Variants of Psychopathy in Chinese Juvenile Offenders: A Latent Profile Analysis

• Author: Jie Luo,Yu Gao,Randall T. Salekin,Xintong Zhang,Jiaxin Deng,Jie Gong,Meng-Cheng Wang
• Published date: 01 April 2022
• Date: 01 April 2022
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/00938548211043149
• Subject Matter: Articles

CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIOR, 2022, Vol. 49, No. 4, April 2022, 530 –549.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/00938548211043149

Article reuse guidelines: sagepub.com/journals-permissions

© 2021 International Association for Correctional and Forensic Psychology

530

VARIANTS OF PSYCHOPATHY IN CHINESE

JUVENILE OFFENDERS

A Latent Profile Analysis

MENG-CHENG WANG

XINTONG ZHANG

JIE GONG

JIAXIN DENG

Guangzhou University

JIE LUO

Guizhou Normal University

YU GAO

The City University of New York

RANDALL T. SALEKIN

The University of Alabama

Despite considerable understanding on the psychopathy subtypes in detained populations, the variants of psychopathy in

non-Western populations are less well understood. To address this gap, the present study conducted a series of latent profile

analyses with the factors of the Youth Psychopathic Traits Inventory, childhood trauma, and trait anxiety in 560 Chinese

incarcerated boys (Mage = 16.92, SD = 0.81). Four subgroups emerged: relatively normal (67.3%); callous, psychopathy-like

(2.8%); moderate psychopathy-like (24.8%); and high traumatic, moderate psychopathy-like (5.1%). Moreover, the modified

Bolck–Croon–Hagenaars method was used to examine the significant mean differences on covariates across profiles, includ-

ing proactive aggression, reactive aggression, affective empathy, and cognitive empathy. Results showed that the psycho-

pathic profiles displayed differences on key variables. The callous, psychopathy-like group endorsed higher aggression and

lower empathy. This study provides initial empirical support for the existence of psychopathy variants and enhances the

understanding of the psychopathic construct in non-Western cultures.

Keywords: psychopathy; subtype; latent profile analysis; Chinese justice-involved youth

AUTHORS’ NOTE: This study was funded by the Guangzhou University’s Research Project (Grant No.

YK2020026) and the China Scholarship council. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and

analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Correspondence concerning this article should

be addressed to Meng-Cheng Wang, Department of Psychology, Guangzhou University, 230 Wai Huan Xi Road,

Guangzhou Higher Education Mega Center, Guangzhou 510006, P.R. China; e-mail: wmcheng2006@126.com

1043149CJBXXX10.1177/00938548211043149Criminal Justice and BehaviorWang et al. / Variants of Psychopathy in Chinese

research-article2022

Wang et al. / VARIANTS OF PSYCHOPATHY IN CHINESE 531

INTRODUCTION

The concept of psychopathy has become integrated into existing criminological theories

(DeLisi, 2016; DeLisi & Vaughn, 2015). Psychopathy is characterized by a constellation of

personality traits, including interpersonal (e.g., superficial charm, manipulation, grandios-

ity), affective (e.g., lack of remorse, shallow emotions, callousness), and behavioral or life-

style (e.g., impulsivity, high sensation-seeking, irresponsibility) features (Cooke & Michie,

2001; DeLisi, 2016). In criminal justice settings, such psychopathic traits often correlate

with violence, an increased chance of recidivism, and institutional misconduct (e.g., Edens

& Campbell, 2007; McCuish et al., 2015). These persistent antisocial and criminal behav-

iors may be attributed to the strong link between psychopathic traits and distinctive dys-

functions at the genetic, neural, cognitive, and social levels (Ribeiro da Silva et al., 2020).

Therefore, understanding the patterns and etiology of psychopathic features has important

implications for crime prevention and intervention (Ribeiro da Silva et al., 2020).

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY VARIANTS OF PSYCHOPATHY

Examination of potential subtypes/subgroups of psychopathy has been an issue of inten-

sive debate (e.g., Hicks et al., 2004; Skeem et al., 2007), and there are some high-density

groups that form subtypes of psychopathy and identification of which is critical for theoreti-

cal and practical causes (Wareham et al., 2009). One prevailing theory disaggregates

psychopathy into primary (low-anxious) and secondary (high-anxious) variants that are dis-

tinctive in etiology, concurrent psychopathology, and prognosis (Karpman, 1941; Skeem

et al., 2003). Primary variants have neurobiologically based emotional deficits, act calmly

and intentionally, and engage easily in instrumental aggression and mixed aggression,

whereas secondary variants are impulsive, tend to exhibit relatively higher anxiety and fear

in response to severe environmental experiences, and are more driven by hostility or anger

(Karpman, 1941; Skeem et al., 2003). Moreover, childhood trauma and inadequate social-

ization through ineffective parenting may contribute to the development of secondary psy-

chopathy (Karpman, 1941; Lykken, 1995). Some studies have provided empirical evidence

to support Karpman’s psychopathic subtypes in incarcerated samples (e.g., Olver et al.,

2015; Skeem et al., 2007). However, recent studies have discovered inconsistent psycho-

pathic subtypes across samples, especially in youths (e.g., Colins et al., 2018; Lee et al.,

2010).

SUBGROUPS OF JUSTICE-INVOLVED POPULATIONS WITH PSYCHOPATHIC FEATURES

Earlier studies have employed conventional cluster analysis techniques to identify sub-

types of psychopathy (e.g., Haapasalo & Pulkkinen, 1992; Vassileva et al., 2005), although

this method is known to potentially overidentify subgroups (Beauchaine, 2003). Person-

centered analyses (i.e., latent class analysis [LCA] and latent profile analysis [LPA]) are

considered to be ideal for psychopathology research because these analyses disaggregate a

heterogeneous population into more homogeneous subgroups based on individuals’ scores

on variables (Vermunt & Magidson, 2006).

Consequently, recent studies have used LCA and LPA to identify subtypes of psychopa-

thy in both criminal (e.g., Lee et al., 2010; Ribeiro da Silva et al., 2019; Wang et al., 2020)

and noncriminal populations (e.g., Fanti & Kimonis, 2017; Zwaanswijk et al., 2018). The