Construct of Psychopathy in Adults - Essay Example

Construct of Psychopathy in Adults (Insert Name) (Institution Affiliation) Psychopathy, while perhaps the earliest and most recognized and studied personality construct or disorder, is the subject of intense debate about its real nature and measurement (Neumann, Hare, & Newman, 2007). The recent studies suggest that Psychopathy is a multifaceted construct that is primarily made up of around four major dimensions which reflects the affective, interpersonal, antisocial anomalies and lifestyle (Hare & Neumann, 2006). In adults, the construct is mainly understood in terms of disturbances in interpersonal, affective functioning and behavioral and antisocial tendencies. This paper presents a comprehensive argument about the construct in adults and its impact on the forensic investigations which is concerned with Psychopathic adults who are important and growing group of individuals within the criminal justice setting (Porter, Brinke, & Wilson, 2009). Psychopathy is ordinarily seen as a personality disorder that is usually understood by a cluster of affective, interpersonal, lifestyle, impulsive and anti –social behaviours and traits which include grandiosity, deceptiveness, egocentricity, lack of remorse or empathy, intrinsic tendency to violate crucial social norms, shallow emotion and irresponsibility among many more (Hare & Neumann, 2010). Thus, the aim of this paper is to critically assess the construct of Psychopathy and the perception of the general public on psychopathic adults together with its association with antisocial personality. The recent attempts to deal and understand the construct of Psychopathy have been impeded by various disagreements and confusion about the meaning of the term. Due to that, this paper begins with a brief description about the traditional aspect of the psychopathic construct and a number of comments about its linkage with the common antisocial personality, violence and crime. It is then followed by the implications of the construct for risk, treatability and forensic responsibility. Generally, as stated above, Psychopathy is characterized by egocentricity, affective, behavioral and antisocial traits such as serious criminal behaviors and poor anger control. Psychopathy remains one of the most recognized personal construct that is highly associated with criminal activities (Trull & Durrett, 2005). In fact, the attractive notice for focus on personality with Psychopathy is mainly due to its substantial link with aggression, violence and other pathology which are externalizing in nature (Hare R. , 2003). However, some psycho pathetic behaviors such as conning, pathological lying and irresponsibility that basically entail antisocial behaviours can be regarded as intrinsic. In the recent years, there have been increasing interests in the study of psychopath construct as it applies to adolescents and children. This heightened attention is as a result of various researches that have brought into light the strong evidence that links psychopathic adults with violent behavior, poor response to treatment and serious repetitive crimes (Forth, 2011). This paper aims at studying Psychopathy in adults in an attempt to distinguish them among various groups that commit violent and delinquent acts. Legitimate concerns currently exist over the potential misuse of the scales that are designed to measure or assess the level of Psychopathy especially in adults who are linked to violent behaviors or criminal activities. The construct of Psychopathy is currently well validated among adults which. The extensive research conducted on this subject has established some relationship between adult offenders and antisocial behaviours. A large body of this group of offenders commits more crimes as compared with those without the Psychopath construct (Boccaccini, Murrie, Clark, & Cornell, 2008). Furthermore, they commit a larger variety of crimes and their crimes are also more violent compared to that of their non psychopathic counterparts. In majority of adults, psychopathy involves a variety of anti- social behaviours which are usually loaded with narcissistic items which contains callous or unemotional items. Given the evidence that antisocial tendencies are linked to the Psychopathy construct in terms of both and underlying structure and content, there is no empirical justification for regarding such tendencies as simply consequences of other psychopathic traits as opposed to integral facets of the construct of Psychopathy (Cooke, Hart, Logan, & C., 2008). There are various extensive empirical literally productions that indicate that in a number of adult forensic populations the items in the PCL - R measure a unitary construct (Bolt, Hare, & Neumann, 2007). The early explanatory factor analysis indicated that the items could be organized in to two broad correlated factors or clusters. The first factor, hereafter referred to as F1, reflected the affective and interpersonal components of the psychopath disorder, while the second factor, or F2, was closely tied to the socially deviant lifestyle. Recent confirmatory factor analyses of very large data sets clearly indicate that a four-factor model consisting of 18 items fits the data well (Cooke, Hart, Logan, & C., 2008). The two items namely: promiscuous sexual behavior and many short - term relationships, do not load on any factor but contribute to the total PCL-R score. The four Psychopathy factors are significantly inter-related, and thus can be comprehensively explained by a single super - ordinate factor of the construct of Psychopathy. Adults with hardened unemotional traits which include lack of empathy and guilt as well as shallow social affect and antisocial behaviours are always labeled psychopaths within the society and the criminal justice system as well. Although no one so far suggests that children and juvenile are psychopaths, some of them possess these deviant traits and are at an elevated level of developing psychopathy at early adulthood stages. Interpersonal connections portrayed by a large number of adult psychopaths may lead to cognitive distortion in their perception of wrong and right and thus instill a variety of antisocial attitudes which are associated with a wide range of thinking patterns that are usually aimed at minimizing personal frustration. For example, a person may adopt thinking patterns such as trivialization, rationalization and distortion which are associated with psychopaths. When Psychopathy in adults is examined from the developmental psychology perspective, the psychopathic personality can regarded as an outcome of deprivation at the tender age especially during the infancy stages due to immense exposure to antisocial behavior. According to research, whenever the child’s relationship with the care giver is sore and there is involvement of several criminal activities, the child has a higher probability of ending up to be a sociopath when he or she grows up. Furthermore, Psychopathy can also be considered as a psychological construct that develops gradually aver a long period of time and involves several frameworks that differ in various aspects. Since early 1980s, Hare have been working continuously on the construction of an ideal instrument that could be used to measure the level of Psychopathy in various age groups. Hare settled on the following four which strongly indicate that a person in psychopathic if they are present. First of all is the interpersonal factor: a person is a psychopath if he or she leads a deceptive and arrogant interpersonal lifestyle which is characterized by grandiosity and also seeks to gain absolute control over others through manipulation, deception and intimidation. Second factor is the affective factor whereby a person displays deficiency of emotional connection with other people, ruthlessness even when dealing with children, insensitivity, lack of remorse, indifference to any form of harm done to others, lack of social attachment to others, and being emotionally cold all the time. The third factor is concerned with lifestyle factor: a psychopathic individual usually leads an irresponsible and impulsive lifestyle that is characterized by impulsive decisions, irresponsible choices that are recurring and persistent, unrealistic planning especially when setting long term goals and ignorance of obligations and commitments. The last factor is the antisocial factor; a person is deemed to be psychopath if he or she persistently rejects the rules and restraints, continually attributes external existence, suffers from severe behavioral problems, portrays serious antisocial or criminal conduct or possesses threatening behaviours such as physical or verbal abuse and violation of supervisory regulations. However, the Hare’s checklist has been by a number of scholars and psychologists criticized due to its fixed nature. Once a PCL – R score is established, it will apply as long as that individual lives despite the dynamic and changeable factors in psychopathy. As a response to the fixed trait model, Cooke developed another method that could be used to perform a comprehensive assessment of the psychopathic personality (Cooke, Hart, Logan, & C., 2008). This method was primarily based on the experiences of a number of researchers and forensic therapists. Consequently, six domains were composed to aid in the identification of psychopathic personality problems and have various dimensions. These domains include (Berg & Wissel, 2009): Self-domain: this is particularly concerned with all the problems with individuality or identity; self-aggrandizing and self-centeredness. The self-domain is focused on having an accurate conscious of identity, desires and qualities. Emotional domain: usually concerned with regulation of mood. The domain mainly focuses on the appropriateness of the affective responses. Persons who are likely to be psychopathic report to be experiencing labile and shallow emotions. Dominance domain which examines difficulties with the interpersonal agency. The domain focuses on the assertiveness and the excessive status seeking nature as well as the control or power in interpersonal exchanges. Behavioral domain: this domain is concerned with the problems faced by the individuals with the organization of goals –directed activities; being sensational seeking and impulsive. The regulation of the behavioral activities and the capacity to handle the daily tasks in an organized and systematic manner is of key importance. The psychopathic individuals manifest weird behaviours that are antisocial in nature. Attachment domain: this domain examines the difficulties manifested with interpersonal affiliation. Psychopathic persons have deficiency in establishing and maintaining personal bonds. The attachment domain is thus centered on the mutual acceptance and intimacy. Cognitive domain: this domain is concerned with all the problems regarding to adaptability and mental flexibility. It also focuses on the ways in which the information is encoded and ultimately processed as well as how attributions are made with respect to organization of thoughts. Another way forward in the assessment of psychopathy in adults is through measurements that are conducted from a wide variety of differing angles such as therapy concepts, psychological levels and therapeutic principles (Weizmann-Henelius, Putkonen, Grönroos, Lindberg, Eronen, & Häkkänen-Nyholm, 2010). However, despite the success in identification of persons with the construct, it is very difficult to treat patients with psychopathy. This is primarily due to the influence and difficulties posed by psychopathic traits to treatment. First of all, the psychopathic individuals frequently fail to provide accurate personal details regarding functioning and past history thus leaving the therapist with some fictitious stories to work with. Secondly, the insincere and deceptive nature of the patients are occasionally used to manipulate the therapist especially when a psychopathic person is unwilling to alter his or her conduct. Third, when a patient is from a group, he or she might want to dominate both the group and the therapist through self-perception. Also, lack of empathetic engagement and shallow affect may undermine the efforts of a therapist in treating a psychopath. Over the years, the vivid connection between victims being victims of abuse at the tender age and later showing severe patterns of violent behaviours as adults or juveniles has been more prevalent. However, not all forms of these anti- social behaviors that constitute to Psychopathy. In fact some of them are not connected to impulsive or neural psychological dysfunction. In children with vulnerability for developing tendency of violence as well as impulsive aggression, it is possible to identify risk indicators in interaction of the individual with the environment. Although the construct of Psychopathy in adults is understood in terms of disturbances in the interpersonal and affective functioning, impulsive behavior and antisocial tendencies, some adults who are not psychopaths may possess some of these traits (Frick, 2002). For instance, those individuals who have not learned on how handle properly strong aggressive feelings or have some difficulties in controlling impulses and who are incapable of identifying their own experiences and feelings may be considered psychopaths yet in reality they are not. Secondly, impulsivity, antisocial tendencies and aggression has become a common way of dealing with violence that characterize majority of cities in the world especially those plagued with gang violence. These traits which are strongly associated with Psychopathy are also increasingly becoming a habitual way of responding to the daily environmental stress. As a result, it would be totally unfair and inoculate to understand the construct of Psychopathy in terms of these traits. In addition, various people manifest disturbance, affective and interpersonal malfunctioning due to various other reasons other than Psychopathy. Furthermore, some group of Psychopaths such as stalkers acts in contrary to other criminal population. Psychopathic stalkers usually report very low rates of anti –social behaviours and personality behaviours which perhaps is a result of their absolute differences in their affective and interpersonal functioning as well as attachment pathologies (Cale & Lilienfeld, 2002). Majority of stalkers tend to form a number of preoccupied attachments whereas antisocial individuals are often detached and dismissive especially in their emotional relationships (Blair, Peschardt, Budhani, Mitchell, & Pine, 2006). If the Psychopathy traits mentioned above are followed, it would predict low frequencies of psychopaths among the stalkers. But indeed, the risks for the forms of violence associated with stalking is more related to disturbances of normal attachment process and highly associated with Psychopathy. In addition, when examining psychopathic cases, the antisocial trait is not always reliable for evaluating an individual. Some antisocial persons usually have a friendly or charming demeanor and are capable of deceiving the therapist or interfering with the objectivity of an evaluation. They may at times gross over very crucial topics with vague and dismissive answers and use manipulative skills to make the interviewer feel silly for asking some questions (Cooke, & Michie, 2001). These kinds of individuals are often successful in applying deception to comfortably hide their disturbance in affective and interpersonal functioning as well as impulsive behavior and antisocial tendencies. This would thus affect the judgment if these traits are relied on in evaluating their Psychopathic status. Sometimes, individuals especially those suspected to have committed a crime, may pretend to be psychopaths by displaying element of danger for the interviewer. In some scenarios, these individuals are frightening and threatening which tempts the interrogator to skip some details or gross over very important matter thus shortening the details (Darke, Kaye, Finlay-Jones, & Hall, 1998). Each of these traits often tends to shift control and decrease the amount of information elicited. Thus these traits cannot be used to understand the construct of Psychopathy. The association between Psychopathy and criminality rests on the fact that many traits that are associated with the indiscriminate in seek of ultimate stimulation and pleasure are illegal. Apart from displaying the antisocial behavior, adult psychopaths are more likely to disregard regality than the general society in their pursuit for stimulation or pleasure. On top of disturbances in the interpersonal and affective functioning, impulsive behavior and antisocial tendencies, research has shown that majority of psychopaths are more violent and aggressive than the general population (Shikawa, Raine, Lencz, Bihrle, & Lacasse, 2001) . As a result, violence, low tolerance to frustration and very low threshold for aggression discharge provides criteria that are more inclusive for determination of psychopaths and establish its link to the criminal activities. Neglect especially at childhood stages may result in antisocial behaviours and disturbance of affective and interpersonal functioning but this does not amount to Psychopathy. Variables which amount to neglect include hostility from parents, family climate, physical abuse, parental indifference, poor emotional climate at home (Harris, Skilling, & Rice, 2001). The Hare’s PCL- R was primarily designed to rate the presence and exact degree of Psychopathy in both adults and adolescents in a reliable and standardized way (Frick, 2002). Its measures two stable factors; first is the set of interpersonal and affective characteristics such as lack of remorse and egocentricity. On the other hand, the Hare’s PLC- R deals with the aspects of Psychopathy that refers to the antisocial and impulsive and unstable lifestyles exhibited by majority of psychopaths. However, female adolescent who represents a significant population within the criminal justice system are less studied in the psychopath literature. Violence in female offenders and traits of disturbance in the affective and interpersonal functioning of the female offenders is increasing in an alarming rate. There is considerable debate about the construct validity Psychopathy in adolescents and therefore a strong need to examine the psychometric properties and external validity of Psychopathy measures (Hare & Neumann, 2006). There is specific controversy over the most suitable factor structure for the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R), the leading measure of Psychopathy. A large number of studies have been devoted to understanding the construct of Psychopathy in adults. The outcomes of these researches have prompted the researchers to critically study the construct among the youth population. The adolescent literature does strongly correlate with the adult literature. Psychopathy has been found to be stable trait especially in the late adolescence (Cooke, & Michie, 2001). However, several key concerns have emerged and revolve around a number of critical issues such as personality and malleability during adolescence and late childhood stages. It is thus clear that individuals with the construct of Psychopathy at an early stage and the condition develop gradually. Thus it will not be proper to understand the construct based on the traits of disturbance of interpersonal and affective functioning and impulsive and antisocial tendencies alone. In conclusion, extending the construct of Psychopathy to the adolescent remains a highly controversial issue, but identification and examination of the specific youth groups with psychopathic like or disordered conduct and assuming that all the youths displaying antisocial behaviours are potential psychopaths can help in intervention and treatment of the condition. Since the construct of psychopathy is well validated among the adults, it can be precisely understood with traits of disturbance in affective and interpersonal functioning as well as the antisocial tendencies and impulsive behavior. The Psychopathic behavior also includes the presence of traits such as antisocial and violence tendencies as well as seek to dominate others. Under the assumption that psychopathy in adults manifests itself by these traits, the assessment of Psychopathy can thus be conducted using the Psychopathy checklist revised commonly known as PCL – R (Hare R. , 2003). Evidence is present for an overall lower prevalence rate of psychopathy in female offenders than in male offenders and youths. However, recent studies show that the famous PCL – R measures may not be effective in measuring Psychopathy in some group of individuals especially the female adults due to failure to predispose the females to violent and aggressive behaviours (Weizmann-Henelius, Putkonen, Grönroos, Lindberg, Eronen, & Häkkänen-Nyholm, 2010). Notably, the findings from the current research have important clinical and forensic applications and provide insight into areas requiring further studies. First, the three-factor model appears to be capable of capturing the construct of psychopathy among female adult offenders who have a history of violence (Weizmann-Henelius, Putkonen, Grönroos, Lindberg, Eronen, & Häkkänen-Nyholm, 2010). More specifically, it appears that three personality dimensions underlie the construct of psychopathy among this sample of psychopathic: the first which represents an arrogant and deceitful interpersonal style, the second which represents deficits in affective experience, and the final factor which represents interpersonally impulsive behaviours. References Andrews D.A. & Bonta J. (2003). The Psychology of Criminal Conduct. Third edition. Cincinatti: Anderson Publishing co. Berg, V. d., & Wissel, D. R. (2009). Attachment and psychopathy in forensic patients. Mental Health Review Journal , 14 (3), 40 - 51. Blair, R., Peschardt, K., Budhani, S., Mitchell, D., & Pine. (2006). The development of psychopathy. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry , 47 (1), 262 -276. Boccaccini, M., Murrie, D., Clark, J., & Cornell, D. (2008). Describing, diagnosing, and naming psychopathy: How do youth psychopathy labels influence jurors? Behavioral Sciences and the Law , 26 (1), 511 - 528. Bolt, D. M., Hare, R., & Neumann, C. (2007). Score metric equivalence of the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R) across criminal offenders in North America and the United Kingdom: A critique of Cooke, Michie, Hart, and Clark (2005) and new analyses. Journal of Psychopathy Assessment , 14 (1), 44 - 56. Burke, J. D., Loeber, R., & Lahey, B. B. (2007). Adolescent conduct disorder and interpersonal callousness as predictors of psychopathy in young adults. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 36(3), 334-346. Cale, E. M., & Lilienfeld, S. O. (2002). Sex differences in psychopathy and antisocial personality disorder: A review and integration. Clinical psychology review, 22(8), 1179-1207. Cook, N. E., Barese, T. H., & DiCataldo, F. (2010).The confluence of mental health and psychopathic traits in adolescent female offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 37, 119-135. Cooke, D., Hart, S. D., Logan, C., & C., M. (2008). Evaluating the Construct of Psychopathic Personality Disorder. The Development of a Comprehensive Clinical Assessment , 123 - 135. Cooke, D. J., & Michie, C. (2001). Refining the construct of psychopathy: Towards a hierarchical model. Psychological assessment, 13(2), 171-188. Cooke, D. J. (1996). Psychopathic personality in different cultures: What do we know? What do we need to find out?. Journal of Personality Disorders, 10(1), 23-40. Cornell, D. J., Warren, J., Hawk, G., Stafford, E., Oram, G., & Pine, D. (1996). Psychopathy in instrumental and reactive violent offenders. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 64, 783-790. Darke, S., Kaye, S., Finlay-Jones, J. R., & Hall, W. (1998). Factor structure of psychopathy among methadone maintenance patients. Journal of Personality Disorders, 12, 162-171. Dandreaux, D., & Frick, P. (2009). Developmental pathways to conduct problems: A further test of the childhood and adolescent-onset distinction. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 37, 375–385. De Brito, S. A, Mechelli, A., Wilke, M., Laurens, K. R., Jones, A. P., Barker,G. J., et al. (2009). Size matters: Increased grey matter in boys with con-duct problems and callous–unemotional traits. Brain, 132, 843–852. De Brito, S. A., McCrory, E. J., Mechelli, A., Wilke, M., Jones, A. P., Hodgins, S., et al. (2011). Small, but not perfectly formed: Decreased white matter concentration in boys with psychopathic tendencies. Molecular Psychiatry, 16, 476–477. Edens, J. F., Guy, L. S., & Fernandez, K. (2003). Psychopathic traits predict attitudes towards a juvenile capital murderer. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 21, 713-736. Edens, J. F. & Vincent, G. M. (2008). Juvenile Psychopathy: A clinical construct in need of restraint. Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, 8, 186-197. Frick, P. J. (2009). Extending the construct of psychopathy to youth: implications for understanding, diagnosing, and treating antisocial children and adolescents. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry/Revue canadienne de psychiatrie, 31(12), 803. Frick, P. J. (2002). Juvenile Psychopathy From a Developmental Perspective. Law and Human Behavior, 26(2), 247-253. Forth, A. (2011). Clinical and Forensic Application of Hare Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Version. Assessing Psychopathy in youth , 1-6. Harris, G. T., Skilling, T. A., & Rice, M. E. (2001). The construct of psychopathy. Crime and Justice, 197-264. Hare, R. D., & Neumann, C. S. (2010). Psychopathy: Assessment and Forensic Implications. In L. Malatesti, & J. McMillan, Responsibility and Psychopathy: Interfacing Law, Psychiatry and Philosophy (pp. 93 - 123). New York: Oxford University Press. Hare, R. (2003). The Hare Psychopathy Checklist-Revised(2nd ed.). Multi-Health Systems , 181 - 197. Hare, R., & Neumann, C. (2006). The PCL-R assessment of psychopathy: Development, structural properties, and new directions. In C. Patrick (Ed.). In Hare, & Neumann, Handbook of psychopathy (pp. 58 - 90). New York: Guilford Press. Jones, A. P., Laurens, K. R., Herba, C. M., Barker, G. J., & Viding, E. (2009). Amygdala hypoactivity to fearful faces in boys with conduct problems and callous–unemotional traits. American Journal of Psychiatry, 166,95–102. Jones, A. P., Happe´, F. G., Gilbert, F., Burnett, S., & Viding, E. (2010). Feeling, caring, knowing: Different types of empathy deficit in boys with psychopathic tendencies and autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 51, 1188–1197. Larsson, H., Viding, E., & Plomin, R. (2008). Callous–unemotional traits and antisocial behavior.Criminal Justice and Behavior, 35, 197–211. Larsson, H., Tuvblad, C., Rijsdijk, F., Andershed, H., Grann, M., & Lichtenstein, P. (2007). A common genetic factor explains the association between psychopathic personality and antisocial behaviour. Psychological Medicine, 37, 15–26. Neumann, C. S., Kosson, D. S., Forth, A. E., & Hare, R. D. (2006). Factor structure of the Hare Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Version (PCL: YV) in incarcerated adolescents. Psychological Assessment, 18(2), 142. Neumann, C. S., Hare, R. D., & Newman, J. P. (2007). THE SUPER-ORDINATE NATURE OF THE PSYCHOPATHY CHECKLIST-REVISED. Journal of Personality Disorders , 21 (2), 102–117. Porter, S., Brinke, T. t., & Wilson, K. (2009). Crime profiles and conditional release performance of psychopathic and non-psychopathic sexual offenders. Legal and Criminological Psychology , 14 (1), 109 - 118. Shikawa, S., Raine, A., Lencz, T., Bihrle, S., & Lacasse. (2001). Autonomic stress reactivity and executive functions in successful and unsuccessful criminal psychopaths from the community. Journal of Abnormal Psychology , 110 (1), 243 - 432. Trull, T. J., & Durrett, C. A. (2005). Categorical and dimensional models of personality disorder. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology , 1 (1), 355 - 380. Viding,E.,Hanscombe,K.B.,Curtis,C.J.C.,Davis,O.S.P.,Meaburn,E.L.,& Plomin, R. (2010). In search of genes associated with risk for psycho-pathic tendencies in children: A two-stage genome-wide association study of pooled DNA.Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 7, 780–788. Viding, E., & Jones, A. P. (2008). Cognition to genes via the brain in the study of conduct disorder.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychol-ogy, 61, 171–181. Weizmann-Henelius, G., Putkonen, H., Grönroos, M., Lindberg, N., Eronen, E., & Häkkänen-Nyholm. (2010). Examination of Psychopathy in Female Homicide Offenders - Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the PCL-R. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry , 33 (1), 177 - 183. Yang, Y., & Raine, A. (2009). Prefrontal structural and functional brain imaging findings in antisocial, violent and psychopathic individuals: A meta-analysis. Psychiatry Research, 174, 81–88 Read More

Psychopathy remains one of the most recognized personal construct that is highly associated with criminal activities (Trull & Durrett, 2005). In fact, the attractive notice for focus on personality with Psychopathy is mainly due to its substantial link with aggression, violence and other pathology which are externalizing in nature (Hare R. , 2003). However, some psycho pathetic behaviors such as conning, pathological lying and irresponsibility that basically entail antisocial behaviours can be regarded as intrinsic.

In the recent years, there have been increasing interests in the study of psychopath construct as it applies to adolescents and children. This heightened attention is as a result of various researches that have brought into light the strong evidence that links psychopathic adults with violent behavior, poor response to treatment and serious repetitive crimes (Forth, 2011). This paper aims at studying Psychopathy in adults in an attempt to distinguish them among various groups that commit violent and delinquent acts.

Legitimate concerns currently exist over the potential misuse of the scales that are designed to measure or assess the level of Psychopathy especially in adults who are linked to violent behaviors or criminal activities. The construct of Psychopathy is currently well validated among adults which. The extensive research conducted on this subject has established some relationship between adult offenders and antisocial behaviours. A large body of this group of offenders commits more crimes as compared with those without the Psychopath construct (Boccaccini, Murrie, Clark, & Cornell, 2008).

Furthermore, they commit a larger variety of crimes and their crimes are also more violent compared to that of their non psychopathic counterparts. In majority of adults, psychopathy involves a variety of anti- social behaviours which are usually loaded with narcissistic items which contains callous or unemotional items. Given the evidence that antisocial tendencies are linked to the Psychopathy construct in terms of both and underlying structure and content, there is no empirical justification for regarding such tendencies as simply consequences of other psychopathic traits as opposed to integral facets of the construct of Psychopathy (Cooke, Hart, Logan, & C., 2008). There are various extensive empirical literally productions that indicate that in a number of adult forensic populations the items in the PCL - R measure a unitary construct (Bolt, Hare, & Neumann, 2007).

The early explanatory factor analysis indicated that the items could be organized in to two broad correlated factors or clusters. The first factor, hereafter referred to as F1, reflected the affective and interpersonal components of the psychopath disorder, while the second factor, or F2, was closely tied to the socially deviant lifestyle. Recent confirmatory factor analyses of very large data sets clearly indicate that a four-factor model consisting of 18 items fits the data well (Cooke, Hart, Logan, & C., 2008). The two items namely: promiscuous sexual behavior and many short - term relationships, do not load on any factor but contribute to the total PCL-R score.

The four Psychopathy factors are significantly inter-related, and thus can be comprehensively explained by a single super - ordinate factor of the construct of Psychopathy. Adults with hardened unemotional traits which include lack of empathy and guilt as well as shallow social affect and antisocial behaviours are always labeled psychopaths within the society and the criminal justice system as well. Although no one so far suggests that children and juvenile are psychopaths, some of them possess these deviant traits and are at an elevated level of developing psychopathy at early adulthood stages.

Interpersonal connections portrayed by a large number of adult psychopaths may lead to cognitive distortion in their perception of wrong and right and thus instill a variety of antisocial attitudes which are associated with a wide range of thinking patterns that are usually aimed at minimizing personal frustration.

Read More