increased propensity for ‘‘cold-blooded” acts of instrumental,
secondary gain (Berkowitz, 1993), is commonly evinced by psycho- unprovoked, and sadistic aggression (Porter, Woodworth, Earle,
pathic individuals and much more so than by nonpsychopathic Drugge, & Boer, 2003; Reidy, Zeichner, & Martinez, 2008; Reidy,
individuals (Mitchell, Avny, & Blair, 2006; Williamson, Hare, & Zeichner, Miller, & Martinez, 2007; Woodworth & Porter, 2002).
Wong, 1987; Woodworth & Porter, 2002). Notably, Kimonis and Conversely, Factor 2 (F2) is associated with greater experience of
collegues (2006) found this deficit in emotion processing did not anger, hostility, and attendant reactive aggression (Falkenbach,
relate to reactive aggression, a type of aggression driven by hostile Poythress, & Creevy, 2008; Hicks & Patrick, 2006; Porter, Birt, &
reaction to various forms of provocation (Berkowitz, 1993). Boer, 2001; Reidy et al., 2007, 2008). These data support supposi-
According to the Integrated Emotion System (IES) model (Blair, tions that impaired emotion processing is the core deficit of psy-
2005), dysfunction of the amygdala impairs the ability to experi- chopathy (Herba et al., 2007), and that this deficit results in
ence and recognize emotions of distress in others (e.g., sadness) increased tendency to engage in instrumental or proactive aggres-
and, as such, may interfere with the development of empathy. Def- sion (Mitchell et al., 2006).
icits in these experiences lead to increased risk for instrumentally Despite abundant research on the relations among psychopa-
violent and antisocial behavior. Consistent with this theory, re- thy, emotion processing, and violence in men, there is a notable
search indicates that psychopathy is consistently linked to both dearth of such research that focuses on women. It is, therefore,
deficits in emotion processing and increased risk of violence (for unclear whether the emotion deficits identified in men parallel
those in women, and whether the IES is useful in understanding
instrumental aggression in women. Verona and Vitale (2006) note
* Corresponding author. Fax: +1 251 460 6320.
E-mail address: [email protected] (D.E. Reidy). that, ‘‘only a few researchers have taken on the pioneering work
of attempting to validate measures of psychopathy, and the con- 2.2. Materials and procedure
struct itself, in women” (p. 415). Indeed, the few studies that have
addressed psychopathy in women focused primarily on forensic 2.2.1. Self-report measures
samples (Nicholls, Olgoff, Brink, & Spidel, 2005). Lilienfeld Psychopathy was measured by the Self-Report Psychopathy Scale:
(1994) argues that it is essential to conduct psychopathy research Version 3 (SRP-3; Paulhus, Neumann, & Hare, in press): a 64-item
in non-institutionalized populations to identify aspects that lead measure of psychopathic traits designed for use with college pop-
to prosocial versus antisocial outcomes. As such, it is necessary ulations. It comprises four facets entitled Interpersonal Manipula-
to determine whether deficits in emotion processing facilitate tion (IPM), Callous Affect (CA), Erratic Life Style (ELS), and Criminal
aggression in populations of women outside the criminal justice Tendencies (CT). The four facets combine to represent the tradi-
system. tional two-factor model of psychopathy derived from Hare’s con-
The purpose of the current study was to investigate the associ- ception of the PCL-R. The IPM and CA facet combine to make up
ation among psychopathy traits, deficient emotion processing, and F1 and the ELS and CT facet combine to createF2. Items are rated
proactive aggression in a sample of nonforensic women. To this along a Likert-type scale from ‘‘1” (disagree strongly) to ‘‘5” (agree
end, we used a lexical-decision-task (LDT) to assess affective re- strongly). For the purposes of this study, we were only interested
sponses to emotionally laden imagery via response latencies to in the F1 and F2 scales as this model is the mostly widely re-
affective words (i.e., sad, angry, fear, happy, and disgust). Blair, searched (Cale & Lilienfeld, 2006). In the present sample,
Mitchell, et al. (2005) and Blair, Richell, et al. (2005) have argued Cronbach’s alphas were .85, .85, and .90 for F1, F2, and Total
that using LDT paradigms is ideal because they allow researchers Psychopathy, respectively. Additionally, the Levenson Self-Report
to measure implicit (and uncontrollable) emotional processing. Psychopathy Scale (LSRP; Levenson, Kiehl, & Fitzpatrick, 1995), a
Several studies have utilized this task to demonstrate aberrant 26-item inventory, was administered. Levenson and colleagues
emotion processing in relation to psychopathy (e.g., Day & Wong, (1995) titled the two LSRP factors ‘‘primary’’ and ‘‘secondary’’
1996; Lorenz & Newman, 2002; Williamson, Harpur, & Hare, psychopathy because they believed that this factor structure fit
1991). Based on theoretical work in this area (e.g., Bower & Forgas, Karpman’s (1941), Karpman’s (1948) distinction between ‘‘primary’’
1999), a purported ‘‘network activation” is involved in behavioral and ‘‘secondary’’ psychopaths. However, it was patterned after the
and physiological responses, as well as in verbal and semantic factor structure of the PCL-R and the subscales are considered
structures related to a given emotion. This word-nonword discrim- analogous to F1 and F2. The LSRP was patterned after Hare’s
ination task purports to measure network activation via response two-factor model of psychopathy but was designed for use in non-
latency to particular stimulus words, with faster reaction times forensic settings to assess behavioral features of individuals not
(RT) indicating greater network activation (e.g., Schacter, 1987). identified as criminals. Items are rated along a Likert-type scale
In contrast, slower RTs to emotion words suggest less activation. from ‘‘1” (disagree strongly) to ‘‘4” (agree strongly). In the current
As such, individuals in a happy mood state would respond faster sample, Cronbach’s alphas were .86, .70, and .87 for F1, F2, and To-
to happiness words whereas persons in a sad mood state would re- tal Psychopathy scores, respectively. Aggression was measured
spond faster to sadness words (Ferraro, King, Ronning, Pekarski, & with the Reactive–Proactive Aggression Questionnaire (RPQ; Raine
Risan, 2003; Olafson & Ferraro, 2001). We used the LDT to assess et al., 2006), comprising 23 items rated on a 0–2 scale (0 = never,
the cognitive/affective state of participants in response to violent 1 = sometimes, 2 = always) to assess proactive (e.g., ‘‘How often
imagery. Based on research that has demonstrated mood congru- have you used force to obtain money or things from others?”) and
ent response patterns with the LDT methodology (e.g., Ferraro reactive aggression (e.g., ‘‘How often have you hit others to defend
et al., 2003), we posited that responding faster to sadness words yourself ?”). Coefficient alphas for the reactive and proactive scales
after viewing violent imagery would reflect increased experience were .83 and .80, respectively.
of sad affect due to activation of empathic responses when viewing
the violence imagery. As such, low empathy individuals (i.e., high 2.2.2. Exposure to visual stimuli
psychopathy) would display less activation of sad affect and there- After completing questionnaires, participants were randomly
fore respond more slowly to sadness words. Conversely, priming assigned to a condition in which they either viewed a set of vio-
with positive affective images would not activate empathic re- lence images (n = 39) or a set of positive images (n = 49). Twenty-
sponses and therefore, psychopathy would be unrelated to the pro- four color images were selected from the International Affective
cessing of sadness words. Consistent with the aforementioned Picture System (IAPS; Lang, Bradley, & Cuthbert, 2005). The 12 dis-
research and the IES model, we advanced the following tressing images depicted scenes in which physical violence was
hypotheses: perpetrated against a person (e.g., a man pressing a knife against
a woman’s throat) whereas the 12 positive images depicted indi-
H1: F1 will predict deficient processing of sadness words (i.e., viduals interacting in a joyful manner (e.g., children playing with
sadness facilitation) after being primed with violence imagery. a kitten).1 Participants rated the images on two dimensions, pleas-
H2: F1 psychopathy will relate to higher rates of proactive antness (4 = very unpleasant, 4 = very pleasant) and pain/distress
aggression. (0 = person portrayed did not experience any pain/distress, 10 = per-
H3: The link between F1 and proactive aggression will be med- son portrayed experienced very much pain/distress). The order of
iated by deficient sadness facilitation in response to violence dimension rating was counterbalanced. The purpose of having par-
imagery. ticipants rate the imagery was to ensure that they cognitively at-
tended to the emotional content of the pictures.
2. Method
2.2.3. Emotion processing
Following exposure to the images, a lexical-decision-task was
2.1. Participants
used to assess emotion processing. Participants were required to
indicate as quickly as possible, by pressing an appropriate key on
Eighty-eight collegiate women (Mage = 19.1; 86% Caucasian)
were recruited from the University of Georgia to participate in ex-
change for partial course credit. Informed consent was obtained
1
from all participants. Researchers wishing to identify the specific IAPS images used in the present study
can contact the authors for a list of the image numbers.
930 D.E. Reidy et al. / Journal of Research in Personality 43 (2009) 928–932
Experimental trials consisted of 150 word and 150 non-word letter Factors 1 2 3 4 5 6
strings. Word stimuli were presented only once and in a random- 1. LSRP F1 – .58 .92 .67 .50 .63
ized fashion. Seventy-five of the words were neutral (i.e., not 2. LSRP F2 .84 .58 .54 .61
emotional) and were matched with one of the 75 emotion words 3. LSRP Tot .73 .60 .72
(i.e., happy, sad, angry, fearful, and disgust words) in terms of word 4. SRP F1 .66 .90
5. SRP F2 .92
frequency and syllabic length. Changing a single letter in each of 6. SRP Tot –
the 150 words created pronounceable non-words. Research indi-
cates that individuals respond faster to words of mood-congruent Note. All correlations are significant at p < .001.
Table 2
Correlation coefficients for psychopathy factors and emotion processing.
Note: Condition 1 = women primed with violence images (n = 39); condition 2 = women primed with positive images (n = 49).
*
p = .005.
Blair, R. J. R. (2005). Applying a cognitive neuroscience perspective to the disorder of Levenson, M. R., Kiehl, K. A., & Fitzpatrick, C. M. (1995). Assessing psychopathic
psychopathy. Development & Psychopathology, 17, 865–891. attributes in a noninstitutionalized population. Journal of Personality & Social
Blair, R. J. R., Colledge, E., Murray, L., & Mitchell, D. G. V. (2001). A selective Psychology, 68, 151–158.
impairment in the processing of sad and fearful expressions in children with Lilienfeld, S. O. (1994). Conceptual problems in the assessment of psychopathy.
psychopathic tendencies. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 29, 491–498. Clinical Psychology Review, 14, 17–38.
Blair, R. J. R., Mitchell, D. G. V., & Blair, K. (2005). The psychopath: Emotion and the Lorenz, A., & Newman, J. P. (2002). Deficient response modulation and emotion
brain. Malden: Blackwell. processing in low anxious Caucasian psychopathic offenders: Results from a
Blair, K. S., Richell, R. A., Mitchell, D. G. V., Leonard, A., Morton, J., & Blair, R. J. R. lexical decision task. Emotion, 2, 91–104.
(2005). They know the words, but not the music: Affective and semantic Lynam, D. R., Hoyle, R. H., & Newman, J. P. (2006). The perils of partialling:
priming in individuals with psychopathy. Biological Psychology, 73, 114–123. Cautionary tales from aggression and psychopathy. Assessment, 13,
Bower, G. H., & Forgas, J. P. (1999). Mood and social memory. In J. P. Forgas (Ed.), 328–341.
Handbook of affect & social cognition (pp. 95–120). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Miller, J. D., & Lynam, D. R. (2006). Reactive and proactive aggression: Similarities
Bushman, B. J., & Anderson, C. A. (2001). Is it time to pull the plug on the hostile and differences. Personality & Individual Differences, 41, 1469–1480.
versus instrumental aggression dichotomy? Psychological Review, 108, 273–279. Mitchell, D. G. V., Avny, S. B., & Blair, R. J. R. (2006). Divergent patterns of aggressive
Cale, E. M., & Lilienfeld, S. O. (2006). Psychopathy factors and risk for aggressive and neurocognitive characteristics in acquired versus developmental
behavior: A test of the threatened egotism hypothesis. Law and Human Behavior, psychopathy. Neurocase, 12, 164–178.
30, 51–74. Nicholls, T. L., Olgoff, J. R. P., Brink, J., & Spidel, A. (2005). Psychopathy in women: A
Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 155–159. review of its clinical usefulness for assessing risk for aggression and criminality.
Day, R., & Wong, S. (1996). Anomalous perceptual asymmetries for negative Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 23, 779–802.
emotional stimuli in the psychopath. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 105, Olafson, K. M., & Ferraro, R. F. (2001). Effects of emotional state on lexical decision
648–652. performance. Brain & Cognition, 45, 15–20.
Falkenbach, D., Poythress, N., & Creevy, C. (2008). The exploration of subclinical Paulhus, D. L., Neumann, C.S., & Hare, R. D. (in press). Manual for the Self-Report
psychopathic subtypes and the relationship with types of aggression. Psychopathy (SRP) scale. Toronto: Multi-Health Systems.
Personality & Individual Differences, 44, 821–832. Porter, S., Birt, A., & Boer, D. P. (2001). Investigation of the criminal and conditional
Ferraro, R. F., King, B., Ronning, B., Pekarski, K., & Risan, J. (2003). Effects of induced release profiles of Canadian federal offenders as a function of psychopathy age.
emotional state on lexical processing in younger and older adults. Journal of Law & Human Behavior, 25, 647–661.
Psychology: Interdisciplinary & Applied, 137, 262–272. Porter, S., & Woodworth, M. (2006). Psychopathy and aggression. In C. J. Patrick
Frick, P. J., & Marsee, M. A. (2006). Psychopathy and developmental pathways to (Ed.), Handbook of psychopathy (pp. 481–494). New York: Guilford Press.
antisocial behavior in youth. In C. J. Patrick (Ed.), Handbook of psychopathy Porter, S., Woodworth, M., Earle, J., Drugge, J., & Boer, D. (2003). Characteristics of
(pp. 481–494). New York: Guilford Press. sexual homicides committed by psychopathic and nonpsychopathic offenders.
Giancola, P. R. (2003). The moderating effects of dispositional empathy on alcohol- Law & Human Behavior, 27, 459–470.
related aggression in men and women. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 112, Raine, A., Dodge, K., Loeber, R., Kopp, L., Lynam, D., Reynolds, C., et al. (2006). The
275–281. reactive–proactive aggression (RPQ) questionnaire: Differential correlates of
Hare, R. D. (2003). The hare psychopathy checklist-revised (PCL-R). 2nd ed. Toronto, reactive and proactive aggression in adolescent boys. Aggressive Behavior, 32,
Canada: Multi-Health Systems. 159–171.
Herba, C. M., Hodgins, S., Blackwood, N., Kumar, V., Naudts, K. H., & Phillips, M. Reidy, D. E., Zeichner, A., Hunnicutt-Ferguson, K., & Lilienfeld, S. O. (2008).
(2007). The neurobiology of psychopathy: A focus on emotion processing. In H. Psychopathy traits and the processing of emotion words: Results of a lexical
Hervé & J. C. Yuille (Eds.), The psychopath: Theory research & practice decision task. Cognition & Emotion, 22, 1174–1186.
(pp. 253–283). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Reidy, D. E., Zeichner, A., & Martinez, M. A. (2008). Effects of psychopathy traits on
Hicks, B. M., & Patrick, C. J. (2006). Psychopathy and negative emotionality: Analysis unprovoked aggression. Aggressive Behavior, 34, 319–328.
of suppressor effects reveals distinct relations with emotional distress, Reidy, D. E., Zeichner, A., Miller, J. D., & Martinez, M. A. (2007). Psychopathy and
fearfulness, and anger-hostility. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 115, 276–287. aggression: Examining the role of psychopathy factors in predicting laboratory
Karpman, B. (1941). On the need for separating psychopathy into two distinct aggression under hostile and instrumental conditions. Journal of Research in
clinical types: Symptomatic and idiopathic. Journal of Clinical Psychopathology, Personality, 42, 1244–1251.
3, 112–137. Schacter, D. L. (1987). Implicit memory: History and current status. Journal of
Karpman, B. (1948). The myth of the psychopathic personality. American Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 13, 501–518.
Psychiatry, 104, 523–534. Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2002). Experimental and quasi-
Kimonis, E. R., Frick, P. J., Fazekas, H., & Loney, B. R. (2006). Psychopathy, aggression, experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
and the processing of emotional stimuli in non-referred girls and boys. Verona, E., & Vitale, J. (2006). Psychopathy in women: Assessment, manifestations,
Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 24, 21–37. and etiology. In C. J. Patrick (Ed.), Handbook of psychopathy (pp. 415–436). New
Kimonis, E. R., Frick, P. J., Munoz, L. C., & Aucoin, K. J. (2007). Can a laboratory York: Guilford Press.
measure of emotional processing enhance the statistical prediction of Williamson, S., Hare, R. D., & Wong, S. (1987). Violence: Criminal psychopaths and
aggression and delinquency in detained adolescents with callous-unemotional their victims. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 19, 454–462.
traits? Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 35, 773–785. Williamson, S., Harpur, T. J., & Hare, R. D. (1991). Abnormal processing of affective
Lang, P. J., Bradley, M. M. & Cuthbert, B. N. (2005). International affective picture words by psychopaths. Psychophysiology, 28, 260–273.
system (IAPS): Digitized photographs, instruction manual and affective ratings Woodworth, M., & Porter, S. (2002). In cold blood: Characteristics of criminal
(Tech. Rep. No. A-6). Gainesville, FL: The Center for Research in homicides as a function of psychopathy. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 111,
Psychophysiology, University of Florida. 436–445.